Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (133333)	2/22/2001 9:47:25 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570418

Scumbria. Maybe teachers should get paid more (although in some areas they get pretty decent pay esp. if you count the fact that they get summers off), but that isn't really directly relevant to your original post or my reply. You seem to like changing the subject a lot. You bashed Bush for not increasing education spending enough. I pointed out that his budget increases federal education spending 11.5% (using date from your own link), and that education is mostly a state and local responsibility. Then you reply that teachers don't get paid enough. Do you have this much trouble sticking to the subject in other areas of your life away from SI? Tim

To: Scumbria who wrote (133333)	2/22/2001 10:40:59 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570418

Scumbria Re..Society gets what it pays for, and our schools suck in this country. In Japan, teaching is considered one of the highest professions. In the US, we treat teachers as babysitters.<<<<< I think we need to consider that many professions in this country are dissed. The teachers are far better off than the farmers, and I would consider food more important than education as I consider starvation a higher priority; a higher priority than even gas. The teachers in our area are well pd; not by lawyer standards, but compared to the rest of us who have to pay their wages out of our pockets. Secondly, I don't think the quality of our teachers is the problem. It is the attitude of the students; primarily why so many seem so disinterested in high school. Instead of blaming the teachers for not teaching, we should be asking why our children don't care if they learn. Blaming the teachers I feel is just an excuse, and throwing more money at schools won't help. We as parents should be looking into the mirror and wondering if we aren't the problem.

To: Scumbria who wrote (133333)	2/22/2001 11:19:32 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570418

Scumbria Re..In the US, we treat teachers as babysitters.<< Sumbria, I am sorry in that in the last post I probably have misinterpreted this statement. I put it in the context that we pay our teachers like we do our baby sitters. Upon further consideration, you could very well have hit the nail on the head, in that we treat our schools as baby sitters, rather than institutions of learning. We send problem kids there to get them off the streets,bus kids all around town to equalize spending on schools when we could just send the money, send handicap children there so they can feel normal, rather than sending them to special schools better equiped to deal with the handicaps. Before I get a bunch of hate mail, let me explain that sometimes the handicap's wish, to be treated as normal, isn't the best for either the handicapped or the rest of the students. If the handicapped can't keep up, instead of slowing down every one else, the handicapped should be in a special class which treats his needs. We need to eliminate all of the reasons our kids don't want to go to school; and I am not talking about homework. Properly motivated, the kids should welcome going to class, doing homework, and learning. And if our own children don't have the motivation, we need to quit blaming the teachers and talk to our children ourselves, and find out why.

To: Scumbria who wrote (133333)	2/22/2001 1:48:37 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570418

"Society gets what it pays for, and our schools suck in this country." My impression after 10 years of experience is that the US society follows some (unwritten?) doctrine. For a society to be stable, it needs a whole spectrum of people - dish cleaners, car mechanics, waiters, clerks, windows programmers, insurance agents, chain sellers of lose-weight product, soldiers, taxi drivers, brokers, computer assemblers, lawyers. Many, many of them. In contrast, the society needs only relatively few leading professors, researchers, microprocessor architects, etc. By sustaining the low level of public education, the U.S. society provides a steady supply for ordinary professions, with relatively low expectations for the quality of life. Most people are happy, the society is stable.

To: Scumbria who wrote (133333)	2/22/2001 1:59:33 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570418

RE:"Society gets what it pays for, and our schools suck in this country." Not necessarily. Throwing more money at education will only help is spent properly. RE:" In Japan, teaching is considered one of the highest professions. In the US, we treat teachers as babysitters" Several problems you don't address with your maniacal statement. 1. Teachers work 10 months a year. Naturally their pay seems less. 2. Way too much money is wasted on building and supporting ivory towers full of school administrators. Along with high pay and pensions. They should be in the classrooms as teachers or helping the teachers or be eliminated. 3. New schools should be built to a standard architecture. Savings would be enormous. Jim