Elon appreciation thread

[Charles West]

If there is no support within the family unit for education in general or for student conduct at the schools then that's a fundamental problem which cannot be mitigated by throwing unlimited amounts of money at the schools. We're fighting culture here, not resources. And these attitudes are not just limited to the poor. Even the private schools struggle with a certain percentage of parents supporting the misconduct of their kids at the expense of everyone else. Their advantage over the public schools is that they can and will kick their troublemakers out.

I don't think it is culture so much as economic neglect. Democrats are generally hostile to business, and inner cities have been allowed to atrophy as entrepreneurs take their ideas elsewhere. A good example is California. It has a hostile business environment, is consistently rated the most hostile in the country, and has steadily lost economic opportunity to neighboring states. The same thing has happened to the inner cities.

 

[Charles West]

How would you reconcile your assumption based on the charts below? From what I can tell, we had a decent increase in math under Reagan, but a corresponding downturn in reading under Reagan. Then a pretty good bump in math and reading under Clinton. Otherwise, I see no correlation that could be tied to which party was in the WH. I get your desire to blame the failure on Dems - and on the surface, it sounds reasonable - as pretty much anything government runs gets mucked up. The stats just don't hold up to that kind of hypothesis, though.

View attachment 91283
View attachment 91284

Educational outcomes are determined at the local level. Look up high school graduates in Chicago, the few that do graduate. Their reading comprehension is below 3rd and 4th grade levels. That is the result of local control.

 

[alebrewer]

Educational outcomes are determined at the local level. Look up high school graduates in Chicago, the few that do graduate. Their reading comprehension is below 3rd and 4th grade levels. That is the result of local control.

No doubt. Plutocracy cannot be defeated at the local level, though. It has to be defeated at the national level. Both parties consist of nothing but swamp infested crooks whose desire is to bleed the country dry. One party does it by increasing the wealth of the top 1% of America and the other party does it by decreasing the wealth of the bottom 75% (through increased taxation and inflation). The only choices available to the voting public at this time are to kill the country quickly or kill it slowly. Either way - both parties are driving the country into becoming a memory.

 

[Charles West]

No doubt. Plutocracy cannot be defeated at the local level, though. It has to be defeated at the national level. Both parties consist of nothing but swamp infested crooks whose desire is to bleed the country dry. One party does it by increasing the wealth of the top 1% of America and the other party does it by decreasing the wealth of the bottom 75% (through increased taxation and inflation). The only choices available to the voting public at this time are to kill the country quickly or kill it slowly. Either way - both parties are driving the country into becoming a memory.

We will have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

[alebrewer]

Regardless of party affiliation, the fact is that the candidate with the most money wins election roughly 90% of the time. But hey - it's not a plutocracy...

 

[alebrewer]

 

[alebrewer]

 

[alebrewer]

 

[alebrewer]

This I will give DT - he is the only president in recent history to have less wealth after leaving the presidency.

 

[ucbruin]

That's because he's dumb as a rock....
Kushner on the other hand....