Q:How badly is govt-sponsored education failing? A: A significant number are voting for a socialist!

[Little-Acorn]

Looks like the usual liberal fanatics are diverting the thread as desperately as they can.

Back to the subject:
There is no better indication of the utter failure of the U.S. govt-sponsored educational system, than this: In a country that was founded on personal responsibility and charity, limited government, hard work and taking the consequences of your own success and failure, help from friends and family... a significant number of people are now voting for an admitted socialist (Bernie Sanders) and various other wannabees who won't admit they are socialists (Hillary, Bloomberg et. al.).

It's about as far from the American ideal as one can get. One of the foremost characteristics of socialism, is the destruction of private property rights. If you build a house, it doesn't belong to you. It belongs to your neighbor, your city, a bunch of complete strangers as much as it does to you. If you grow an apple tree, the apples aren't yours, they belong to everyone else equally. This characteristic leads to the failure of socialist economy after socialist economy, as hardworking people realize there is no benefit to working harder, since the results will be taken from them.

Yet now we have a large number of people who simply listen to the sweet rhetoric of "Everyone will get an equal share, no one will be left behind, etc.", without any consideration that they will be getting equal shares of less and less.

The idea that they can now legally get stuff for free that other people worked to produce, is becoming the dominant factor in more and more people's lives. It's a far cry from the American ideal that government's job is to protect your rights, including the right to keep what you own. One of the main jobs of a socialist-style government, is to take things from people who have more and give them to those who have less.

The educational system has utterly failed to point out the disasters that have befallen nearly every country that has tried to live this way. As a result, we find ourselves on the ever-steepening slope to yet more disaster... with the wreckage of societies that have tried it before, all around us.

The only remaining question is:

Is this really a failure as I describe here? Or is it exactly what the people behind this downhill trend, intended all along?

 

[initforme]

As long as capitalism is regulated then it is the greatest system. But I do believe wall street is filled with immorality and greed. I have educated my own kids to this fact. They know through my opinions that the system is rigged for the wealthy. This is an inarguable fact.

 

[bripat9643]

Indeed. Look at the chronic repetitions of "Soak the Rich", "Evil Wall Street", "dingbat dupes", and other ranting from various liberal fanatics.
Your diagnosis is on the mark.

It's "hater dupes." You wouldn't want to misquote the resident forum crackpot.

Quote:

That's COMMUNISM, brainwashed functional MORON. Socialism is simply fair capitalism with a good safety net, dingbat dupe.

Ah, he's trying a little variety in his insults.

Isn't it a riot that he thinks socialism is capitalism? And these turds claim we don't understand socialism.

 

[francoHFW]

Using magical incantations would suggest delusion.

True, which is why all Bernie and all his supporters are suffering from delusions.

Because some Internet tough guy who doesn't even understand what socialism means says so.

The only people who don't understand socialism are the people who support it.

Nope.

Yep. All you leftwing nutburgers prove it every time you post. Not only do you not understand socialism, you don't understand capitalism. You support socialism because you've been brainwashed and bamboozled. Capitalism is what made this country the greatest in the world. Socialism is the road to destruction.

Socialism is just fair capitalism. Communism in practice is totalitarian, and basically dead now.

 

[francoHFW]

Gorby destroyed the USSR. We're lucky that demented Raygun didn't bring back the hard liners with his grandstanding bluster.

Funny how Fannie/Freddies' share of the market went from 75% to 25% when Booooshie regulators/cronies allowed toxic assets to be rated A+, insured, and sold around the world, dunce.

Clinton appointees were running Fannie and Freddie at the time, dumbass.

Fannie and Freddie was not a problem. Until the Booshies got THERE. Can you read?

As I told you, when Fannie and Freddie went down two Clinton appointees were running them.

Private lenders/Boooshie pals took over the market (75%) in 2003. That's why F+F only got 25% of the bailout.

How Many Bad Loans Did Fannie and Freddie Originate? | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty

The fact that private-label MBS exploded in the bubble years isn't great evidence against the theory that F&F spurred/prolonged/exacerbated a bubble. And the more a person believes in the inherent bubbliness of the private sector the more they should worry about the risks of massive government programs to encourage long-term lending.
Before the financial crisis, I would have expected a chart like the one above (from Barry Ritholz) to have little impact on normal economists' views of Fannie and Freddie's role in the crisis. Expectations, liquidity provision, government backstops: All would be worthy topics of discussion, their side effects would be fretted over. Back then intangible features of the economy like promises and beliefs and animal spirits got quite a bit of play. I liked and still like that kind of economics.
Coda: As I note in the review, Zandi used similarly opaque language in a coauthored policy paper, "The Future of the Mortgage Finance System," with a chart entitled "% share of mortgage originations." So he wasn't just writing informally for a popular audience.
Here's how you do Zandi's kind of chart transparently:

This is from the Mortgage Bankers Association; it's about multifamily, but the point stands: Here you can tell that mortgages are originated for Fannie and Freddie, not by them. Its gets readers looking in the right direction: Somebody originated loans for F&F, so maybe you should wonder about that party's incentives. Maybe this is what Zandi meant, maybe not, hard to say.​

Just look at the blue (corrupt private lenders, pals of Boooshies) collapse in 2008, dupe.

 

[francoHFW]

Indeed. Look at the chronic repetitions of "Soak the Rich", "Evil Wall Street", "dingbat dupes", and other ranting from various liberal fanatics.
Your diagnosis is on the mark.

It's "hater dupes." You wouldn't want to misquote the resident forum crackpot.

Quote:

That's COMMUNISM, brainwashed functional MORON. Socialism is simply fair capitalism with a good safety net, dingbat dupe.

Any argument?

 

[francoHFW]

Looks like the usual liberal fanatics are diverting the thread as desperately as they can.

Back to the subject:
There is no better indication of the utter failure of the U.S. govt-sponsored educational system, than this: In a country that was founded on personal responsibility and charity, limited government, hard work and taking the consequences of your own success and failure, help from friends and family... a significant number of people are now voting for an admitted socialist (Bernie Sanders) and various other wannabees who won't admit they are socialists (Hillary, Bloomberg et. al.).

It's about as far from the American ideal as one can get. One of the foremost characteristics of socialism, is the destruction of private property rights. If you build a house, it doesn't belong to you. It belongs to your neighbor, your city, a bunch of complete strangers as much as it does to you. If you grow an apple tree, the apples aren't yours, they belong to everyone else equally. This characteristic leads to the failure of socialist economy after socialist economy, as hardworking people realize there is no benefit to working harder, since the results will be taken from them.

Yet now we have a large number of people who simply listen to the sweet rhetoric of "Everyone will get an equal share, no one will be left behind, etc.", without any consideration that they will be getting equal shares of less and less.

The idea that they can now legally get stuff for free that other people worked to produce, is becoming the dominant factor in more and more people's lives. It's a far cry from the American ideal that government's job is to protect your rights, including the right to keep what you own. One of the main jobs of a socialist-style government, is to take things from people who have more and give them to those who have less.

The educational system has utterly failed to point out the disasters that have befallen nearly every country that has tried to live this way. As a result, we find ourselves on the ever-steepening slope to yet more disaster... with the wreckage of societies that have tried it before, all around us.

The only remaining question is:

Is this really a failure as I describe here? Or is it exactly what the people behind this downhill trend, intended all along?

When your corrupt greedy idiot Pub heroes wreck the world economy, the victims need help, brainwashed functional moron. Not to mention wrecking our nonrich and the country for 30 years.

After 30 years of Voodoo: worst min. wage, work conditions, illegal work safeguards, vacations, work week, college costs, rich/poor gap, upward social mobility, % homeless and in prison EVAH, and in the modern world!! And you complain about the victims? Are you an idiot or an A-hole?

 

[ninja007]

True, which is why all Bernie and all his supporters are suffering from delusions.

Because some Internet tough guy who doesn't even understand what socialism means says so.

The only people who don't understand socialism are the people who support it.

Nope.

Yep. All you leftwing nutburgers prove it every time you post. Not only do you not understand socialism, you don't understand capitalism. You support socialism because you've been brainwashed and bamboozled. Capitalism is what made this country the greatest in the world. Socialism is the road to destruction.

Socialism is just fair capitalism. Communism in practice is totalitarian, and basically dead now.

how is socialism fair you fucking retard? How is it fair to give to the lazy from the people who make this economy run?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Socialism is just fair capitalism. Communism in practice is totalitarian, and basically dead now.

how is socialism fair you fucking retard? How is it fair to give to the lazy from the people who make this economy run?

Please don't feed the trolls.

 

[bripat9643]

As long as capitalism is regulated then it is the greatest system. But I do believe wall street is filled with immorality and greed. I have educated my own kids to this fact. They know through my opinions that the system is rigged for the wealthy. This is an inarguable fact.

Regulations are what makes capitalism suck. They insulate big corporations from competition from the little guy. The stifle new business formation and innovation.

You're right, the system is rigged for the wealthy, by the wealthy politicians that you put into office.

 

[bripat9643]

True, which is why all Bernie and all his supporters are suffering from delusions.

Because some Internet tough guy who doesn't even understand what socialism means says so.

The only people who don't understand socialism are the people who support it.

Nope.

Yep.

Nope.

Don't you know that editing what I posted to change my meaning is against the rules?

 

[bripat9643]

Clinton appointees were running Fannie and Freddie at the time, dumbass.

Fannie and Freddie was not a problem. Until the Booshies got THERE. Can you read?

As I told you, when Fannie and Freddie went down two Clinton appointees were running them.

Private lenders/Boooshie pals took over the market (75%) in 2003. That's why F+F only got 25% of the bailout.

How Many Bad Loans Did Fannie and Freddie Originate? | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty

The fact that private-label MBS exploded in the bubble years isn't great evidence against the theory that F&F spurred/prolonged/exacerbated a bubble. And the more a person believes in the inherent bubbliness of the private sector the more they should worry about the risks of massive government programs to encourage long-term lending.
Before the financial crisis, I would have expected a chart like the one above (from Barry Ritholz) to have little impact on normal economists' views of Fannie and Freddie's role in the crisis. Expectations, liquidity provision, government backstops: All would be worthy topics of discussion, their side effects would be fretted over. Back then intangible features of the economy like promises and beliefs and animal spirits got quite a bit of play. I liked and still like that kind of economics.
Coda: As I note in the review, Zandi used similarly opaque language in a coauthored policy paper, "The Future of the Mortgage Finance System," with a chart entitled "% share of mortgage originations." So he wasn't just writing informally for a popular audience.
Here's how you do Zandi's kind of chart transparently:

This is from the Mortgage Bankers Association; it's about multifamily, but the point stands: Here you can tell that mortgages are originated for Fannie and Freddie, not by them. Its gets readers looking in the right direction: Somebody originated loans for F&F, so maybe you should wonder about that party's incentives. Maybe this is what Zandi meant, maybe not, hard to say.​

Just look at the blue (corrupt private lenders, pals of Boooshies) collapse in 2008, dupe.

It's obvious you didn't understand the meaning of "Originations for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae."

 

[Little-Acorn]

An increasing proportion of the public has never been taught the results of socialist economies across the globe. This constitutes the greatest failure of our govt-sponsored "public education" system, in its history.

One of the foremost characteristics of socialism, is the destruction of private property rights. If you build a house, it doesn't belong to you. It belongs to your neighbor, your city, a bunch of complete strangers as much as it does to you. If you grow an apple tree, the apples aren't yours, they belong to everyone else equally. This characteristic leads to the failure of socialist economy after socialist economy, as hardworking people realize there is no benefit to working harder, since the results will be taken from them.

Yet now we have a large number of people who simply listen to the sweet rhetoric of "Everyone will get an equal share, no one will be left behind, etc.", without any consideration that they will be getting equal shares of less and less.

The idea that they can now legally get stuff for free that other people worked to produce, is becoming the dominant factor in more and more people's lives. It's a far cry from the American ideal that government's job is to protect your rights, including the right to keep what you own. One of the main jobs of a socialist-style government, is to take things from people who have more and give them to those who have less.

 

[regent]

If schools taught the various economic and political systems, can we imagine just the protests of good citizens, that schools were teaching communism and socialism. With schools dependent on public funding and public good will, most schools steer clear of any thing that suggests teaching of communism, socialism, or fascism. The end result is that many of us largely remain ignorant of these subjects. I took a college class on Marx at one time and the instructor suggested we cover our books that blared "MARX" on its cover, and we understood.
What is socialism?

 

[OldLady]

Socialists own public-ed. If you look at their curriculum they are heavily invested in self esteem, diversity, sense of community, etc. Lots of new age types slogans on the walls. The beauty is they charge a fucking fortune for it and are always pushing for more. Socialists laughing all the way to the bank.

There's nothing wrong with diversity and sense of community, is there? Not sure that's necessarily an underpinning of socialism, either.

 

[OldLady]

Ah, another "OMG, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT 'SOCIALISM' MEANS BUT IT SCARES ME!" thread.

It must be Tuesday.

The problem is YOU don't know what socialism means...neither do these ignorant millennials that think it's the answer to all their problems. Socialism has never worked....and never will.

Didn't you see SNL last week? Bernie (and Europe) are into DEMOCRATIC socialism, and the difference between that and socialism is YUGE!

 

[Arianrhod]

On this board, "socialism" has become a catchall for

 

[OldLady]

Ah, another "OMG, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT 'SOCIALISM' MEANS BUT IT SCARES ME!" thread.

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway. So I'll pretend that irrelevancies and exaggerations are significant, so I don't have to deal with the major issues instead.

It's not clear from your thread title which "gov't" you're objecting to. The state governments that set policies for their schools? One state in particular? Or did you intend to drill down to the 13,000+ school districts in the U.S. and show us which ones have offended you?

Surely you don't intend to drill down to an individual school or schools? If so, please list them and explain why.

Alternatively, you can explain why the word "socialism" - which you're objecting to on social media - gets you so upset.

Lots of mind reading there on your part, Slick. But you stumbled onto a big problem in public ed. They've created a cottage industry and have massive amounts of districts. Each district needs its' own infrastructure, administrators, bureaucracy, offices, etc. etc. Costing the tax payers a fortune. Half my property taxes goes to public-ed.

Ah, that's your problem? Taxes? Can't argue, they're big.

 

[OldLady]

What education failed to make most RWnuts not believe in evolution?

Most do. You don't live in reality.

Then why is it so many who don't end up on message boards?

Where else will they find someone to agree with them?

 

[OldLady]

An increasing proportion of the public has never been taught the results of socialist economies across the globe. This constitutes the greatest failure of our govt-sponsored "public education" system, in its history.

One of the foremost characteristics of socialism, is the destruction of private property rights. If you build a house, it doesn't belong to you. It belongs to your neighbor, your city, a bunch of complete strangers as much as it does to you. If you grow an apple tree, the apples aren't yours, they belong to everyone else equally. This characteristic leads to the failure of socialist economy after socialist economy, as hardworking people realize there is no benefit to working harder, since the results will be taken from them.

Yet now we have a large number of people who simply listen to the sweet rhetoric of "Everyone will get an equal share, no one will be left behind, etc.", without any consideration that they will be getting equal shares of less and less.

The idea that they can now legally get stuff for free that other people worked to produce, is becoming the dominant factor in more and more people's lives. It's a far cry from the American ideal that government's job is to protect your rights, including the right to keep what you own. One of the main jobs of a socialist-style government, is to take things from people who have more and give them to those who have less.

Are you SURE that's not communism you're thinking of?