Republican Tea Party Debate- Sept 12

[MasterShakezula]

There's no reason why any one nation should be responsible for solving others' problems.  That should be up to multi-national groups, such as the UN to solve, if the countries with the problems cannot deal with their own issues. 

If the world doesn't want Team America to be its world police, it shouldn't be wanting Team America to be its world police. 

[Super Dude]

The UN is an organization built to delay action, not put it into motion.  That's why.

[73109]

Here's my proposition.

No country in the world is self sufficient. Every country needs trade, every one. So, one could say that a country is dependent on the things it gets from countries outside itself. So, if there ever came a time where a country as a whole was committing a "crime against humanity," an organization (preferably a stronger version of the UN) should make it mandatory to stop trading with said country. No country can keep itself afloat without trade, so what choice do they have but to stop.

Admittedly, I've been thinking about this for a while, but I'm not sure how well it would work. I think it would, but I bet one of you could come up with fifty thousand holes in it.

[MasterShakezula]

I like that idea.  It would need to be further fleshed out, but a good start, so far.

In the meantime, I don't see a reason why we would have any right to send our military to save other nations from their own failings, unless it is a direct and MAJOR ( think, platoons invading our home soil, shooting at our own people in areas of large population; something at least of that scale) threat to our home field. 

I'm all for peaceful humanitarian efforts, even sending funding to legitimate repair efforts (provided that the money is used for that, as opposed to falling in the hands of the next native warmonger to screw things up again); that stuff I'd be cool with our gov doing.

But I'm not for sending in weaponry, funding for militias, troops, or anything of that sort.  Call me horrendously cynical, but I bet that odds are, had we intervened in Rwanda, it could have escalated into something much, much worse. 

[73109]

I agree. I am the biggest pacifist you'll ever meet, which is why I hate intervening in situations like those mentioned whenever people's rights are being violated. However, I'm also a massive bleeding heart so I think that whenever a situation like the ones come about come about, others should do whatever they can do stop it. Peacefully. Enter my idea.

[Super Dude]

How do you get every single country in the organization, let alone the world, to agree to stop trading with that country?  Enter the problem with everything international relations.

[73109]

If the crimes that these hypothetical countries are committing are so bad, wouldn't most of the countries agree to boycott trading with them? If it is a vast majority than you boycott those in the minority as well. Or it could be done voluntarily, but that's an issue because we are all greedy.

[Super Dude]

Think of international relations as the state of nature on a massive scale.  Nobody can make anybody do anything because morality doesn't exist on the international level, just interest.  Thing is, even if a state goes into something with the best intentions (and actually probably especially so), there is a high chance the state that agrees to cooperate with them is just going to stab them in the back later.  Case in point, Hitler's appeasement.  It's the security dilemma (also known as the prisoner's dilemma), and it's present in every single event that takes place on the international stage.  That's why, for example, the Mideast Road Map to Peace has basically been a complete standstill.  What assurance does Israel have that once Palestine is a state that they can expect violence will cease?  What assurance does Palestine have that Israel will lower trade barriers and end settlements?

Also as a side note, the philosophe's of the Enlightenment too believed in world peace through international trade.  There are some in political theory circles who believe the two world wars are the result of relying too heavily on that assumption.

[Sigz]

Just a heavily downsized effort that just would have enough forces stationed at our borders and within our country in event of an attack upon our soil, as well as a reserve to deploy in event of emergency.  Perhaps some off-shore bases, and a functional Navy and Airforce. 

Yes, and hence my original post - all this costs a hell of a lot more than education. It's really specious to say "zomg we spend more on defense than education look at how much we suck", because the two things are incomparable. Rifles and tanks cost quite a bit more than pencils and books.

[MasterShakezula]

My main concern about the military spending is the fact that it's way more than it should be, and the fact that it makes us enemies out if other, justifiably angered nations.

Now about education reform, I'd say it's less of an issue of poor funding than it is poor use of funding in conjunction with a far outdated system made to create factory workers in a post industrial nation.

[73109]

Exactly on both accounts. One, we should not spend 700 billion dollars a year on guns.

Two, we need education reform which A) Puts more money into educational systems, and B) Changes the job of school from future job equiptment to educating citizens. I want our education system focused on the nuturing of the minds of the young. We need to develop thinkers and citizens, not sheep.

[Super Dude]

My main concern about the military spending is the fact that it's way more than it should be, and the fact that it makes us enemies out if other, justifiably angered nations.

Now about education reform, I'd say it's less of an issue of poor funding than it is poor use of funding in conjunction with a far outdated system made to create factory workers in a post industrial nation.

I get the sentiment, but it really isn't about how much money we spend.  It's how we put the spent money to use that pisses others off.  Theoretically we can maintain this level of spending (theoretically meaning without taking economics into account) without causing any substantial changes in our relations with other countries.

[Scheavo]

Exactly on both accounts. One, we should not spend 700 billion dollars a year on guns.

Two, we need education reform which A) Puts more money into educational systems, and B) Changes the job of school from future job equiptment to educating citizens. I want our education system focused on the nuturing of the minds of the young. We need to develop thinkers and citizens, not sheep.

I'm not entirely sure lack of money is the problem, but lack of money in the right area's. Too many administrators, superintendents, and other persons who don't do a whole lot to help educate our kids.

I completely agree with part b. It's time we start teaching philosophy in high school (at the latest). Teach kids music, foreign languages, and math when they're young, let the rest just sort happen after that.

[73109]

I completely agree, dude. America's math and science education is pathetic. If you look at Finland's education, it is perfect. I understand that implicating that type of education system in the US with many more children would be difficult, but that is why I say we need more money in education. I also completely agree with philosophy. Kids need to start thinking, not spitting back information.

[Super Dude]

Exactly on both accounts. One, we should not spend 700 billion dollars a year on guns.

Two, we need education reform which A) Puts more money into educational systems, and B) Changes the job of school from future job equiptment to educating citizens. I want our education system focused on the nuturing of the minds of the young. We need to develop thinkers and citizens, not sheep.

I'm not entirely sure lack of money is the problem, but lack of money in the right area's. Too many administrators, superintendents, and other persons who don't do a whole lot to help educate our kids.

I completely agree with part b. It's time we start teaching philosophy in high school (at the latest). Teach kids music, foreign languages, and math when they're young, let the rest just sort happen after that.

At the latest?  I mean, I agree with the sentiment, but I don't think too many boys or girls will really "get" it at the time they're figuring out boobs, penises, and the like.  I would call high school age the "perfect fit," so you begin learning philosophy in your freshman year but not earlier.

[73109]

Well, maybe if we fostered education early, maybe they can understand the stuff. We just think they can't because of what we have been doing to them. However, I wouldn't have a problem if they learned it in 9th grade. Or they could learn it in all of them.

[MasterShakezula]

I say we need to have more intensive education for all.

We have the few honor students put forth a great deal of effort to succeed and learn, while the majority linger around and generally act like cretin throughout high school.

From what I've read about say, Japan, everyone is forced to go through very tough and challenging courses, to some degree, and those who just screw around are totally ostracized.  Hence, why they have so many hard-working, well-educated individuals and so few uneducated dumb-asses. 

We could learn from them. 

I mean, really, here, college is viewed as something many go to, but it's not the end of the world if you don't put enough effort in school to get there.  There, you're a fucking imbecile (well, viewed as one) if you don't make it into college.  We need that mindset. 

[Super Dude]

Well, maybe if we fostered education early, maybe they can understand the stuff. We just think they can't because of what we have been doing to them. However, I wouldn't have a problem if they learned it in 9th grade. Or they could learn it in all of them.

I dunno if you went to private or public school in elementary and middle, but given my experience with private school, I don't think it makes much of a difference.

[MasterShakezula]

I doubt it would. 

It's not the type of school kids go to that is determining how they are; it's our entire culture. 

Our culture is largely vapid and complacent.  We accept mediocrity to the point where it's the standard, and anything above it is essentially declared to be sheer genius.  Unless it's too far above the norm, in which case, it's declared weird or crazy and ostracized. 

In Japan, intellectualism is the norm; here, it's almost heresy.   

[Super Dude]

If you want to see culture change, wait a few more decades.  It's a slow, slow process short of an outright cultural revolution like the hippies.

[73109]

What cup said is right. Here, in my school district, standardized test scores are so low, the goal by the end of the 2012 year is to have 60% of the kids pass...They are trying to fail!! Isn't there a problem with that? Kids have the ability to learn well beyond what we think. We just don't know that.

[MasterShakezula]

Seriously?  Deliberately failing tests?

Did you hear that sound?

(T'was the sound of my hypothesis that kids my age couldn't get any less responsible and future minded being spontaneously disproved)

[73109]

Nononono. They are not trying to fail the test. Their goal passing rate is 60%, which is failing on a test (out of 100.) So what I'm saying is, their goal is to have a failing amount of kids passing.

[MasterShakezula]

(Thanks for clarifying.  I guess my hypothesis is still no longer true, though, because:)

Goal of 60%?

Fucking pathetic, that's what 60% is.

I mean, really, you and I both know how easy those damn things are.  Anything less than a 100% passing rate on those tests is just plain unacceptable.  Simple as that. 

[73109]

No shit. These are the easiest tests I've ever taken, and most kids fail them...

[MasterShakezula]

What do these kids do all day?

Sex and hard drugs?

[73109]

Pretty much.

[Perpetual Change]

Nononono. They are not trying to fail the test. Their goal passing rate is 60%, which is failing on a test (out of 100.) So what I'm saying is, their goal is to have a failing amount of kids passing.

Uh, sorry, but no. Maybe the "problem" is kids like yourself (no offense) who are good and filling in standardized tests are told that they're the "smart" ones, whereas the other kids just get disgruntled and give up. When, in fact, standardized tests are a horrible gauge of intelligence.

[MasterShakezula]

Pretty much.

Same shit happens here.

I'd just like to know how the hell do they get away with that shit?

Are their parents really that negligent/emotionally-detached/apathetic/idiotic?

Nononono. They are not trying to fail the test. Their goal passing rate is 60%, which is failing on a test (out of 100.) So what I'm saying is, their goal is to have a failing amount of kids passing.

Uh, sorry, but no. Maybe the "problem" is kids like yourself (no offense) who are good and filling in standardized tests are told that they're the "smart" ones, whereas the other kids just get disgruntled and give up. When, in fact, standardized tests are a horrible gauge of intelligence.

Or, how about these "normal" kids get off of their asses and put some goddamn effort into their academic lives, for once?

All of the information required to get a passing grade on these fuckers can be acquired simply through attending class, paying an adequate amount of attention to the lectures, and doing the homework.

IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!

[73109]

Yeah, my school district is not the model though. Shit area, minorities are the majority (not racist, you just know what that tends to mean,) most don't speak English, so...yeah! I've become pretty disillusioned with the system.

[MasterShakezula]

Yeah, my school district is not the model though. Shit area, minorities are the majority (not racist, you just know what that tends to mean,) most don't speak English, so...yeah! I've become pretty disillusioned with the system.

My school is apparently one of the best public school in the state.

Even then, there are loads of meat-heads and broads, too many ESLs, and an unhealthy # of potheads/delinquents.  In most of my classes, I'm one of the few who are actually giving a damn.

Almost every day, I see the school's assigned fuzz escorting some toker into his patrol vehicle. 

[73109]

Yeah man. What's killing us is the "hood" mentality. These kids don't think they will make anything of themselves so they don't try. Also, way too many ESLs...way too many.

[MasterShakezula]

Spot on.

Anyone who has this "hood" mentality should be gotten rid of.  It's entirely possible for anyone to do a good enough job to get somewhere in society; they just have to care enough to put in the effort where effort's due!  Except they don't, because they've got their sad little victim mentality going on.  Sucks for them, I guess; hope they enjoy their lifetimes in poverty. 

As for the ESLs, they should be forced to learn English.  Over the course of the last 200 odd years, the US has had its share of immigrants, and though we accepted their differences (over time; our treatment of them was far from perfect, I will admit), they made their share of efforts into actually integrating into our society.  The current crop shouldn't have anything less expected of them. 

[73109]

I don't think they should be gotten rid of. I just think they should learn a trade. Mind you, I only think this because of the situation education finds itself in. If it were up to me, these kids would be actively apart of the education system, learning well beyond what they are, and most importantly, caring.

[MasterShakezula]

Sadly, there are a couple things that prevent positive outcomes from happening.

A: they don't learn useful trades, because they are lazy/unmotivated, or because they end up taking up illegal trades.

B: for them to be taking part in the education system and to care, it'll take more than the education system trying to make them.  It'll take a complete change in culture.  Their culture taints them before they even hit the elementary school doors, it seems.  Their worthless parents are just as much accountable for their upbringings and to blame for their failings. 

Disclaimer: this is the best I know; I never grew up in an empoverished neighborhood, so I don't have any experience with this waste of student body aside from coming across them at school.