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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: haqihana who wrote (8771)	5/22/2006 1:18:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Tim, Hard currency has always been considered to be precious metals, or in some cases gems. Not always, not even close. Hard currency is a relative thing. In countries without stable currency hard currency means things like the dollar, yen, euro, etc. A reasonably stable currency, that might shift in value but is unlikely to undergo a catastrophic collapse. Yes, the teaching situation is bad now, and with the kinds of people that decide to be teachers, and the constant adverse doings of the NEA, are going to make it worse. Kids are getting passed up a grade just because they are a nuisance and they want to be rid of them. Many cases of tampering with the SATs have been found and documented. How can that get better, or even hold it's ground? If the tampering with the SATs, and the adverse doings of the NEA, and social promotion and such have been going on for awhile, their current existence doesn't mean things are getting worse. None of them are new. Social promotion may indeed be on a slow decline, or at least I see no evidence that it is getting worse. If you look back decades ago and see that these things didn't happen or didn't happen as much, and that they do happen a lot now, you might take that as evidence that things are getting worse but really it is only evidence that things have gotten worse. If things have gotten worse very recently than it isn't unreasonable to assume that things might be getting worse at the moment, but changes since 1960 or 1970 or even 1980 or 90 are not very recent changes. None of which amounts to an argument that things are getting worse at the moment, I'm just pointing out I haven't seen information or relevant argument that supports the contention that things are worse now than they where a year ago, or that they will be worse in a year or 5 than they are now.