A DaveInElma Thread...but much better than he can do it

[LeviF]

My only concern: do you think he knows what "normative sense" means?

Got me there.

 

Or, are we going to have to spend 3 pages on that?

That's what google is for.

 

Would you advocate closing down failing schools and integrating these children into successful mainly surburban schools?

We all love a good riot.

[BiggieScooby]

Got me there.

 

 

That's what google is for.

 

 

We all love a good riot.

I don't think that would happen, this solution works.

[OCinBuffalo]

Would you advocate closing down failing schools and integrating these children into successful mainly surburban schools?

hehe....I am the absolute worst person to ask about integration. A while back I was trolling some turd here, and I told a trumped up story, that also hooked Buftex btw.

 

Anyway, the truth is: I was integrated into an elementary school in Buffalo when I was 7. The story was that, since I was a "smart kid", my performance, and the girl they sent with me, would encourage the other kids to do better. It's like these idiots have never been to public school. WTF did they think putting 2 white kids in a class of 28 black kids was going to accomplish? Honestly? (edit: and, for Buftex, the truth is I beat up 2 kids with a chair, not the whole class and the teacher. But, the truth sounds less psychotic, and therefore isn't as useful a tool for trolling self-righteous liberals.)

 

So, speaking from personal experience: new schools suck in general, I went on to have 7, and even more if you know that the fix is in. It was impossible not to know what my "role" was in my school in Buffalo, and everybody else knew as well. The first day one kid asked me "so you gonna make me smarter, white boy?".

 

I fail to see how putting 2 black kids from the city into a class of 28 white kids would be any less unsettling for them. Little kids are a-holes as a rule. If we are going to do any social engineering, we better damn well have a better plan than what I and many others had to endure.

 

The only thing I retain from the trumped up story: at least Republicans don't expect 7 year olds to implement their policies for them.

 

Even given all of this, I would be willing to try anything that somebody can CLEARLY outline as a solution. Anything is better than doing what we are doing, spending what we are already spending, and expecting different results.

Edited December 14, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[BiggieScooby]

It is proven that you can bring kids up to a higher level if given a quality environment. I have seen it with my own eyes. The pie-zone system works, getting poor kids from the urban core mixed in with more affluent classmates. If they are put in this environment from age 5 on they will succeed as much as other kids do.

[OCinBuffalo]

It is proven that you can bring kids up to a higher level if given a quality environment. I have seen it with my own eyes. The pie-zone system works, getting poor kids from the urban core mixed in with more affluent classmates. If they are put in this environment from age 5 on they will succeed as much as other kids do.

 

It is also now correlated, at least, that leaving the poor kids in their own school, and focusing on changing the culture there, is the most effective way to produce results.

 

This is not about rich and poor. This is about ****ty culture vs. successful culture. This study is simply empirical evidence that confirms common sense.

[BiggieScooby]

It is also now correlated, at least, that leaving the poor kids in their own school, and focusing on changing the culture there, is the most effective way to produce results.

 

This is not about rich and poor. This is about ****ty culture vs. successful culture. This study is simply empirical evidence that confirms common sense.

Separate but equal doesn't work.

[OCinBuffalo]

Separate but equal doesn't work.

 

Neither does "it will work because it's my idea". Putting 2 white kids into class of 28 black ones...was somebody's "awesome" idea, wasn't it?

 

How about this: you allow each family to decide which school they want to attend. You give them a piece of paper that basically represents the state funding for that kid...we could call it...a voucher. You also allow competing schools to be formed in any district. You could call them...charter schools. I think you should look into taking these ideas to the politicians, as they might just work.

 

Rather than wasting resources shipping kids for hours, and taking away from homework time, you introduce competition. Nothing makes things better like competition.

Edited December 14, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[LeviF]

I don't think that would happen, this solution works.

Tell that to Southie and Roxbury.

 

OC is right. It's the culture. No matter what, if that kid is living next door to crackheads and hookers, busing him to a whiter elementary school isn't going to solve the problem. When kids learn a mentality at home, they bring that with them to school. The teachers can change that mentality. BUT busing only does it one or two at a time, so it's not effective on a large scale. However, getting a group of 25 or 30 kids to change the way they think IS effective. Then they go home, play with the other kids, talk to their families, and that mentality rubs off. Suddenly you have a good cycle getting started, instead of a bad cycle repeating itself with a couple of outliers here and there.

[3rdnlng]

Yeah, I didn't see your comment.

 

When I did, I had already written what I did, so I said F it and posted it anyway.

 

My only concern: do you think he knows what "normative sense" means? Or, are we going to have to spend 3 pages on that?

 

So I previously replied to you twice in this thread. My first post complimented you on your original post and my second post had a tad bit of sarcasm in it. You obviously didn't notice the sarcasm and replied with a rather lengthy post. Levi pointed out to you how you could have stated your opinion in a few words. He may or may not have been utilizing sarcasm. You then went and insulted me for no reason other than just being a dick. Did you ever think that you were sent to another school when you were seven because your suburban school administration already knew you were a dick, and wanted to see you get beat up by all the black kids in your new school?

[OCinBuffalo]

So I previously replied to you twice in this thread. My first post complimented you on your original post and my second post had a tad bit of sarcasm in it. You obviously didn't notice the sarcasm and replied with a rather lengthy post. Levi pointed out to you how you could have stated your opinion in a few words. He may or may not have been utilizing sarcasm. You then went and insulted me for no reason other than just being a dick. Did you ever think that you were sent to another school when you were seven because your suburban school administration already knew you were a dick, and wanted to see you get beat up by all the black kids in your new school?

 

First of all:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrP-dKOIQMM

 

 

Second:

 

I asked Levi and honest question: I have no idea if you know what Normative means, there overly sensitive boy. It wasn't directed at you personally. I have wasted pages of entire threads because I made the assumption that, for example, somebody would know the difference between structural and frictional unemployment, only to find out at the end that they have no idea. Hence, the "are we going to have to spend 3 pages on this" comment. Get it?

 

Third:

 

Don't be an idiot.

[GG]

What does Oprah have to do with any of this? How does she promote the culture? Last I checked her demographics are solidly middle aged women. She wouldn't have built her empire by focusing on urban black kids.

 

And I don't know where you got the idea that her fortune is disappearing. If anything, her last network deal has worked out very well. She's picked up a nice queue from The Donald - you no longer need to build anything yourself, just franchise out your name.

[OCinBuffalo]

What does Oprah have to do with any of this? How does she promote the culture? Last I checked her demographics are solidly middle aged women. She wouldn't have built her empire by focusing on urban black kids.

 

And I don't know where you got the idea that her fortune is disappearing. If anything, her last network deal has worked out very well. She's picked up a nice queue from The Donald - you no longer need to build anything yourself, just franchise out your name.

What is the difference between handing out college tuition, and handing out cash? What is the difference between inspiring others to improve themselves, and pandering to the basest emotions of dopey housewives?

 

Culture.

 

Hell Trump has a better shot at being remembered than Oprah does. Much depends on what he does when he's about to die.

 

Last I heard the network was failing miserably. Look I don't really pay attention to things like this, so if I am wrong, so be it. And, I wouldn't bet against Oprah staying down for very long...as there's always going back to getting ratings by making more people win the lottery.

[GG]

What is the difference between handing out college tuition, and handing out cash? What is the difference between inspiring others to improve themselves, and pandering to the basest emotions of dopey housewives?

 

Culture.

 

Hell Trump has a better shot at being remembered than Oprah does. Much depends on what he does when he's about to die.

 

Last I heard the network was failing miserably. Look I don't really pay attention to things like this, so if I am wrong, so be it. And, I wouldn't bet against Oprah staying down for very long...as there's always going back to getting ratings by making more people win the lottery.

 

So her giving away prizes on her show and money is responsible for the degeneration of the urban culture? Shouldn't you be blaming the first gamne show that ever aired on TV for that? Strike that, blame the first radio show. Or was it the Irish Sweepstakes?

 

You're stretching with Oprah.

 

If you want to find villains in the media side in perpetuating & glorifying the culture, look no further than the music industry.

[3rdnlng]

First of all:

 

youtube.com/watch?v=OrP-dKOIQMM

 

 

Second:

 

I asked Levi and honest question: I have no idea if you know what Normative means, there overly sensitive boy. It wasn't directed at you personally. I have wasted pages of entire threads because I made the assumption that, for example, somebody would know the difference between structural and frictional unemployment, only to find out at the end that they have no idea. Hence, the "are we going to have to spend 3 pages on this" comment. Get it?

 

Third:

 

Don't be an idiot.

 

I know. Lighten up. Philosophically I'm pretty much in line with you and Dave in Elma I was just busting you, the admitted troll, a little bit.

Edited December 14, 2011 by 3rdnlng

[OCinBuffalo]

So her giving away prizes on her show and money is responsible for the degeneration of the urban culture? Shouldn't you be blaming the first gamne show that ever aired on TV for that? Strike that, blame the first radio show. Or was it the Irish Sweepstakes?

 

You're stretching with Oprah.

 

If you want to find villains in the media side in perpetuating & glorifying the culture, look no further than the music industry.

We can find it everywhere, especially so-called "music".

 

As I said, that's pedestrian. No, what makes Oprah worse it that the "here's some free money for doing nothing but showing up at my show, when you should be at work" approach attempts to legitimize the culture. You cannot legitimize the current music industry's product.

 

The difference between a game show, and Oprah: generally you have to know something in order to get money from a game show. You don't have to know anything to get money from Oprah.

Edited December 14, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[GG]

We can find it everywhere, especially so-called "music".

 

As I said, that's pedestrian. No, what makes Oprah worse it that the "here's some free money for doing nothing but showing up at my show, when you should be at work" approach attempts to legitimize the culture. You cannot legitimize the current music industry's product.

 

The difference between a game show, and Oprah: generally you have to know something in order to get money from a game show. You don't have to know anything to get money from Oprah.

 

So, if I get this straight, a bunch of middle aged white women getting a free Pontiac on Oprah's show thanks to a GM marketing promotion is glorifying inner city black youth culture?

 

That's quite an assumption that Oprah's audience members don't work for a living. Is everyone who attends a talk show taping unemployed? Does that extend to everyone who goes to a movie, theater & concert? Or does the fact that once in a while Oprah will throw in a pblicity stunt to boost her ratings throw you off?

[Juror#8]

The title is just what popped into my head(and BOHICA stands for bend over here it comes again) and it's somewhat true, because this thread is about what is wrong with our schools, especially our urban ones. Well, what is wrong with our schools is what is wrong with our major cities as well. Basically, it's time to talk root cause = culture.

 

To wit: This article, read up.

 

It's interesting that they used the word "culture" in the study isn't it? I have been using the same characterization, and drawing the same, very important, distinctions whenever these issues arise, here and elsewhere.

 

Now for the "better than DaveInElma" part:

 

The culture of "inner city", "urban", whatever.... The culture largely sucks. You can, and must, separate race from culture, as anyone who has been in the military can attest. Few would argue against the effectiveness of the military's culture. Many can easily argue against the effectiveness of this supposed "urban" culture. Where the Army's culture is productive and therefore inherently not only self-sustaining, but also capable of exponential growth, the "urban" culture is the opposite, and must be fed by external sources(largely suburban teenagers and later, suburban liberal guilt), if it doesn't completely destroy itself first.

 

This "urban" culture is predicated on taking, rather than making, and you are lying to yourself if you think it is limited to non-whites(ahem, Jerry Springer). There are many different ways to contrast taking and making. Sure we can all talk about welfare, but that's pedestrian and lacks insight. Rather, consider the guy who calls people "marks" and looks to take things from them in the short term, rather than make long term friends and business relationships. In the long term, the first guy almost certainly fails, as there will always be a younger, smarter, quicker guy to take his place. However the latter choice creates security and structure, and is therefore the definition of wealth.

 

Wealth can be passed on and increased. Learning how to run a scam keeps you stuck where you are, eventually the scams you know own you, because they are the only things you know, and nobody cares. Look at even the most successful beneficiaries of this "urban" culture: all they have is money, not wealth. As the PPP Financial Sector Jedi Council will tell you, there is a huge difference, and that money will probably be blown in less then 2 generations. Some of these beneficiaries have even admitted it = Chris Rock: "Bill Gates would jump out of building if he woke up and found out he only had Oprah's money". The cracks are there and easily visible: Oprah herself is well on her way to blowing her money this generation. Her entire ethos lacks dignity and inherent value, is predicated on pandering to the basest of emotions, and therefore it is doomed.

 

As simple as I can make it: Carnegie vs. Oprah. Both amassed great fortunes. One can never be forgotten. The other already has been. The difference is culture.

 

The simple fact is that there is absolutely 0 reasons why this "urban" culture should be accepted or even tolerated by anyone. Neither should any of the behavior that has been derived from it. It is of absolutely no use to anyone. It holds no great answers, poses no great questions. There is nothing to be learned from it. Contrast this with, for example, Middle Age Italian culture, which was also completely immoral and self-aggrandizing. At least there were many useful contributions to humanity, and we are still learning from it, which is why it isn't dead. In contrast, we have seen 100s of less useful major cultures pass from this world without a second thought. This one is completely useless. Why then, are any of you so scared to destroy it?

 

Afraid to be called a racist? Bull. Again, think about the Army, and the fabled "disproportionate number of black people in it", but then think about how many hicks from the sticks are in it as well, and then think about how successful it is. Then conclude, properly, that race is not behavior, and therefore, it is just as racist to accept this crappy culture as though it is inherent to a race, as it is not to on those terms. Either way, you are setting sub-standard behavioral expectations on a whole bunch of people you don't know.

 

This culture has no place, anyplace, least of all in our schools. It's high time that an academic produced something useful(which is why we pay them). Now it's for the politicians to apply it(which is why we pay them).

 

1. Tried to resist responding but couldn't. Your name as the thread author, coupled with the topic of "urban culture," was too attractive to maintain distance.

 

2. I could deconstruct this argument in a few different ways but then I'll get excoriated for being "too serious" and a party crasher so I'll refrain and just play along.

 

3. I have to add a substantive component to this enumeration so I will say that one of the few ways that I've found to improve the culture (with respect to schools in primarily urban districts) and, by extension, the performance, is a managed form of affirmative action to address an extant economic disparity.

 

3a. Thesis developed further here: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/139324-affirmative-action/

 

4. Also, at least in DC, there is the issue of folks benefitting from the affluent DC job economy, but spending that money in the surburban MD and VA communities. DC transients have made Montgomery, Howard, Fairfax and Loudon counties 4 of the wealthiest counties in the nation perennially.

 

4a. Not much attention is devoted to how the lack of tax revenue affects DC public schools and public programs. Generally there is a functional relationship between income and tax revenue. This is not the case when folks commute to huge cities for work, and leave to another state to do everything else. Places like DC, NYC (with people coming out of NJ, CT); Atlanta, etc. are running into the same problem. It only disadvantages lower income families because education is one of the first budget casualties.

 

5. "Urban culture" is actually really great. I'm a city guy. We lived in West Baltimore growing up, moved to SE DC, and ended up in PG County right on the DC line before I left for college. Don't know where you grew up and I won't make any assumptions. There is a lot to like about the inner city and inner city folks. A lot of good comes out of those communities as well. I can elaborate if you care to know.

 

The most intelligent person that I've ever met aspired to be a rapper all throughout middle and high school. He was a product of DC schools. He walked around with a hoody and headphones singing Wu Tang songs all throughout high school. He was expelled from school and not allowed to attend prom because of a "bum rush" group fight in the cafeteria in 11th grade. He went on to school, received his PHd and was teaching holomorphic functions and differentiation formulas at Cornell before getting a job with the government (keeping the country safe - when you're as intelligent as he is, I guess you don't run into clearance issues). In his current line of work, they only want the best and the brightest. Not what you may have expected 20 years ago from the young man from the ghetto of Anacostia.

 

I'm kind using "inner city" and "urban culture" synonymously. Not sure if you are as well or if you have some other point of reference. Since you didn't specify, I'll assume that by "urban culture" you mean the mentalities, groups, dispositions, aesthetic, paradigms, inclinations, associations, concerns, experiences, behaviors, and cultivations extant amongst inner city residents.

 

6. In brevity, my initial reaction to your post could be described thusly:

 

 

7. I want to conclude by saying again that there is a lot to like about urban culture. I think that you short-cutted and discounted some aesthetic, subjective and abstract qualities in your post.

Edited December 14, 2011 by Juror#8

[OCinBuffalo]

So, if I get this straight, a bunch of middle aged white women getting a free Pontiac on Oprah's show thanks to a GM marketing promotion is glorifying inner city black youth culture?

 

That's quite an assumption that Oprah's audience members don't work for a living. Is everyone who attends a talk show taping unemployed? Does that extend to everyone who goes to a movie, theater & concert? Or does the fact that once in a while Oprah will throw in a pblicity stunt to boost her ratings throw you off?

 

Still waiting for you to respond to the game show thing. Hey, you drew the comparison, now you have to deal with it.

 

Again, I never said "black culture". In fact, I specifically said "you are lying to yourself if you think it is limited to non-whites(ahem, Jerry Springer)."

The youth are not to blame for the culture....they can't control the behavior of the adults around them.

[OCinBuffalo]

1. Tried to resist responding but couldn't. Your name as the thread author, coupled with the topic of "urban culture," was too attractive to maintain distance.

 

2. I could deconstruct this argument in a few different ways but then I'll get excoriated for being "too serious" and a party crasher so I'll refrain and just play along.

 

3. I have to add a substantive component to this enumeration so I will say that one of the few ways that I've found to improve the culture (with respect to schools in primarily urban districts) and, by extension, the performance, is a managed form of affirmative action to address an extant economic disparity.

 

3a. Thesis developed further here: http://forums.twobil...rmative-action/

 

4. Also, at least in DC, there is the issue of folks benefitting from the affluent DC job economy, but spending that money in the surburban MD and VA communities. DC transients have made Montgomery, Howard, Fairfax and Loudon counties 4 of the wealthiest counties in the nation perennially.

 

4a. Not much attention is devoted to how the lack of tax revenue affects DC public schools and public programs. Generally there is a functional relationship between income and tax revenue. This is not the case when folks commute to huge cities for work, and leave to another state to do everything else. Places like DC, NYC (with people coming out of NJ, CT); Atlanta, etc. are running into the same problem. It only disadvantages lower income families because education is one of the first budget casualties.

 

5. Urban culture is actually really great. I'm a city guy. We lived in West Baltimore growing up, moved to SE DC, and ended up in PG County right on the DC line before I left for college. Don't know where you grew up and I won't make any assumptions. There is a lot to like about the inner city and inner city folks. A lot of good comes out of those communities as well.

 

The most intelligent person that I've ever met aspired to be a rapper all throughout middle and high school. He was a product of DC schools. He walked around with a hoody and headphones singing Wu Tang songs all throughout high school. He was expelled from school and not allowed to attend prom because of a "bum rush" group fight in the cafeteria in 11th grade. He went on to school, received his PHd and was teaching holomorphic functions and differentiation formulas at Cornell before getting a job with the government (keeping the country safe - when you're as intelligent as he is, I guess you don't run into clearance issues). In his current line of work, they only want the best and the brightest. Not what you may have expected 20 years ago from the young man from the ghetto of Anacostia.

 

6. In brevity, my initial reaction to your post could be described thusly:

 

youtube.com/watch?v=PuZ1nvagxT8

 

7. I want to conclude by saying again that there is a lot to like about urban culture. I think that you short-cutted and discounted some aesthetic, subjective and abstract qualities in your post.

I have lived in cities my entire life. Big ones. I sold my car in 2005 and I doubt I will ever buy another. If I need one, I rent it.

 

We can all provide anecdotal evidence of the random dude from the block that made good. How does that explain or refute the national urban teen pregnancy #s?

 

Again, there's very little to learn from a guy who's song refrain is "slap my B word up". Yeah, how much time should we spend on interpreting what the "artist" was trying to express? Where is the value in that? 300 years from now, is a music appreciation teacher going to be challenging her students to provide what "slap my B word up" means to them? This culture has no value. None at all. (Edit: well put it this way, it had a lot of value, when I was in 9th grade...dancing around like an idiot. It was fun. Rob Base was great then, but I was also playing Copland then too. I still play Copland now.)

 

DC pols need to stop pretending that refusing to confront this terrible culture makes them "compassionate" or "understanding" or "tolerant". It simply makes you a sucker. These city people are scamming you, and you are letting them, so that you can say you have street cred/you aren't the tight ass guy who can't dance? Dude, as a person who actually does have street cred, I know a scam when I see one.

 

The writing is on the wall: the macroeconomic "more funding"/"less funding" approach to education has failed. Smart politicians, and their aides, can benefit from a study like this. Dumb ones will not recognize the opportunity and be hurt by it.

Edited December 14, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[GG]

Still waiting for you to respond to the game show thing. Hey, you drew the comparison, now you have to deal with it.

 

Again, I never said "black culture". In fact, I specifically said "you are lying to yourself if you think it is limited to non-whites(ahem, Jerry Springer)."

The youth are not to blame for the culture....they can't control the behavior of the adults around them.

 

Easy, game shows are only about ratings. You may think that they are about test of knowledge or skill, but many are not. Just look at the history of game shows, they are more about the entertainment than a test of skill. Tell me do you need a lot of skill to tell Monty what's behind door #2, or telling Chuck Woolery where was the weirdest place you had sex?

 

Oprah giving out prizes to the audience is no different that the nobleman throwing out coins to the peasants for centuries. It's ablip on the radar of the nihilistic culture you decstibe. And Oprah's act is more of a descendant of Donahue than a peer of Springer.