America - The Official Thread

[ledhed]

Ummm China and india suck up tons as do the Eu...no one complaiins about them ...why ?

 

[a6m5]

Ummm China and india suck up tons as do the Eu...no one complaiins about them ...why ?

Oops. I was going there. China is definitely on the way to become a world resource supersucker. China securing natural gas, oil all over the world makes news all the time. It might only be a matter of time, before many countries will start taking shots at China and their foreign policy. We, the western nations kind of already do.

 

[FoolKiller]

I would have to guess that people complain about "American Imperialism" because as a superpower with a massive economy we have an effect on everyone. This will of course lead to complaints left and right.

When was the last time you saw someone praise a government leader on the news or pro-Americans from around the world be given attention? It doesn't happen because it isn't the same visual imagery as a protest and angry people.

Besides, whoever is in control, or has the most power, will always be given a bad reputation. In all reality America needs the rest of the world in order to prosper and like any symbiotic relationship the rest of the world benefits as well. Sometimes things go bad and the local governments allow for sweat shop situations to arise, so America is blamed for causing virtual slavery in third-world countries, but they forget to look at the nice, clean call centers in places such as India.

America is called imperialistic purely because they have a global influence. It is a simple word play to redefine globalization, which would be the natural progression of civilization as it grows. Whoever happened to be an economic superpower would be the one with the influence because of this. The only way to stop it would be if global population died down to a point that small farming communities were all that was necessary to sustain civilization, but a planet of six billion people requires trade between societies in order for tehm all to survive. The largest of these societies would have the most influence on the rest because they will need to trade the most and with multiple societies.

Any society is free to break free of American influence but will find it hard to survive that way.

 

[ledhed]

There is only make believe Imperialism when talking about the US.

You have to invent terms for it..like " cultural Imperialism " Economic Imperialism" ETC.

Instead of being a man and just saying " inlfluence " .

But that wont sell you any books or get you heard by radical left slackers and such...and Chomski will be disapointed.

 

[superberkut]

A tremendous revival, but this topic seemed too suitable for this thread and ultimately defeated the purpose of creating a new thread. (from an aborted new thread)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/15/AR2008021502901.html

A condensed excerpt of the article:

The mind of this country, taught to aim at low objects, eats upon itself." Ralph Waldo Emerson offered that observation in 1837, but his words echo with painful prescience in today's very different United States. Americans are in serious intellectual trouble -- in danger of losing our hard-won cultural capital to a virulent mixture of anti-intellectualism, anti-rationalism and low expectations.

This is the last subject that any candidate would dare raise on the long and winding road to the White House. It is almost impossible to talk about the manner in which public ignorance contributes to grave national problems without being labeled an "elitist," one of the most powerful pejoratives that can be applied to anyone aspiring to high office. Instead, our politicians repeatedly assure Americans that they are just "folks," a patronizing term that you will search for in vain in important presidential speeches before 1980. (Just imagine: "We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain . . . and that government of the folks, by the folks, for the folks, shall not perish from the earth.") Such exaltations of ordinariness are among the distinguishing traits of anti-intellectualism in any era.

The classic work on this subject by Columbia University historian Richard Hofstadter, "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life," was published in early 1963, between the anti-communist crusades of the McCarthy era and the social convulsions of the late 1960s. Hofstadter saw American anti-intellectualism as a basically cyclical phenomenon that often manifested itself as the dark side of the country's democratic impulses in religion and education. But today's brand of anti-intellectualism is less a cycle than a flood. If Hofstadter (who died of leukemia in 1970 at age 54) had lived long enough to write a modern-day sequel, he would have found that our era of 24/7 infotainment has outstripped his most apocalyptic predictions about the future of American culture.

Dumbness, to paraphrase the late senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, has been steadily defined downward for several decades, by a combination of heretofore irresistible forces. These include the triumph of video culture over print culture (and by video, I mean every form of digital media, as well as older electronic ones); a disjunction between Americans' rising level of formal education and their shaky grasp of basic geography, science and history; and the fusion of anti-rationalism with anti-intellectualism.

Despite an aggressive marketing campaign aimed at encouraging babies as young as 6 months to watch videos, there is no evidence that focusing on a screen is anything but bad for infants and toddlers. In a study released last August, University of Washington researchers found that babies between 8 and 16 months recognized an average of six to eight fewer words for every hour spent watching videos.

I cannot prove that reading for hours in a treehouse (which is what I was doing when I was 13) creates more informed citizens than hammering away at a Microsoft Xbox or obsessing about Facebook profiles. But the inability to concentrate for long periods of time -- as distinct from brief reading hits for information on the Web -- seems to me intimately related to the inability of the public to remember even recent news events. It is not surprising, for example, that less has been heard from the presidential candidates about the Iraq war in the later stages of the primary campaign than in the earlier ones, simply because there have been fewer video reports of violence in Iraq. Candidates, like voters, emphasize the latest news, not necessarily the most important news.

No wonder negative political ads work. "With text, it is even easy to keep track of differing levels of authority behind different pieces of information," the cultural critic Caleb Crain noted recently in the New Yorker. "A comparison of two video reports, on the other hand, is cumbersome. Forced to choose between conflicting stories on television, the viewer falls back on hunches, or on what he believed before he started watching."

The shrinking public attention span fostered by video is closely tied to the second important anti-intellectual force in American culture: the erosion of general knowledge.

This article is brought up as it came to my attention recently. And yet, I find myself agreeing with it to the point of promoting it. I am sure that many American GTP members are smarter, however. So, theoretically, how could this lack of knowledge and rationalism be curbed and turned around with such a tremendous population?

 

[Year.Zero]

I am sure that many American GTP members are smarter, however.

Now that is anti-intellectualism right there.

 

[YSSMAN]

So, theoretically, how could this lack of knowledge and rationalism be curbed and turned around with such a tremendous population?

Proper funding of our education system through funds better appropriated from other segments of the budget? Getting rid of "No Child Left Behind" for an education plan that would actually help and encourage our kids to learn and be better prepared in life?

That, and we need to bomb MTV. It is the root of all evil...

 

[Year.Zero]

Proper funding of our education system through funds better appropriated from other segments of the budget? Getting rid of "No Child Left Behind" for an education plan that would actually help and encourage our kids to learn and be better prepared in life?

That, and we need to bomb MTV. It is the root of all evil...

Political pandering has to change. The appeasement to "folks" campaign didn't work—they DID elect a "folk", and look what happened. The fact that he appealed to "folks" and got elected only says that the "folks" were already there in majority in the first place; those 18+ and dumb enough to vote for Bush in 2000 (that was the year, wasn't it?) were the by-product of 1982 and earlier: just old enough to appreciate gangsta rap.


There, I said it! Rap is to blame for your nation's idiocy!

[partial seriousness]How's that for a thesis? [/partial seriousness]

 

[superberkut]

Now that is anti-intellectualism right there.

Really? Danoff is American...

I think it is the type of crowd that this website attracts that leads me to believe this, however I guess you're correct in that I shouldn't assume.

 

[Kylehnat]

In this country, intelligence is still regarded as uncool, and those who possess it are regarded as weaklings, destined to be picked-off by the hungry predators who still prey on human flesh. It doesn't help that our current president is a complete retard, who probably picked on people like me when he was in high school. Our most revered citizens are athletes and actors, not those who are researching disease or working on the energy problem. As such, many young'ns and their parents focus on playing 8 sports year-round, and all but ignoring school (little Billy is going to be the next Alex Rodriguez if we push him hard enough! ). This churns out a population of burger-flippers who TiVo every episode of "American Idol", but can't be bothered to spend 60 seconds to find Iraq and Iran on a map (once you find one, the other shouldn't take more than a couple hours to locate). We're a society who values the almighty dollar above all else, and until professors and scientists are billionaires (here's hoping! ), nobody is going to think it's "cool" to be smart.

 

[Joey D]

Proper funding of our education system through funds better appropriated from other segments of the budget? Getting rid of "No Child Left Behind" for an education plan that would actually help and encourage our kids to learn and be better prepared in life?

That, and we need to bomb MTV. It is the root of all evil...

We'd rather blow our money on things other then that though, which still boggles my mind.

 

[YSSMAN]

I'll openly admit that education is not my primary focus in domestic policy, but of what I have read on it, it is something that worries me the most. How we can go about under-funding almost every K-12 institution absolutely blows my mind, furthermore, that people are actually unwilling to pay the taxes for these schools because they don't have children.

Really?

Feel free to pay back the $17,000 your community paid for you to go to school then...

The simple fact of the matter is that education is one of the most-important tools for Americans to have an opportunity for a greater life in this country. From Maine to California, we have to be willing to spend any amount necessary to give our kids that chance. Furthermore, there has to be some kind of program to encourage and give these kids the ability to take the next step; To go to college, get a degree, and get into a competitive field.

Certainly I do not wish to argue for a "free" education like much of what the socialized world has, that creates a class of over-privileged and over-education people (see job issues in France based on degree), but I do think there could be a lot more that our tax dollars could fund (properly) on the basis of education.

I had planned for some time to become a teacher, but I'm uncertain as of now. With all of the hoops that one has to jump through because of current laws on the books, I'm not even sure if its worth the extra year and a half I'd have to spend at Aquinas...

 

[Joey D]

I have an issue with paying more for schools though, what we pay should be enough (unless of course the school needs to expand). Here in Lake Orion they have raised taxes three times for the schools (voted on every time) and the only thing they did with the money was: astro turf the football field, build a marching band practice field, and build a state of the art dark room even though everyone was doing digital pictures.

There was nothing academic about anything they used the money for. I was still in overcrowded classes and using books that were severely outdated (if there was a book at all). I remember my history book's present day section talked about the Soviet threat and never mentioned Desert Storm since it had not happened yet...I mean seriously?

 

[Year.Zero]

Canada sounds way better off in the education department, and even we complain.

 

[Eric.]

I have an issue with paying more for schools though, what we pay should be enough (unless of course the school needs to expand). Here in Lake Orion they have raised taxes three times for the schools (voted on every time) and the only thing they did with the money was: astro turf the football field, build a marching band practice field, and build a state of the art dark room even though everyone was doing digital pictures.

There was nothing academic about anything they used the money for. I was still in overcrowded classes and using books that were severely outdated (if there was a book at all). I remember my history book's present day section talked about the Soviet threat and never mentioned Desert Storm since it had not happened yet...I mean seriously?

I hear you. My high school hasn't really had any improvements to the actual buildings/land, but I'm not seeing any improvements on anything. Every computer is something like a 2Ghz or less Pentium 4 or 3 with just enough RAM to run XP. A lot of books I've used both in junior high and high school have been from the 80s, also. From this history point, it really doesn't matter for us. We've never learned much past WWII in school anyways.

 

[YSSMAN]

I have an issue with paying more for schools though, what we pay should be enough (unless of course the school needs to expand)...

There was nothing academic about anything they used the money for. I was still in overcrowded classes and using books that were severely outdated (if there was a book at all).

Forest Hills has had the same issues on occasion, but the thing is, the people have money (and continue to make it) in the area, so they continually approve the millages and other tax increases (despite being a Republican stronghold - Dick DeVos lives here) to pay for our schools. As a matter of fact, we actually had too much money at one point and the State threatened to take some of our money away.

...So we built a soccer stadium next to our football stadium (among other crazy ideas in the district)...

Its the inner-city schools that I worry most about. These kids do deserve a better shot at life (one that they also need to *want* first), and I'm not sure how we can fix those failing school systems. They need more money, better teachers, better equipment... All together they can create better students.

NPR ran a series a few months ago where they graded the school systems in Michigan and as I recall something like less than 25% of students graduate out of the Detroit Public School system. Compare that to Forest Hills, where well over 90% do, and its a very striking difference and something that needs more attention.

 

[nk4e]

In this country, intelligence is still regarded as uncool, and those who possess it are regarded as weaklings, destined to be picked-off by the hungry predators who still prey on human flesh.

Well, I believe that it various because in my High school years, the nerds were pretty high up in the chain. Jocks and alittle bit of cheer leaders attended Advance Placement classes. But the ones are in the bottom of the chain are the gangsters and people who don't care about their education.

Our most revered citizens are athletes and actors, not those who are researching disease or working on the energy problem. As such, many young'ns and their parents focus on playing 8 sports year-round, and all but ignoring school (little Billy is going to be the next Alex Rodriguez if we push him hard enough! ).

Well, I believe that its a trait that is given by each generation, like some sort if influence if you might say that a child wants to achieve and set the bar even higher.

We're a society who values the almighty dollar above all else, and until professors and scientists are billionaires (here's hoping! ), nobody is going to think it's "cool" to be smart.

People don't respect the educational system because it doesn't work sometimes or there "are" other ways to get the same amount of money within lesser time to support a family or live a simple life.

 

[Joey D]

NPR ran a series a few months ago where they graded the school systems in Michigan and as I recall something like less than 25% of students graduate out of the Detroit Public School system. Compare that to Forest Hills, where well over 90% do, and its a very striking difference and something that needs more attention.

I seem to remember that it was 17% in Detroit and that is just awful. But that city is a lost cause anyways as far as I am concerned. I don't think their is anything that can help it.

 

[YSSMAN]

I disagree...

Which reminds me: They're supposed to be doing a remake of Robocop for 2009 (YES!)

 

[Danoff]

Its the inner-city schools that I worry most about. These kids do deserve a better shot at life (one that they also need to *want* first), and I'm not sure how we can fix those failing school systems. They need more money, better teachers, better equipment... All together they can create better students.

More money is always the complaint about public schools. It'll never be enough. Public education is like public anything - inefficient, wasteful, and just plain sucks.

The way to help these kids is to do away with public schools entirely.

 

[Omnis]

More money is always the complaint about public schools. It'll never be enough. Public education is like public anything - inefficient, wasteful, and just plain sucks.

The way to help these kids is to do away with public schools entirely.

That'll be the day...

The only reason they keep around public schools is to have an excuse to tax the crap out of the people in the school districts.

Could you imagine the market that would open up if a state or even a county sold all of its schools? That, paired with a federal tax credit, would be awesome.

 

[Year.Zero]

Public education is like public anything - inefficient, wasteful, and just plain sucks.

The way to help these kids is to do away with public schools entirely.

That's not a universal problem, though. The Nordic countries have made it work wonders.

America's problem is the staunch capitalist attitude—which hinders any kind of communal development; the more liberal countries do perfectly well with government-funded programs—education, healthcare, or otherwise.

It's just a conflict in your country's ideals; that doesn't mean privatization is the answer, though.

 

[YSSMAN]

There is a reasonable balance that can be reached, the problem is, no one in our government seems to have any clue how to run a public education system. Wind the clock back 40 years ago and most Americans were at the top of the list when it comes to overall education levels. A short time later we were surpassed by the majority of Europe and parts of Asia, and its never gone back.

Handing out private contracts can in fact be a good thing. I'd like to see more solid research done on the effectiveness of a private education setting... However, I'm not completely sold on the idea, and consequently, I advocate for better reforms in our education system. One HUGE step forward would be a pay increase for our teachers, as well as curriculum that aren't focused on tests, but on the actual subjects that are important to learn and know about.

The simple fact of the matter is that an education is something that every child needs in this country. Quite obviously there is a massive imbalance between the states on the performance of these children. Certainly more could, and should, be done... Per exactly what (other than increased funding, training), I am not sure. I'd have to read more on the subject, it is not my strong point in domestic policy.

 

[Omnis]

That's not a universal problem, though. The Nordic countries have made it work wonders.

America's problem is the staunch capitalist attitude—which hinders any kind of communal development; the more liberal countries do perfectly well with government-funded programs—education, healthcare, or otherwise.

It's just a conflict in your country's ideals; that doesn't mean privatization is the answer, though.

Actually, you could probably attribute their success in education to the family more than anything.

Privatization in fascist fashion isn't the answer though. Not for us. See, here, when things are centralized, people concentrate on how much they can plunder from the collective rather than how much they can produce for themselves. It's not the capitalist attitude that hinders us.

Sometimes I wish that the people that think the Scandinavian countries are so great would just move there. Globally, I like the diversity, but I don't think a single country can function while constantly moving towards and being pulled between socialist and other systems.

 

[V1P3R]

Which reminds me: They're supposed to be doing a remake of Robocop for 2009 (YES!)

Oh no...

 

[Barracuda]

According to my history teacher America almost plunged into a depression yesterday

Anyone else hear about that?

 

[Danoff]

That's not a universal problem, though. The Nordic countries have made it work wonders.

Wonders? Last time I checked, they weren't all that far ahead of the US, and our education system is in shambles. Being anywhere near the US means your public education system sucks.

No, socialized systems universally suffer from the same problems. Inefficiency, poor quality, and high cost. It's an inherent flaw in any socialized service. It's fairly easily proven by simple logic. Socialism attempts to circumvent basic economic theory by removing a layer of choice from the equation. The result is to remove some of the key incentives that help ensure efficiency, quality, and cost effectiveness. This isn't rocket science. It's fundamental economic theory (which is basically not taught anywhere in any schools).

Another thing for you to think about. If public institutions are such a great answer for education, why is it that US universities (which are basically universally privately funded at least in part) still rank among the top in the world? We're trying our hand at socialism with our grade schools and it's failing miserably. Meanwhile we're keeping market forces in place at the college level where we're still topping out the list globally. Coincidence?

America's problem is the staunch capitalist attitude—which hinders any kind of communal development; the more liberal countries do perfectly well with government-funded programs—education, healthcare, or otherwise.

A) They don't. They have incredibly high tax rates that prevent economic growth and development. They need these huge tax rates to help prop up bloated wasteful bureaucracy.

B) Communal development doesn't really require an attitude change. All it requires is a legal change. All you really need in place to establish public institutions is a tax hike and a bureaucrat ready to spend. I'm sure you'd like to think that capitalism is holding us back, but you happen to be attacking one of our few fully socialist systems.

How we can go about under-funding almost every K-12 institution absolutely blows my mind, furthermore, that people are actually unwilling to pay the taxes for these schools because they don't have children.

Really?

Feel free to pay back the $17,000 your community paid for you to go to school then.

That taxes that cover your education are paid for by your parents. So if someone without children complains about paying for public schools, they're doing so knowing that their education was effectively bought and paid for by their parents (assuming their parents paid taxes). That's actually how it works, you don't pay for your own education. Your parents pay for it. So if you aren't a parent, you shouldn't be bearing the cost of other peoples' children.

 

[nk4e]

According to my history teacher America almost plunged into a depression yesterday

Anyone else hear about that?

My government teacher told me that we are in a recession.

 

[TwinTurbos94]

Yeah, we're in a recession right now.We'll have a boom in the upcoming months [/prediction]

 

[Joey D]

Yeah, we're in a recession right now.We'll have a boom in the upcoming months [/prediction]

With what? It will be years before we have an upward trend in our economy and no I don't solely blame the president either. There are several factors why the economy tanked...for a good example look at the American Axel strike.