Obsessing About Conspiracy

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: I disagree

Postby heath7 » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:09 pm

Putting up with nonsense can be as easy as spinning the scroll wheel; how is that morally or intellectually weak? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=heath7>heath7</A> at: 7/27/05 3:14 pm<br></i>
heath7
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 9:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

heath7

Postby robertdreed » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:11 pm

I've modified my comment. See above.<br><br>In general, I only ignore comments directed at myself after I judge that I've already replied on the record to the points in question. If someone persists in repeating themselves, I resort to scrolling by. <br><br>I think that replying to all comments directed specifically to me is a matter of politeness, as much as anything else. In the case of accusation, or people misapprehending or miscasting my comments, I feel an additional obligation, to clarify my remarks. <br><br>In my years on-line, I've mostly used scrolling by in response to a tired-ass tactic common to Internet trolls- filling up huge expanses of textspace with lengthy cut-and-pastes, often off-topic. I sometimes suspect that it's a tactic used when a given disputant has been severely caught out and unable to reply, and their only response is to put as much distance between themselves and their embarrassment as possible. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 7/27/05 3:24 pm<br></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: works for some, shuts out others ..i know

Postby hmm » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:13 pm

and here i was thinking hey every discussion here is mostly free of anger,it is sometimes heated but not personally so.<br>(well excluding my last post to this thread)<br>i can delete my earlier contribution?<br>but you are right<br>if you approach the search for knowledge as if its a battle to win you have already lost much chance of finding any new knowledge in the discussion you are having.<br><br>heh "Debate is rarely worth more than the inherent theatrics" to true <p></p><i></i>
hmm
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: works for some, shuts out others

Postby sunny » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:14 pm

I'm having trouble understanding why some are upset that we're having a heated discussion, a "pissing contest", which is basically what a debate is, after all. What are forums for, then? Instead of decrying the tone and content, why don't you all contribute to the actual subject at hand? Name-calling and ad-hominem attacks should be out of bounds, of course, but other than that, nobody is hurting anyone, are they?<br>My opinions are not set in stone;hopefully, by debating others, my horizons will be broadened and incorrect assumptions will give way to more informed ideas.<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START ;) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: this discussion topic works better in chat HINT

Postby hmm » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:20 pm

<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :b --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":b"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br>it leaves less polution too hehe <p></p><i></i>
hmm
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

sunny

Postby robertdreed » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:22 pm

If I'm not responding in detail to your previous post directed at myself, it's because on the most critical issue, we agree. <br><br>Sorry about that ;^) <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 7/27/05 3:31 pm<br></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

I don't like "chat"

Postby robertdreed » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:34 pm

It doesn't leave a record. <br><br>Pollution? Where? <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: sunny

Postby sunny » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:37 pm

No need to apologize; I didn't take offense. Just to let you know, I enjoy the sharpness of your debating skills, and hope to continue to benefit from the obvious depth of your experiences- so, keep sharing! <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

thanks, sunny

Postby robertdreed » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:45 pm

but don't think you're off the hook, simply becuase you've praised me ;^)<br><br>Often, I'd rather "brainstorm" than debate......but about what? <br><br>This discussion board, and the associated website, is on the outright <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>frontier</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> of controversial topic matters. Given the circumstances, I'm not sure how a climate of agreement- or even <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>comity</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->- can be maintained for any length of time. <br><br>The consideration of these dodgy subjects is no place for bobbleheads. Beyond the ample grounds for people of good will having well-reasoned disagreements, hucksters abound in these intellectual precincts. It's often quite difficult to distinguish between the sincere and the consciously phony, at least at the outset. And even in cases where one feels confident of identifying a witting fraud, it's usually unproductive to level an explicit accusation. <br><br>But pretending consensus is not the solution. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 7/27/05 4:05 pm<br></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: thanks, sunny

Postby sunny » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:54 pm

Don't worry, Robert, you're not off the hook either-just thought I'd try and keep it civil, since I don't like to be considered "shrill" but that doen't mean I'll suddenly leave my brains<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START ;) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> at my log-on screen <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sunny@rigorousintuition>sunny</A> at: 7/27/05 3:57 pm<br></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

They Want to Destroy Our Schools

Postby proldic » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:59 pm

Philadelphia School Privatization <br>They Want to Destroy Our Schools <br> <br>By Justin Harrison — CWA Local 13000, Philadelphia <br> <br>As in other big cities, the Philadelphia School District is in crisis. Cut after cut in federal and state funding has taken its toll. There are often no books, no bathrooms, no heat or air conditioning, and sometimes no running water, not to mention not enough teachers and too many students in classes. <br> <br> <br>Exploiting public concern about the education crisis, big business is seizing the opportunity to push its agenda. They want public education to better serve their needs, and to shift the costs and responsibility for education directly onto the working class. <br><br>Their solution? Let the market rule. Privatization. That means making teachers work harder for less, and driving down support costs by closing schools and contracting out services. <br><br>Manipulating public concern about education, Pennsylvania Governor Schweiker engineered a fiscal crisis in the Philadelphia Public School District that enabled him to take over the city schools. He then put all 264 city public schools into the hands of an appointed School Reform Commission (SRC). <br><br>In its first strike the SRC selected 70 schools with low standardized test scores for "reform." 19 schools will be "reconstituted" by dismissing all the teachers and hiring new ones. 9 schools will become charter or independent schools, 42 will be privatized, 28 will be run by for-profit companies, 6 will go to nonprofit management companies or community organizations, and 8 will be "partnered" with a university. Depending on the "success" or failure of each model, more privatizations will be pushed through in 2003. <br><br>But the real cause of the crisis in public education in Philadelphia, as in other cites, has been a systematic starving of funds from public education. Of the ten most populous states, Pennsylvania was second to last in the percentage of state dollars going into public schools. <br><br>State funding for public education has fallen 12.4% since 1990, to only 38% of the total funding. A generation ago Pennsylvania funded 50% of public education. Today, Pennsylvania would need to increase funding for public education by $1.5 billion to return to that target. <br><br>For-profit education companies like Edison Schools Inc., the nation's largest for-profit manager of public schools, stand ready to step into the breech. Edison is in the news lately: its stock has taken a pounding as questions are raised about its bookkeeping and its failure to win contracts for all 42 privatized Philadelphia Schools (it only got 20). Though Edison has yet to make a profit in its ten years, it appears that big business would rather pour its millions into keeping Edison afloat than properly fund public education. <br><br>Under pressure to cut costs and privatize services, our children's health has already been sacrificed, with our schools becoming a dumping ground for agribusiness products that can't be sold on the open market. This has led to a 10% per year increase in food poisonings in our public schools, according to a congressional study (Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/1/02). <br><br>In pushing through their program, the SRC has run into opposition from the community, the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers (PFT), and the School Students Union. The School Students Union has led a courageous fight with pickets, demonstrations, and occupations. The SRC was quick to give the students a modern big business civics lesson by getting an injunction to prevent the students from picketing commission meetings. <br><br>The PFT has focused on preserving teachers' seniority rights and has moved through the courts to attempt to stop the state takeover. However, the PFT and the SRC are on a collision course and events may overtake them. The SRC has threatened to close schools and reopen them as non-union unless the PFT gives the "reforms" they need. <br><br>A broad coalition against the attacks on education has been formed. It needs to take its campaign to every household in Philadelphia and expose the devastating effects of budget cuts as the cause of the crisis in education, not the fact that schools are publicly run. It was the mass struggles of previous generations that forced public officials to fund education for working class children. To take funds out of the public school system – a direct result of privatization – will weaken our public schools and take us backwards, not forwards. <br><br>• No Privatization or Commercialization of our Schools – No Vouchers <br><br>• No Cuts in Education Funding – Tax big business and rich to restore full funding for public schools <br><br>• No Layoffs of Teachers and School Workers <br><br>• Quality education requires well-paid teachers – Raise teachers' wages and benefits <br><br>• Massively increase the number of teachers, to dramatically reduce class size <br><br>• Take control of schools out of big business sponsored politicians, and put in hands of school employees, parents and students <br><br>• Money for Jobs and Education, not War<br> <br> <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Deep Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests