Opinion I've been saying it starts at home.

It's all 3 and none.

Funding is primarily done through local property taxes, essentially you pay for your school district based on how expensive your taxes are. Expensive counties generate more tax revenue for schools than less expensive counties. But the states chip in money as well. And the federal government provides funding if the state adopts specific criteria. For example, the federal government might want geometry taught at a certain age so they'll provide funding if the state agrees to make that part of the state-wide criteria. If a state doesn't agree with that criteria, they don't have to adopt it but they don't get the funding either.

This is what leads to debates around things like Common Core or No Child Left Behind. They are federal criteria that had to be adopted to qualify for federal money. The states want the money but they don't always want the criteria. Many times, the states feel strong armed into adopting the criteria because they need the money so badly. But this also means that there are universal standards beyond those grant based criteria. A school in Alabama can choose to teach subjects based on their own philosophy while a school in a neighboring state could teach the same subject based on a different philosophy. And that's before you get into how the individual school districts within the state can apply even more divergent philosophies from each other.

So, you could write your "I'm mad as hell" letters to state, fed and local but you'd have to write different letters because they all manage different parts of the funding and standards components from each other.

Thanks for for taking the time to explain. I wonder if in lieu of government funding they should chase corporations and offer advertising space in the school hallways or something
 
I'd say that the thrift towards antisocial behaviour or delinquency itself is a manifestation for the lack of family values, either by the person committing those acts or the group they're a part of and for example the GSS stats show that it's 10% vs 17% in police altercations with non-intact/intact households and 5% vs 13% of intact/step- and single parent households in adolescent arrests.
There are plenty of more, albeit none labelled as 'family values' : they're rather measuring the difference of traditional vs non-traditional families and the results are somewhat as expected.
Traditional values have been absolutely exemplary in providing good citizens for centuries, only now much more recently created 'alternatives' have had somewhat dire impact on the societies and I for one can't understand why beat around the bush when it comes setting kids up for the best possible life ahead of them.
I think a lot of this applies to school and education as well : I agree that the 'baseline' should cover "everyone", but I think it should also cater needs of the best students and the special-ed for example. Nothing would be better than a great public educational system and where I come from, the best institutions are indeed public (from elementary until uni), big mix of all backgrounds.
Granted, to be get into the top uni you're supposed to have a fantastic report card OR go through exams, sometimes up to a week and depending on the program, the acceptance % might be a mere 2-3%.
So competition is quite necessary in near-meritocracy and the further a person is willing to go, the harder they will have to work or have a true natural talent for something.
We can't choose where we start, but I tend to think that the family unit is the most important starting point for the person 'currently' navigating through life and that moulds the perception of that person towards his/hers family as well.
So yeah, I don't disagree with you, but I think I see a different intervention..
I don't disagree with the stats but I see a different causation, at least as it applies to the U.S. Specifically, I disagree with the direction. Many people say that when family values break down we see these increases in antisocial behavior or delinquency. Which I think is backwards. I think when the social fabric is attacked, we get antisocial behavior some of which manifests aslnon-intact families.

Essentially, intact families are the product of a society that functions properly and rewards such things. When society fails to reward good behavior, the things that get lost include intact families. Family structures are an outcome, not a cause.

What we call tradition is simply a history that certain behavior gets rewards so you should do it, even if you don't know how the rewards actually work. But if the behavior, the tradition, doesn't yield those rewards then the traditions lose value. Keeping the tradition or returning to them doesn't matter if the system itself doesn't work as promised.

The link between education and work is very similar. Students get an education because it is supposed to result in better work. But if education doesn't result in better work then people will stop pursuing the education. It's incorrect to then state that if people only valued education more then their work lives would improve. It misses the crucial element that education lost value because it wasn't performing as tradition claimed it should. And that speaks to a problem with work, not a problem with how people value education. The Work stopped valuing education, the people followed thereafter.
 
Thanks for for taking the time to explain. I wonder if in lieu of government funding they should chase corporations and offer advertising space in the school hallways or something
We'd have to identify the reward for the corporation. I think we'd end up in the same resource problem we have now. If I'm a corporation, I'm advertising where I know the parents can buy my product.

The thing is that the most highly resourced parents already know this is how the game works and the lowest resourced parents know it as well. It's the parents in the middle, better resourced than the poor but with no real understanding how much better resourced others are that don't grasp the extent of what's happening.

To put in some real life examples, Elon Musk built a school for his kids and the kids of the engineers that work for his companies. I'm aware of several schools for gifted kids are funded by very wealthy parents who wanted an elite education for their children and didn't feel like fighting with existing public or private schools. They then brought in other well monied parents and basically run private schools for the super resourced. On the other side of things, some parents keep their kids in elite boarding schools and private schools for the social networking, not the education. They address the education with tutors and out of school expenditures.

Corporations will follow the money. There's no incentive to do otherwise.
 
We have after school programs, but that kid doesn't appear old enough to be going to school.

Will higher min wage and parental leave (I assume you mean maternity/paternity leave) help this child learn how to behave?

Redlining isn't a thing any longer.

Or we could try the Dem solution that liberal cities have been using for years without success.
Redlining still exists in several realms of American life
 
I'd like to think stuff like this has always happened, we just didn't have social media and smartphones and 24/7 news until recently. But damn, what causes a 10 year old to do something like this?

Edit: I thought this thread was about the 73 year old guy who got beat to death in Philly by a bunch of "kids." One of them is only 10.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to think stuff like this has always happened, we just didn't have social media and smartphones and 24/7 news until recently. But damn, what causes a 10 year old to do something like this?
It's a cycle that self-sustains. Police do something that the community dislikes, the community teaches the children that the cops are the enemy. The kids treat the cops like the enemy. The enemy does something the community dislikes, wash, rinse, repeat.

The origin of the cycle is decades old at this point.

Some people are going to balk at this comparison but this is what fighting the government looks like. I'm not saying for anyone to agree that the fight is justified -- it's irrelevant to the point I'm making. When a community is at war with the government, that's what it looks like. The government remains present because it's the government, it's not going anywhere. But community fights with the avatars of the government that are present.

As I type this, all sorts of parallels pop into my head. Like Robin Hood for example. Antagonizing the poor sheriff of Nottingham for trying to do his job, lol.
 
It's a cycle that self-sustains. Police do something that the community dislikes, the community teaches the children that the cops are the enemy. The kids treat the cops like the enemy. The enemy does something the community dislikes, wash, rinse, repeat.

The origin of the cycle is decades old at this point.

Some people are going to balk at this comparison but this is what fighting the government looks like. I'm not saying for anyone to agree that the fight is justified -- it's irrelevant to the point I'm making. When a community is at war with the government, that's what it looks like. The government remains present because it's the government, it's not going anywhere. But community fights with the avatars of the government that are present.

As I type this, all sorts of parallels pop into my head. Like Robin Hood for example. Antagonizing the poor sheriff of Nottingham for trying to do his job, lol.
I actually assumed this thread was about the kids who beat the 73 year old to death in Philly (the embedded tweet in the OP is just a blank white box for me on Firefox). One of them is only 10 years old.
 
I actually assumed this thread was about the kids who beat the 73 year old to death in Philly (the embedded tweet in the OP is just a blank white box for me on Firefox). One of them is only 10 years old.

Can you imagine what that 10 year old will be teaching his 10 year old, 10 years from now...
 
This video was just released it has zero to do with race so please dont make it about race as we're seeing kids of all races act up.
This is proof positive it starts with parents. Where do you think they learned this behavior from? We have a parenting issue in this country. What can be done to turn things around?


I don't know, maybe the kid has seen the cops brutalize his father? It's terrible to see either way.

Anywho, have you ever posted any examples of bad parenting in a white family? How many threads on parenting have you started?

This just comes across as a micro aggression.
 
Blacks of Yesteryear and Today

http://walterewilliams.com/blacks-of-yesteryear-and-today/

I was a teenager, growing up in the Richard Allen housing project of North Philadelphia, when Emmett Till was lynched in Money, Mississippi, on Aug. 28, 1955, and his brutalized, unrecognizable body later recovered from the Tallahatchie River. From 1882-1968, 4,743 lynchings occurred in the United States. Roughly 73%, or 3,446, were black people, and 27%, or 1,297, were white people. Many whites were lynched because they were Republicans who supported their fellow black citizens and opposed the lawless act of lynching. Tuskegee University has the best documentation of lynching. It records an 1892 high of 69 whites and 161 blacks lynched. By the 1940s, occurrences of lynching fell to single digits or disappeared altogether.

At the time of my youth, today’s opportunities for socioeconomic advancement were nonexistent for black people. For all but a few, college attendance was out of the question because of finances and racial discrimination. If you were not admitted to the black colleges of Lincoln University or Cheyney State College, forget about college. I do not know of any student of my 1954 class at Philadelphia’s Benjamin Franklin High School who attended college. Though the quality of education at Benjamin Franklin is a mere shadow of its past, today roughly 17% of its graduating class has been admitted to college. The true hope for a youngster graduating from high school during the 1950s was a well-paying and steady job. My first well-paying job was as a taxi driver for Yellow Cab Company.

Younger black people today have no idea of and have not experienced the poverty and discrimination of earlier generations. Also, the problems today’s black people face have little or nothing to do with poverty and discrimination. Political hustlers like to blame poverty and racism while ignoring the fact that poverty and racism were much greater yesteryear but there was not nearly the same amount of chaos.

The out-of-wedlock birth rate among blacks in 1940 was about 11%; today, it is 75%. Black female-headed households were just 18% of households in 1950, as opposed to about 68% today. In fact, from 1890 to 1940, the black marriage rate was slightly higher than that of whites. Even during slavery, when marriage was forbidden, most black children lived in biological two-parent families. In New York City, in 1925, 85% of black households were two-parent households. A study of 1880 family structure in Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were two-parent households.

There’s little protest against the horrible and dangerous conditions under which many poor and law-abiding black people must live. It is not uncommon for 50 black people to be shot over a weekend in Chicago — not by policemen but by other black people. About 7,300 black people are murdered each year, and not by white people or racist cops, but mostly by other black people. These numbers almost make our history of victimization by racist lynching look like child’s play.

The solutions to the many problems that black Americans face must come from within our black communities. They will not come from the political arena. Blacks hold high offices and dominate the politics in cities such as Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New Orleans. Yet, these are the very cities with the nation’s worst-performing schools, highest crime rates, high illegitimacy rates, weak family structure and other forms of social pathology.

I am not saying that blacks having political power is the cause of these problems. What I am saying is that the solution to most of the major problems that confront black people will not be found in the political arena or by electing more blacks to high office.

One important step is for black Americans to stop being “useful tools” for the leftist, hate-America agenda. Many black problems are exacerbated by guilt-ridden white people. Often, they accept behavior and standards from black people that they would not begin to accept from white people. In that sense, white liberal guilt is a form of disrespect in their relationships with black Americans. By the same token, black people should stop exploiting the guilt of whites. Let us all keep in mind that history is one of those immutable facts of life.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.
 
No, actual solutions, rather than the blame game your lot plays.

These are trauma born issues. Anyone who works with or lives with people who have trauma born issues understands you need a two pronged approach:

1. Hold space.
2. Set boundaries.

The left is all about holding space. The right is all about setting boundaries. Just choosing one or the other doesn't get you anywhere, and more times than not is just going to make things worse. You need both. Simultaneously.

Until we figure that out in the West, this is how things are going to be.
 
Pretty on point IMO and the funny thing is that there are more than few 'basic' lefty 'Doggers as well, who are still trying to overcomplicate the fix for the issue.
It doesn't get much more simple than Family, Work and Education and only in that particular order.
Of course, it's much more comforting to talk big, seek culprits everywhere else, cry again for more funds etc.
Things work better when they're not complicated and honestly, the poor and the uneducated do not need some shit-talking social scientist to put these mascots on a pedestal to be catered by the system that doesn't fix the status quo and only makes them clients for the welfare state with the same gloomy outcomes that were always there.
But yeah, reality is a hard pill to swallow for the many.
Wtf are you on about? Can you lay out a solution for all this?
You have people offering evidence based solutions and all you can answer for a solution is nothing?
 
Wtf are you on about? Can you lay out a solution for all this?
You have people offering evidence based solutions and all you can answer for a solution is nothing?
Oh right, the decades long pumping of billions into wild social experiments that haven't erased the problem, combined with spoon fed dogma of being of only able get ahead by having lower standards?
If your solution to problem is to end up with a population only worthy of being taken care of by the state and that any achievement must be carved out by allocating mere representation, then bravo : another success story for the lefties.
I mean it shows that you're challenged, but my message is simple : focus on bringing the understanding of the necessity of nuclear family values at a early age for the less-fortunate (a concept irreplaceable with anything else out there), replace welfare-dependency and support easy-access work for people with low-education (earning wages has vast cognitive and psychosocial benefits beyond basic monetary gratification), support adequate basic elementary education and support talents (again, the purpose of education is to provide the individual with enough general knowledge and civilization so that they can make something out of themselves and offer support for the individuals who have the capabilities to pursue further goals.)
The point being, since there has been a total neglect of basic skills and values for the less-fortunate by replacing the traditional, functioning concepts by absolutely atrocious concepts imagined by idealists, the fix needs to start from the basics.
 
Oh right, the decades long pumping of billions into wild social experiments that haven't erased the problem, combined with spoon fed dogma of being of only able get ahead by having lower standards?
If your solution to problem is to end up with a population only worthy of being taken care of by the state and that any achievement must be carved out by allocating mere representation, then bravo : another success story for the lefties.
I mean it shows that you're challenged, but my message is simple : focus on bringing the understanding of the necessity of nuclear family values at a early age for the less-fortunate (a concept irreplaceable with anything else out there), replace welfare-dependency and support easy-access work for people with low-education (earning wages has vast cognitive and psychosocial benefits beyond basic monetary gratification), support adequate basic elementary education and support talents (again, the purpose of education is to provide the individual with enough general knowledge and civilization so that they can make something out of themselves and offer support for the individuals who have the capabilities to pursue further goals.)
The point being, since there has been a total neglect of basic skills and values for the less-fortunate by replacing the traditional, functioning concepts by absolutely atrocious concepts imagined by idealists, the fix needs to start from the basics.
1.So more tell kids what exactly at an early age? Not to get a divorce?
2. Subsided work programs for Poor's?
3. More money for schools.

Are those your solutions?
How would you implement them.
Still sounding pretty vague here
 
1.So more tell kids what exactly at an early age? Not to get a divorce?
2. Subsided work programs for Poor's?
3. More money for schools.

Are those your solutions?
How would you implement them.
Still sounding pretty vague here
Eh, I don't know if those exactly are my solutions.

1. Not fucking around without contraception and what a family actually is, how it's supposed to function and consequences of when it doesn't. Divorce actually means that there has been an effort to build a family of sorts, so that's already a level up.. There's so much to unfuck here, but I'd start tracing back to when the deterioration started and comparing it to policies that were implemented to 'advance' the situation. It all starts from very 'low-level'.
2. Yes I'd say to an extent, by tax-benefits or write-offs for the corps for participation, same to new small business and service-industries for setting up shop (evaluated on cost. vs. benefit in terms of tax-dollars on both all economic levels and re-tooled if deemed too costly or abused) Actually, this is an interesting opportunity in today's world where de-globalisation is on the table and these type of programs can accelerate the re-establishment of homegrown industries and innovation.)
3. Too vague and more money might not be necessary nor is it pragmatic (again, just printing and distributing money doesn't solve shit), it's a matter of where and how it's spent and on what exactly. The most crucial I find is elementary education, since the basics are the most important to get right for any future plans. Also, linked to NR°2 in terms of potential work force that might not require higher level studies.
Also, if education requires pooling additional resources, then they be gradually pinched from the spend that will be rendered obsolete by the benefits of better education.

I think this is both a national and community-level problem, which would need engagement from all levels.
The federal government will not know what the grass-roots problems are (focused on the big picture and depending who's in charge, unfortunately focused on serving a voting base the most) while communities are sometimes fixated on single-sighted short-term solutions for the most acute problems (understandable), when there's a whole another level of tanglement to unfuck.
I'd start by evaluating the plans of nations that have had to 'bring up to speed' much larger demographics in the past 40 years or so, much faster, to find out what can be applied here, because some of the struggles are the same (and some are not, depending on the particular problems of the demographics, the level of foundation from where to start from etc.). There are good examples out there.
So there will be no easy fixes for buying votes or serving a voter-base, but we're talking about only apolitical plans that will committed from 5 to 15 or 20 years and evaluated periodically : if shit gets wrong or starts to go wrong, it needs to be fixed and not run for decades unchecked which is why we are here.
 
Back
Top