The most serious failing of our K-12 system is rarely addressed because it would cost money to fix it and we can’t have that, can we? It’s that we still break for a three-month summer recess. That made sense for me as a farm boy in the ’50s, and I probably learned more on the back of a tractor than you city kids did watching Captain Kangaroo. But we aren’t a rural society any more — and a nine-month school year doesn’t even adequately cover the baby-sitting role of schools. That’s critical because it’s not the ’50s anymore and single-parent and/or two wage-earner families are now the norm. We can’t go on with the nine-month school year. It’s time to go to 11 months. Yes, that means paying teachers more and also finding another way to handle their continuing education, since summer school won’t be so easy for them. But as long as we cling to a 19-th century school year model, we will fail to properly educate kids for the 21st century.
Happy Birthday, Steve! I hope you special day has been as pleasant and interesting as you are! Best wishes for a successful year to come!
… plan now to attend your neighborhood caucus in 2012. For more see http://www.COCaucus.org
Click here to buy my e-book A Conspiracy of Wizards for just $2.99!!!
This thread had begun as the reposting of a discussion with a conservative friend of mine on Facebook, whose willingness to engage in such civil discourse I respect and admire. She hadn’t intended to publish her thoughts in a forum such as this, however, and asked me to take her posts down. So, instead, I am converting this thread into an invitation to all: Let’s lay out the two (or more) sides of this debate, work together at discovering what underlying values we agree on, and what precise details are contested, and then examine that contested range of beliefs, values, and conclusions with a willingness to produce something together that is superior to what either side is capable of producing alone.
I will posit this for starters: We all value individual liberty. We all value striving to ensure that any member of our society who embraces personal responsibility, and makes an effort to succeed, benefits from that effort to the degree warranted by the combination of their effort and their ability. We all value, I presume, ensuring that we have the most robust, sustainable, and fair political economic system possible, producing adequate wealth, doing so in a sustainable way, and ensuring that anyone who works hard prospers by doing so.
Unless I’m mistaken, it would seem that the ends are not really in contention, but rather the means (though we often confuse the two). What does it take to achieve these goals? It should not be so difficult for us to use all of the empirical and theoretical tools at our disposal to address that question together, and narrow the range of disagreement to that which is legitimately disputable.
Following, in the comments, is my part in the exchange with my conservative Facebook friend. The questions we must confront, with this as a starting point are: Where is the common ground? What are the things upon which we can compromise without surrendering our deepest beliefs and values? What is the range and detail of consensus that we can arrive at, working together? How do we get past this deadlock of incompatable world views? And what elements of each really are the most functional, really do best serve the public interest?
Having lost my conservative counterpart in this debate, I need some new takers! Who can represent the position of less government in general, less federal government in particular, and more reliance on voluntary contributions to public welfare? (I sent Jon Caldara of The Independence Institute a message inviting him, or a proxy, to participate).
Please join in.
Click here to buy my e-book A Conspiracy of Wizards for just $2.99!!!
Thiings have gotten crazy busy over the last coule of weeks, but I look forward to joining your conversations here.
SirRobin
I am so looking forward to this open and honest blog group. Everyone sees the same thing differently and it helps to look at the points of view perceived by a diverse group such as this. We may not be able to solve the problems we confront. But we may be able to help one another look at something from many angles, thereby getting more tools for dealing with issues.
For me, some of the topics that get me going are: bigotry and intolerance; public safety without trying to “idiot proof the world;” people who have kids and don’t know how, or take the time to teach them right from wrong; women’s rights; animal cruelty; the way technology seems to have eliminated people’s ability to think for themselves and problem solve without a computer (kinda like biting the hand that feeds the blog, huh?); gratuitous violence portrayed on both the big & small screens as well as computer games; and so very many more! I really am not a hot head. I just play one in real life! LOL!
From time to time, and daily if the site becomes robust enough, I will post a quote or a thought, and leave it to participants to discuss either it, or whatever they choose.
Today’s quote comes from John Maynard Keynes:
Men will do the rational thing, but only after exploring all other alternatives.
Leaving aside the sexism of the phrasing, what I love about this quote is the subtle combination of cynicism and idealism. We do “the rational thing” in the aggregate and in the long run (idealism), but not individually and in the short run (cynicism). My suggestion for a topic of conversation is this: What have we accomplished that is rational, and what are we doing that isn’t? Try to find the long-term trends that we should honor and reinforce, and the short-term tendencies that we should be aware of.
