Good examples of the effects of government getting involved in education, particularly tying it to location. The solution to this problem is clear but politically difficult: limit government involvement in education to vouchers at most, preferably none at all.
The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
21–30 of 147 posts
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#22America is still a deeply segregated society. And the segregation is built in such a way that it tends to keep people where they always where.
Is there something wrong with groups of people wanting to self segregate?
Self segregate means less communication between people.
Thus communication problem directly impact the frustration of each party about others. Then more violence will occurs.
To be more precise. Yes, everybody want to live with people which share the same values. But this local optimization have a bad effect on the society viewed in its totality.
Taking my own example, I believe that not being segregated in school had made me lose some hours of good Math. But I believe this experience made me more tolerant. And it is also certainly true for the others.
There is no perfect society model, but my inclination is to believe that more communication is never a waste and that any lack of communication is potentially dangerous.
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#23>> In case you needed further proof of the American education system's failings, especially in poor and minority communities, consider the latest crime to spread across the country: educational theft. I'm not sure if it is entirely fair to single out the education system here (once again), or at least batch it in with "yet another failing". I believe more is at fault here. Unless I'm mistaken, tax payers in a particu…
Funding varies state-by-state. For example, in Michigan most school district funding comes from the state level, and local districts are limited in their ability to raise more funds.
http://www.michiganinbrief.org/edition07/Chapter5/K12Funding...
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The segregation is not all systemic. I remember reading an article discussing research discussing how neighborhoods change as a result of very slight preferences of "I'd rather be by somebody of my race than a different race." This applied to black and white neighborhoods. Taken over time and populations, these very slight differences in preference (and, realistically, in the USA, it is unlikely to be "slight") lead…
I compare it to boxing matches. If I'm watching a match between someone who is identified as German, and someone who is identified as Italian, without other influences , I am going to tend towards cheering for the Italian, because I identify more with Italians. Never mind the fact that I'm 3/4th German and only 1/4th Italian, and certainly don't have anything against Germans. It's purely a unconscious tribal reflex,…
PG argued pretty effectively against this kind of "tribal reflex" in Keep Your Identity Small:
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#25>> In case you needed further proof of the American education system's failings, especially in poor and minority communities, consider the latest crime to spread across the country: educational theft. I'm not sure if it is entirely fair to single out the education system here (once again), or at least batch it in with "yet another failing". I believe more is at fault here. Unless I'm mistaken, tax payers in a particu…
Her father, registered in that school district, obviously pays the taxes; So there's no reason why it would not cover the tuition of her chidren.
You're just dropped back from "it's fair that way" to "the rules say that way".
It's not like that his taxes are of a different color than her taxes, right? So it should not matter where the children go to school, it's still fair.
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
If by "wrong" you mean "leads to worse outcomes" - then very possibly yes.
How do we define "segregate"? Is it just across 'skin color' / 'irrelevant heritage' lines? What if I identify with and want to live around entrepreneurs? atheists? 'survivalists'? Homosexuals? I think I can make a fairly strong argument for homosexuals preferring to live among themselves as being ultimately detrimental to society (reduced exposure to homosexuals allows intolerance and misunderstanding to fester), ho…
I'm not arguing preference here. All of your examples still apply. And I would simply say that right and wrong are poor constructs to let us formulate ideas about how we should live.
There's a good chance that atheists who choose to live only among atheists are going to suffer worse outcomes. Living in a diverse society leads to more perspective and better ideas, and an eventually better society.
Only living with other gay people or other Hacidic Jews or other white supremacists may feel comfortable, and it might lead to a functioning society. But is it ideal? Does it leave the people better off? Society at large?
I don't actually know the answer tho these questions, but I suspect you're better off meeting all sorts of people, living in all sorts of places, and absorbing all sorts of ideas.
I don't really believe in right and wrong.
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
I compare it to boxing matches. If I'm watching a match between someone who is identified as German, and someone who is identified as Italian, without other influences , I am going to tend towards cheering for the Italian, because I identify more with Italians. Never mind the fact that I'm 3/4th German and only 1/4th Italian, and certainly don't have anything against Germans. It's purely a unconscious tribal reflex,…
PG argued pretty effectively against this kind of "tribal reflex" in Keep Your Identity Small: http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html
As I read it, he may be arguing against this sort of "tribal reflex", but he's certainly not arguing against it's existence. My point is that I am agreeing with the parent of my original post, segregation can arise from phenomenon not necessarily codified into law or even recognized consciously by the participants. Whether this "tribal reflex" is "right or wrong" is irrelevant, the important and seemingly undisputed point is that it exists.
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure by your statement if you have children or not. But I just finished enrolling my children in a private school instead of the local public school. I really don't care if they are black or white I want my children to go to a school where the parents value education as much as I do.
I have mixed race children and do whatever it takes to make sure that they are in schools that made up of mostly white, Asian, or Indian (India) students. Black and Hispanic students have shown no signs of valuing education and the schools usually plagued with violence. I'm not alone in this thinking; every single Asian family I know does the same.
I don't think you two actually disagree. You want to send your kids to a place where the parents value education, and you're using ethnicity as an easy indirect way of measuring this. A lamentably reasonable strategy.
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#29AS if anybody cared - how it works in Russia:
- There are virtually no private schools, every school is public.
- There are better schools and worse schools. In a big city there are a few really good ones and a bunch of mediocre ones.
- A school have to accept anyone living in a proximity, but it may also accept anyone else. So the good ones set up entry exams. Mediocre ones enroll everybody.
- I guess there are some bad schools, some really poor ones, but there are probably none or a very few "failing" ones, with meaning as in article.
By the way, where do illegal immigrants' children go to?
Re: The Latest Crime Wave: Sending Your Child to a Better School
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do we define "segregate"? Is it just across 'skin color' / 'irrelevant heritage' lines? What if I identify with and want to live around entrepreneurs? atheists? 'survivalists'? Homosexuals? I think I can make a fairly strong argument for homosexuals preferring to live among themselves as being ultimately detrimental to society (reduced exposure to homosexuals allows intolerance and misunderstanding to fester), ho…
I'm not arguing preference here. All of your examples still apply. And I would simply say that right and wrong are poor constructs to let us formulate ideas about how we should live. There's a good chance that atheists who choose to live only among atheists are going to suffer worse outcomes. Living in a diverse society leads to more perspective and better ideas, and an eventually better society. Only living with oth…
I fully agree that these sorts of segregation are ultimately bad things. I merely disagree that we should label them "wrong", since I think that doing so expects too much of the individuals. Society will certainly become better off if Athiests spend more time with theists, however I cannot in good conscious really fault them (say that it is 'wrong') for their decision.
I think we pretty much agree in other words ;)