Bernie Sanders next president of USA

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[spanky4ever]

@iNcog

notification

USA has destabilized the middle east - thus the refugee crises.How about Afghanistan, Irak and Libya. This is what coursing the refugee crises

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[spanky4ever]

@iNcog

notification

: about my last post - I want to add Syria too. Not directly, but indirectly. ISIS and Al-quaida and the other terror groups has come to be because of USA politics in the middle east. The Mujaheddin was a small insignificant group before USA armed them to kick out Russia from Afghanistan. This was the beginning of Taliban - witch we all know how turned out. Isis has also been armed by USA in the Libya war. It was after Gadaffi had been overturned, and the rebels in Syria was armed to their teeth with USA weapons, that we saw the rice of ISIS - (if I dont remember this wrong - dont think I am though).

https://youtu.be/oMjXbuj7BPI
https://youtu.be/o6kdi1UXxhY
https://youtu.be/EEiTkaqb53c

If you are interested in this topic, there are a lot of info available.

But this is another debate, completely - so I wont address it more in this thread. Feel free to make a thread of your own about this issue, and I will surely come and debate it with you

[Papist]

Bernie is a nice guy with some good ideas but his campaign strategy is "I will give you the world", and it's pissing me off. Let me go through one more time:

1. THE POTUS CANNOT RAISE TAXES

2. THE POTUS CANNOT IMPLEMENT HEALTHCARE REFORM UNILATERALLY

3. THE POTUS CANNOT CHANGE GOV'T FUNDING

Bernie is either lying or deluding himself when he says he will do these things. Instead of alienating a good chunk of the American populace, who do not approve of these policies, take small steps.

[evilcheadar]

I honestly feel deflated now that Sanders is all but mathematically eliminated from the race. Whether you agree with his policies or not I think it's hard not to respect a man who has been the very definition of a politician, a public servant, his whole life. Arrested fighting for minority rights in the 60s, he has since continued a life dedicated to the furtherment of those who most need it. A fighter for universal healthcare and environmentally friendly policies, and a prominent figure against the war in Iraq and government surveillance. He ran a campaign funded by the people, for the people, refusing money from super PACs in a political environment which makes it almost impossible to compete without it. He's been on the same side of the issues throughout his career and is, as far I am concerned, the most outstanding character in the presidential race. Darn shame.

I have concluded people are anything but reasonable and sensible. Consider yourself blessed with a rare gift if you supported sanders.

A rare gift of delusion.

[PoniPoika]

Ok @noissance

notification

: if more want to go to collage - the grades to admit will be higher. Then the "best" students will get to attend collage - not the most wealthy - like in a marked? no problem then

Again, the problem is not people going to college, its people dropping out of college who realize that it's not for them. I am in favor of an articulated/recognized vocational program in high school (AKA Skills-Based Learning). High school needs to be improved first before college, as i pointed out getting great grades is easy in high school. The reason is the lowering of standards (particularly in language and math), to accommodate those who don't even want to go to high school. Thanks to no child left behind, absence from school is a truancy offense that can land on your record.

I disagree with much of what you're saying in terms of how the US education system should be restructured (which it should of course). But even if we accept your premise, none of that is a case against free tuition, since that in itself does not mean more people enter higher education (that depends largely on the amount of places available - as seen in states like Finland), meaning that free tuition does not on its own devalue higher education. At its most fundamental level, free tuition would simply move the criterion for entering higher education away from pre-existing wealth towards more of a meritocracy (based on results at a secondary level). It is hard to argue that this would not be positive, though it comes at the expense of increased state investment in education. The question then is whether the trade-off is worth it; experiences in places like Finland (free tuition), the Netherlands (cheap tuition), Sweden and Scotland (mostly free tuition) would suggest that it is. It's important to remember that the US does not exist in a vacuum, and the policies suggested by Sanders have all been implemented elsewhere, with varying structures and levels of success.

Of course, US higher education would also have to be reformed structurally, since the state would be unlikely to be able to simply take on the fees paid by students at the moment (which are just astronomical in international context).

On a side note, your critique of secondary education in the US is unclear - are you arguing that the grading is inaccurate in providing a pseudo-ranking of the academic capabilities of individual students, or just that reaching high grades is not particularly difficult? In the latter case, there is no huge issue in itself - particularly as relates to free education - since the relevant factor is how students compare to their peers, not whatever arbitrary benchmarks are seen as 'good' results.

[spanky4ever]

Only half of USA ppl has had the chance to have their say about Sanders vs Clinton. If you dont count the superdelegates- Clinton is leasing with 300 delegates. Sanders is not out yet, though I will agree that it will be hard. The superdelegates usually vote with the candidate that gets more elected delegates. In Obama vs Clinton, they sided with Obama when he got most elected delegates.

[momuuu]

His critique on secondary education might be that everybody is basically thrown in together. In the Netherlands we differentiate students based on their level. There are like 6 levels of high schools with an entitely differeny curriculum tailored towards the level of students. At the lower levels people are educated in a more practical sense with the goal to get a simple degree (no bachelor or anything), at the medium level people are educated to usually get a basic bachelor and at the highest level students are educated to go to a university and get a masters degree.

I found that even at the age of eleven, before this differentiation really happened, that some students in my class were really slowing me down, so I cant imagine how America does it with no differentiation or hardly any in secondary education.

[briowl]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJj2kSbwpqE[/video]

[PoniPoika]

His critique on secondary education might be that everybody is basically thrown in together. In the Netherlands we differentiate students based on their level. There are like 6 levels of high schools with an entitely differeny curriculum tailored towards the level of students. At the lower levels people are educated in a more practical sense with the goal to get a simple degree (no bachelor or anything), at the medium level people are educated to usually get a basic bachelor and at the highest level students are educated to go to a university and get a masters degree.

I found that even at the age of eleven, before this differentiation really happened, that some students in my class were really slowing me down, so I cant imagine how America does it with no differentiation or hardly any in secondary education.

That is a reasonable argument, though I would point out that most comparative research favours keeping students in the same classes at primary level, regardless of ability. With secondary education, I would argue that an approach based on 'levels' is flawed; rather, you want to distinguish students by approach (with the most common division being between vocational and academic education)

[momuuu]

His critique on secondary education might be that everybody is basically thrown in together. In the Netherlands we differentiate students based on their level. There are like 6 levels of high schools with an entitely differeny curriculum tailored towards the level of students. At the lower levels people are educated in a more practical sense with the goal to get a simple degree (no bachelor or anything), at the medium level people are educated to usually get a basic bachelor and at the highest level students are educated to go to a university and get a masters degree.

I found that even at the age of eleven, before this differentiation really happened, that some students in my class were really slowing me down, so I cant imagine how America does it with no differentiation or hardly any in secondary education.

That is a reasonable argument, though I would point out that most comparative research favours keeping students in the same classes at primary level, regardless of ability. With secondary education, I would argue that an approach based on 'levels' is flawed; rather, you want to distinguish students by approach (with the most common division being between vocational and academic education)

Well primary is like up to the age of twelve right? I'd argue that a class with the smartest and average kids is detrimental for either one of those groups. Completely useless and a waste of talent. You can't lecture at an appriopriate level for all students imo

[Goodspeed]

His critique on secondary education might be that everybody is basically thrown in together. In the Netherlands we differentiate students based on their level. There are like 6 levels of high schools with an entitely differeny curriculum tailored towards the level of students. At the lower levels people are educated in a more practical sense with the goal to get a simple degree (no bachelor or anything), at the medium level people are educated to usually get a basic bachelor and at the highest level students are educated to go to a university and get a masters degree.

I found that even at the age of eleven, before this differentiation really happened, that some students in my class were really slowing me down, so I cant imagine how America does it with no differentiation or hardly any in secondary education.

That is a reasonable argument, though I would point out that most comparative research favours keeping students in the same classes at primary level, regardless of ability. With secondary education, I would argue that an approach based on 'levels' is flawed; rather, you want to distinguish students by approach (with the most common division being between vocational and academic education)

They are different levels as well as different approaches. After all quick learners require a different approach than slow learners. The only flaw is that it's not always possible to know where someone belongs at the age of 12, and primary school teachers aren't always right either. Overall I think it's a decent system if you want your smart kids to get the best possible education and your slower learners not to lose their self confidence (on the other hand they may not be learning as much). Another plus is your teachers don't need to be highly educated to teach the lower 'levels'.

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[momuuu]

Well in my last year of primary school I was so far ahead of the average kid in my class that I didnt learn anything, literally. I just worked by myself and was done with everything in january or something. It was quite a waste to be honest. Im really glad there are great differentiation options, as I cant imagine Id have gotten anywhere near where I am now without them really. Its right that differentiation at the age of 12 can be tough. Ive known people that really jumped up in level close to that age. Fortunately theres a possibility to go to an inbetween level for the first 2 or 3 years of highschool.

I honestly cant imagine how you can create a lecture that is useful for people of all intelligence. You'll just end up either explaining things for waaaay too long for everyone or not explain things long enough for half to get it.

[PoniPoika]

Well in my last year of primary school I was so far ahead of the average kid in my class that I didnt learn anything, literally. I just worked by myself and was done with everything in january or something. It was quite a waste to be honest. Im really glad there are great differentiation options, as I cant imagine Id have gotten anywhere near where I am now without them really. Its right that differentiation at the age of 12 can be tough. Ive known people that really jumped up in level close to that age. Fortunately theres a possibility to go to an inbetween level for the first 2 or 3 years of highschool.

I honestly cant imagine how you can create a lecture that is useful for people of all intelligence. You'll just end up either explaining things for waaaay too long for everyone or not explain things long enough for half to get it.

The solution to this is having advanced students skip a grade. Beyond that, the issue is mostly disparity in attainment levels rather than intelligence

[spanky4ever]

I cant help but feeling this is a pseudo-problem. The biggest problem now, is the huge debt students of longer education has - If you had to make it thru collage, coming out with 100 thousand dollar in debt (if you didn't have parents who could pay for that) When are you gonna pay that debt, at the same time you want to buy a house, have children, buy a car?? If you cant enter this "marked" you will also slow the eco down - in a big way.
Its just not a good business for a country to "trickle up" and leaving the ppl who could buy your "stuff" - out!!
Basicly you are killing the hand that feeds you. Hallo - even Big Dude Wall street are realizing this now! Hence briowl video above.

I just read that average student debt are 35 000 dollars.

[momuuu]

Well in my last year of primary school I was so far ahead of the average kid in my class that I didnt learn anything, literally. I just worked by myself and was done with everything in january or something. It was quite a waste to be honest. Im really glad there are great differentiation options, as I cant imagine Id have gotten anywhere near where I am now without them really. Its right that differentiation at the age of 12 can be tough. Ive known people that really jumped up in level close to that age. Fortunately theres a possibility to go to an inbetween level for the first 2 or 3 years of highschool.

I honestly cant imagine how you can create a lecture that is useful for people of all intelligence. You'll just end up either explaining things for waaaay too long for everyone or not explain things long enough for half to get it.

The solution to this is having advanced students skip a grade. Beyond that, the issue is mostly disparity in attainment levels rather than intelligence

Imo skipping grades is usually bad for the student. I actually have a few friends that did that but the social consequence of such a thing seem pretty severe at younger age and when you get older you'll risk missing a lot of stuff when skipping a grade.

[Papist]

His critique on secondary education might be that everybody is basically thrown in together. In the Netherlands we differentiate students based on their level. There are like 6 levels of high schools with an entitely differeny curriculum tailored towards the level of students. At the lower levels people are educated in a more practical sense with the goal to get a simple degree (no bachelor or anything), at the medium level people are educated to usually get a basic bachelor and at the highest level students are educated to go to a university and get a masters degree.

I found that even at the age of eleven, before this differentiation really happened, that some students in my class were really slowing me down, so I cant imagine how America does it with no differentiation or hardly any in secondary education.

In the US, students are divided but it's done by class rather than school. There are typically 2-3 "tiers" of courses for the subject: Advanced Placement (materials created by the company that makes SAT tests), and then a couple of lower levels (average students tend to go into the tier below AP). Each level of course is less rigorous than the one above it. For those students who don't feel that they fit into the academic environment of the school at all, there are several other options available. They can attend a magnet school, which typically specializes in a specific field (e.g. arts, trades, etc.) or a charter school, which typically uses an alternative educational model to teach the same material as the public schools.

[spanky4ever]

@papist

notification

thx for that clearification

[spanky4ever]

https://youtu.be/hZdfcIRYAE8 Danny Devito endorses Sanders

[noissance]

Bernie sanders to be on TYT in a few hours tune in!

[WickedCossack]

Well in my last year of primary school I was so far ahead of the average kid in my class that I didnt learn anything, literally. I just worked by myself and was done with everything in january or something. It was quite a waste to be honest. Im really glad there are great differentiation options, as I cant imagine Id have gotten anywhere near where I am now without them really. Its right that differentiation at the age of 12 can be tough. Ive known people that really jumped up in level close to that age. Fortunately theres a possibility to go to an inbetween level for the first 2 or 3 years of highschool.

I honestly cant imagine how you can create a lecture that is useful for people of all intelligence. You'll just end up either explaining things for waaaay too long for everyone or not explain things long enough for half to get it.

Actually there is a considerable amount of emerging research to show that mixed ability classes can make more progress than streamed classes. Higher ability students benefit immensely from explaining concepts to weaker students as it requires a level of comprehension much greater than simply being able to complete work yourself thereby developing their own understanding. Weaker students benefit from higher expectations and peers who can support them when the teacher is occupied or just to explain ideas from a more relatable/different perspective.

Of course that would be in an ideal classroom. Highly depends on the teacher.

Having said that differentiation takes up a huge amount of my time when planning lessons. Sometimes feels like you need to plan an individual lesson for every student ... which unfortunately isn't feasible when there's only 24hrs in a day.

[briowl]

MUST SHOULD COULD

[spanky4ever]

Sanders is on TYT right now