31 May 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI'm curious; by what measure can you state Northern European schools are "better" than US schools?
In what sense do cutting funding for schools and health care improve its quality? I'm curious.
[b]Are you willing to argue that New York has the best schools?
No, but I'm willing to argue that Northern European schools are better than US schools.[/b]
31 May 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraPISA doesn't measure what schools are "better". And the program is not without critics:
PISA, for example.
In his epilogue, Hopmann notes PISA’s underlying assumptions:
The assumption that what PISA measures is somehow im- portant knowledge for the future. There is no research available which proves this assertion. . . .
The assumption that the economic future is dependent on the knowledge base monitored by PISA: [it] relies on strong and unproven arguments, which have no basis when, for instance, comparing success in PISA’s predeces- sors and later economic development.
The assumption that PISA measures what is learned in schools: this is not [even] PISA’s own starting point, which is not to use national curricula as a point of reference.
The assumption that PISA measures competitiveness of schooling (most of the variance in PISA is attributable to background factors).
The assumption that PISA thus measures. . . school structures, teacher quality, the curriculum, etc.
In short: PISA relies on strong assumptions based on weak data.
http://norberto.bottani.free.fr/spip/spip.php?article257
31 May 09
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't know enough about PISA's methods to comment, but do you know any better method?
PISA doesn't measure what schools are "better". And the program is not without critics:
In his epilogue, Hopmann notes PISA’s underlying assumptions:
The assumption that what PISA measures is somehow im- portant knowledge for the future. There is no research available which proves this assertion. . . .
The assumption that the econom ...[text shortened]... sumptions based on weak data.
http://norberto.bottani.free.fr/spip/spip.php?article257[/b]
31 May 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraParents are those biologically responsible for children. There isn't a culture or society on Earth that doesn't at least superficially hold parents responsible for providing the necessities of life.
"Logically responsible"? What does that even mean?
Of course you may be advocating the system in Ayn Rand's Anthem?
31 May 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWe are debating that excessive taxation limits or diminishes liberty. Taxes can and are theft, although some taxation is clearly required to fund government.
Non sequitur. I was responding to your claim that "taxes are theft" which is ridiculous. I never said you have to "accept what ever levels [of taxes] are imposed"; in fact, I specifically said you can use the democratic process like anybody else.
Let's get serious.
On criteria which makes a tax theft, is when it is a direct transfer from a producer to a consumer.
Check the original understanding of the "general welfare" clause.
Part of the democratic process is:
1. Leaving the jurisdiction with excessive taxation.
2. Avoiding the activity taxed.
3. Voting the bums out.
4. Taking up arms, the reason for the 2nd amendment.
31 May 09
2 edits
Originally posted by normbenignThat's a pretty humorous definition of "theft". Can't seem to find it in Merriam-Webster.
We are debating that excessive taxation limits or diminishes liberty. Taxes can and are theft, although some taxation is clearly required to fund government.
On criteria which makes a tax theft, is when it is a direct transfer from a producer to a consumer.
Check the original understanding of the "general welfare" clause.
Part of the democratic ...[text shortened]... activity taxed.
3. Voting the bums out.
4. Taking up arms, the reason for the 2nd amendment.
Taking up arms to avoid taxation was disfavored by the Framers. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/whiskey_rebellion.htm
31 May 09
Originally posted by FMF"Isn't this where democracy comes in?"
He is deadly serious. As he was when he said that Obama and the Nazis were kindred spirits.
Originally posted by normbenign
[b]Government is necessary, but a lot of it we have isn't.
Isn't this where democracy comes in? The only viable decision making mechanism we have at our disposal. Ancestor worship, in the form of second guessing the "inten ...[text shortened]... omparable with fundamentalist Islam or Christianity - is surely no kind of mechanism at all?[/b]
Democracy in its purest is a tyranny of 51%. It is two wolves and a sheep voting on "what's for dinner"?
The US government is a Constitutional republic, the Constitution setting the limitations of when and how democracy is used. It isn't ancestor worship but a written law, which protects people against the temporary and silly notions of the moment. That written law has within it the methods of deliberately altering it.
This vision and collection of law is largely responsible for most of the prosperity which Marxists and social liberals want to squander on unsustainable egalitarianism. NY, and nations relying on excessive taxation of producers eventually find that "Atlas Shrugs". The producers tire of being blamed for the condition of the non producers and tire of their productivity being squandered, and they find their own Gault's Gulch.
31 May 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWhen you take what's mine by force, and give it directly to someone else, what the hell is it?
That's a pretty humorous definition of "theft". Can't seem to find it in Merriam-Webster.
If you believe it isn't then give me your credit card number and I can see that a lot of needy people get what you own.
Theft is a moral as well as a legal term. That people have voted to use the government to steal for them, doesn't make it moral.
31 May 09
Originally posted by normbenignParents should be at least partially responsible for their children, but logic has nothing to do with that.
Parents are those biologically responsible for children. There isn't a culture or society on Earth that doesn't at least superficially hold parents responsible for providing the necessities of life.
Of course you may be advocating the system in Ayn Rand's Anthem?
Obvisouly you think there is some gain in a society when a part of the population is denied education and health care in return for the Hummers of the wealthy. Is that what you mean when you say "freedom"?
31 May 09
Originally posted by normbenign"Producers" like the banks and investment firms that "produced" $63 trillion worth of mortgage backed securities?
"Isn't this where democracy comes in?"
Democracy in its purest is a tyranny of 51%. It is two wolves and a sheep voting on "what's for dinner"?
The US government is a Constitutional republic, the Constitution setting the limitations of when and how democracy is used. It isn't ancestor worship but a written law, which protects people against the ...[text shortened]... nd tire of their productivity being squandered, and they find their own Gault's Gulch.