I think we need a government-to-government recognition and ranking system. Meaning the least authoritarian societies should have more of an open admission policy. Their students should be freer to attend our universities under grad and post-grad.
If the other government is authoritarian nada, nothing from us. The risk-takers stay home and save innocent weaker people in their own country. Overturn your dictator. Build your own economy.
We have it de facto right now that passports for the first world get you just about anywhere but lesser passports get you next to nowhere. The difference would be working better with countries that are fully very good republics to allow people into the US to work in much greater numbers.
This was done in the 1950s under the guise of white Europeans got in. That pretext must not be used. Instead, rank the governments.
The reason is there are indoctrinations that I do not want to do business with. I do not think any of us do. I do not want people here from dictatorships supporting Sharia law. I do not want people here from China because we wonât educate our own. I do not want people here from Central America because they wonât stand up to their problems at home.
We want better republics everywhere no brain drain from authoritarian regimes.
What matters, critically and first, is taking care to educate, socialize, and usefully integrate into society the poorest, lowest IQ, and most vulnerable.
NO! Not paradoxically. Obviously with the least understanding of economics and sociology. Never mind that it such a policy follows obviously and immediately from the founding canons of every significant sacred tradition I know of, and of the simplest level common level of morality.
Ours is a time of blindingly cripplingly wealth, greed, power, and immorality.
Throwing more money at a flawed system does not change the results, unless you change the flawed system.
I have often theorized that if poverty is the problem, and it certainly doesnât help, then removing the child from poverty and those raised in poverty is the only likely answer to break the pattern. This of course would trigger justifiable cries of parental interference, (which it absolutely is,) and rather sounds like a distopian elitism novel, and could never be the solution. Kids are of course greatly influenced by their parents, and if a parent has no regard for education or discipline, then no matter how much money you throw at the situation will fix it. I would further say this is not only a poverty issue, but a lack of parental involvement issue, AS WELL AS a flawed education system that bores the capable, caters to the average, and ignores those in need. This of course also allows kids with involved parents to be less than stellar in school.
IMO itâs a motivational issue at heart. Eldest could be a B student by just sitting in class. He once told us that of course he could do better, but why bother? No matter how much we tried to light a fire under him, we could not find the right motivation for him. It was only in his Sophomore year of high school that we found the right trigger, when we took him to visit colleges and he found his dream school. Fearing he had already blown his chances to get in, he buckled down and had straight Aâs from there on.
Our education system is so busy cramming testable facts and figures down our kidsâ throats, ignoring thought process and fostering imagination. They donât know how to dream. This is the case in even the best of public schools, and many private.
Letâs stop boring our kids into a comatose state.
There is such a bias against anything other than college track here in the US, whereas in France, kids who have tested out of the college track are steered towards other options, like vocational schools where they can learn a well paying trade. Though I have no data to reference, it seems as though public vocational schools in the US are an afterthought.
This is important in several ways. It gives the students motivation to apply themselves and it weeds out those that canât or wonât apply themselves, eliminating distractions of bad behavior and narrowing the scope of the level of teaching that needs to be applied to a group.
When I was a kid in school, we were more separated by achievement. While there are still advanced tracks in most schools in some subjects, there has been an active movement to generalize classes in a valid attempt not to cause those in the lower levels to be labeled as less smart. Itâs all part of âa trophy for all participantsâ approach, that has the negative side effect of also eliminating motivation to excel, without likely doing much to protect the lower level students sense of self.
Countries in the EU also put quotas on how many professionals can be in the marketplace. This means you can graduate with an accounting degree in Ireland and the testing to be a CPA can stop you not based on the grade but the number allowed into the profession.
You can blossom later in life and not be funded to go to college.
All valid points - but the major counter to that is that itâs doing this âweedingâ when kids are 13 or 14 years old. While there are some arguments in favor of that, itâs a little crazy to set up a system where oneâs prospects in life are determined primarily by how one does in a series of academic exercises when youâre 13 years old. Especially since weâve established a lot of âpaper ceilingsâ that limit economic advancement for those who donât get college credentials. Itâs hard enough for kids when weâre doing the âweedingâ based on high school performance - doing it based on middle school performance has its own downsides.
At least here in Michigan, many high schools have dropped all shop classes, so kids donât get a chance to tinker with wood, or metal, or cars, to see if they like it. Some schools donât even offer driverâs ed anymore. Itâs all about passing the âno child left behindâ tests. Everything else has been defunded.
Sure, which is why I like the French system where one can get back in to the tax paid system by paying for private school, which is frankly super cheap or at least it was when I was there, until you requalify for your preferred track. There was a 22 year old who had screwed up as a kid and was back in my private high school to get his baccalaureate, which would then entitle him to a chance at free college. He admitted to me that he had screwed up as a kid and wanted back in to the option of higher learning, and with it higher paying jobs.
IIRC, there was more than one triggering moment, not just middle school. No system will be perfect, but what we have with disruption and one size learning for all is clearly set for failure. Why deter those who will and can, for the sake of those who wonât or canât? And is it even kind to keep a kid who wonât be able to handle the college track out of opportunities better suited for them? Particularly given those opportunities are not necessarily low paid. I once managed a quality control lab where the technicians that worked for me were paid more than I. Just had an electrician do some work on the house. He was cheap at $90/hour, time and materials. Nephew does HVAC and is paid very well. As I said, we have a bias for college education that is not necessarily merited.
And about the blessed budget. Kicking a troubled kid out means the taxpayers are on the hook to educate them privatelyâŚat least that was the case in PA. Thus the disrupters learned the had basically free rein.
The disrupters were put in âspecial classâ. I never watched âWelcome Back Kotterâ, but wasnât that about a teacher in âspecial classâ? In âGreatest American Heroâ, the main character was also a teacher in âspecial classâ.
Of course, if a kid plays football, he can do anything, without being expelled. In Detroit, a kid that played football for Cass Tech High School, picked one of the school security people up and body slammed him to the floor. As soon as the kid was out of juvy for that assault, he beat up his girlfriend in the school. As he went to the clink on the second assault charge, all the local Detroit media was concerned about was whether the two assault convictions would impact his college football career. If I ran a college, I wouldnât want that thug on campus.
Unfortunately IQ is a bell shape curve. There are as many people with lower & rock bottom IQ as there are those with superior & top 1% IQ folks.
Our economy has off shore most formerly well paid wrench turning jobs to low labor cost countries.
So what to do with these folks that have cast adrift? I would think more education for those with low intellectual horsepower is unlikely to be successful.
AS the US way of war is much more technical these folks arenât wanted by the military unless we want to form a few divisions of cannon fodder.
I suppose they could work at Bezoâs warehouses for 3 years until they are injured.
Are lower IQ folks deserving of UBI? Or does our nation tell them âTS, its your problem.â
Tell them to wait for their payment from their political leader (like THAT will ever happen. LOL). Meanwhile, they are on their own. They own their choice(s).
In many cases it was not their choice(s) but the business executives off shoring decisions were encouraged by NAFTA & low foreign labor costs & US tax law that excuses taxation upon foreign produced profits as long as those profits are brought within the USA though that tax treatment has been modified a few years ago.
And they had limited employment choices as their intellect was limited also even though from one side they criticized for not pursuing further education even though they have limited financial resources & intellect to benefit from any such educational. And from the other they side they criticized for not pulling themselves by their bootstraps at minimum wage jobs that have little or no benefits.
10-15% of the population [50 million people] has an IQ of 83 or lower. In a technological complex society these folks have no place as they cannot be elevated to fit in such a society.
What is a nationâs responsibility towards that 10%?