Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

An Entrepreneur and the Minimum-Wage

by Don Boudreaux on April 29, 2010

A.G. (who asks me to use, in this post, only his initials) is a regular reader of Cafe Hayek. He’s 28 years old and is an entrepreneur in Charlotte, North Carolina. His firm employs 25 people, 21 of whom are low-skilled workers. A.G. just sent this memo to his employees:

To All Team Members:

The schedule for next week has been posted. You may notice that hours have been cut back on your schedule. This is across the board, not just you. I don’t want anyone to think they’ve done something wrong to deserve a cut in hours, so I wanted to explain why it’s happening.

There are a couple of reasons for this:

Go here and read the whole thing.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

The Battle Hymn of Obama

Picture of Jesus with a group of children, but Obama's face instead of Jesus' face, by Darleen Click of proteinwisdom.comBy now, if you haven't been hiking the Appalachian Trail or something, you've seen and heard the video of a bunch of grade-school kids chanting "Mmm, mmm, mmm! Barack Hussein Obama!", including a line virtually lifted from "Jesus Loves the Little Children".

(The magnificent graphic was created by Darleen Click of Protein Wisdom.)

You may have missed the part after the chanting, where the kids sing the praises of Obama to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic. Well, that deserves to be mocked, too:


Mine eyes have seen the glory of the House's healthcare plan
Even though its countless pages make it really hard to scan
And anyone who disagrees might just as well be Klan!
Pelosi marches on!

  (Chorus)
  Glory, glory to Obama
  Glory, glory to Obama
  Tell your daddy and your Mama
  His plans are marching on!

He's apologized for everything the country's ever done
CO2's at fault for warming; please just disregard the Sun
You have no right to question him, for after all HE WON!
As ACORN Marches on!

(Repeat Chorus)

It's our duty as Americans to do just what he says
He looks so good on television; better in hi-rez
We will censure any congressmen who disrespect the Prez
Gleichsaltung marches on!

(Repeat Chorus)

Now let's listen to the Cactus Cuties do the real Battle Hymn of the Republic:

[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full article.]

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Has anyone see Alice lately?

'Cause I swear I've fallen down the rabbit hole....

Somehow I've gotten on the mailing list of the John W. Pope Civitas Institute, a North Carolina conservative organization who's vision is "of a North Carolina whose citizens enjoy liberty and prosperity derived from limited government, personal responsibility and civic engagement." I just got an email with the results of the June polling done by the Civitas Institute. Let's take a look, shall we?

The results fall fully in the "you can't make this stuff up" category. Question 1 asks "Do you feel things in North Carolina are generally headed in the right direction or have gotten off on the wrong track?" 54% of the respondents say "Wrong Track" vs. 33% for "Right Direction" and 13% "Not sure".

So the response to question 3 blows my mind. "If the election for state legislature were held today, would you be voting: Democrat, Republican, Neither, Not Sure". 41% said that they would vote Democrat! Hello?!? Who do you think is (and has been for way too long!) running the legislature in Raleigh? Santa Claus?

And it goes down hill from there. Question 4 asks "Opinion of Barack Obama: Favorable, Unfavorable, No Opinion". 61% said that they had a favorable opinion. Question 9: "Which party would do a better job of holding down taxes?" 45% said Republicans vs 31% Democrats. Question 10: "Which party would do a better job of creating jobs and growing the economy?" Hold on to your hats folks. 48% said the Democrats would do a better job vs 33% for the Republicans. How can you possibly reconcile the results of those two questions?

Questions 11,12 and 13: "Which party would do a better job of fighting corruption in government; improving public education and reducing health cost." The Demos win all three 48% to 38%, 41% to 25% and 46% to 30%. Oh, but look! The Republicans win "Which party will do a better job controlling illegal immigration by 42% to 31%. Wowsie Woo!

But what really frosts my cookies is the response to question 15: "Which political party, Democrat or Republican, does former governor Mike Easley belong to?" A full 19% of these (Hang on Don! Don't say anything rash!)...ahem...respondents say Easley was a Republican!! We haven't had a Republican governor in North Carolina since Jim Martin's term ended in 1993!!! WTF!!

Questions 18 through 25 ask about taxes and everyone thinks taxes are too high (Well that's a relief! I was beginning to wonder...). Question 26 asks "Do you think the public education system in NC is better or worse than other states?" 54% say worse (but we think the same bozos who've been running the show will do a better job of improving education???) I repeat: WTF?.

But as I dig deeper into the poll I began to understand. 43% say that they get their information about the NC legislature from........TV. A whopping 33% classify themselves as "Moderate". 47% of the respondents are......you guessed it: Democrat vs 36% Republican. The geographical area is telling as well: 22% are from Charlotte vs 19% from the Triad (Greensboro/High Point/Winston Salem), 19% from the Triangle (Raleigh/Durham/Hippy H......uh Chapel Hill), 14% from Western NC, 14% from the Northeast and 13% from the Southeast.

So let's review: a majority of the poll respondents get their news from TV; view themselves as moderates; are Democrats and live in the Charlotte area (major metropolitan = liberal). Well shucks! That explains everything. This is the same bunch of know-nothing boobs that give us the "Hope and Change" guy that's currently getting himself bulldozed in Russia. BTW: hows that "Hope and Change" thing working out for you anyway?
[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full article.]
Edit: After some thought it appears to me that a line from "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" is a better fit: "Morons! I've got Morons on my team!"

Friday, June 26, 2009

It's all about the "O"

No, not The Won. Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com, is interviewed by Reason's Nick Gillespie about a variety of subjects, including how bad regulation creates problems that are used to demand more regulation, and how bad government schools are at the root of many contentious issues.

Thursday, April 9, 2009

Ramussen Poll shows more than Economic Preference

Just 53% Say Capitalism Better Than Socialism
(h/t Monopticus)

So sayeth the Ramussen Phone Poll...

Though according to the initial breakout, if you're sitting there scratching your head and thinking "That just can't be right"... chance are, you're probably over 40.

Let's Review:

- Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided.
(that last 30% are the vacantly-staring, disconnected, mental-tabula-razas that criminal-defense and civil-prosecution attorneys refer to as "jurors" - MD)

- Thirty-somethings are a bit more supportive of the free-enterprise approach with 49% for capitalism and 26% for socialism.

- Adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism, and just 13% of those older Americans believe socialism is better.

- Investors by a 5-to-1 margin choose capitalism.

- As for those who do not invest, 40% say capitalism is better while 25% prefer socialism.

- There is a partisan gap as well. Republicans - by an 11-to-1 margin - favor capitalism.

- Democrats are much more closely divided: Just 39% say capitalism is better while 30% prefer socialism.

As for those not affiliated with either major political party, 48% say capitalism is best, and 21% opt for socialism.


Now I'm reminded of an old-saw that my brother and I frequesntly trade back-and-forth that goes:
"Truisms become truisms because, at some point, they were true."


You know - like:
"As people get older, start raising kids and become acquainted with cold reality - they become more conservative."

Or:
"A Liberal is just a Conservative who hasn't been mugged yet."

Okay - enough fun - looking back:

- Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided.

The phrase "adults under 30" seems more than ever like an oxymoron to me - particularly since the Obama campaign.

To be more accurate, that should probably read:
"kids at least old enough to have graduated college, who are still living with their parents, and are angry over not having been issued their Gulfstream IV with their degree".

Seriously, we're talking about the generation with the largest sense of collective-entitlement that our culture has ever seen.

MuscleDaddy-the-Elder asked his final (before retirement) Freshman English Class, on the first day of the semester, to scratch out a couple of paragraphs about:
"What you would want to have with you if stranded on a deserted island"


- more than one wrote "My Parents".

This is fairly indicative of the cultural phenomenon that allowed Barack Obama to get elected in the first place - nearly two generations brought up into lives of ease, short-attention-span and instant gratification... and they don't want it to end.

Someone should be their 'parent' - why not the government?

Bob Parks touched on this one in a recent post - go ye now and read it.


Sorry, what's that you say?

"But wait, MD - what about all of those patchouli-and-ponytail wearing oldsters?
What about the middle-aged Code Pinkos and over-the-hill Che-shirt-wearers?
What about the "Socialism" sides of the poll from the other age groups?
Don't they invalidate your chrono-centric rant, here?"


Not really, as it turns out.

But since they are a topic about which an entire book could be (and coincidentally, has been) written, I'll just point out that Diana West has already done all of the heavy-lifting on that topic - complete with a yeoman-effort of citation-and-reference gathering - and has produced the defining work in the explanation of that aspect of our societal failure with her book:

Death of the Grown-Up

...and follow by saying unto you all "go ye forth and read it".

(You can't have my copy - I'm hanging onto it against the long-chance of getting it autographed - go show your support of capitalism and buy your own!)


Seriously, folks - this isn't something that's going to fix itself, nor is the real work likely to bear fruit anytime soon.


The real change has to start here, now - with our kids.

- MuscleDaddy


(P.S. - I'm beating all of you to it - "Hey you kids! Get off my lawn!"... so there.)

Monday, March 16, 2009

Evan Sayet Heritage II: Hating What's Right

As many of my friends can tell you, I am a big fan of Evan Sayet's first Heritage lecture. Well, he's baaaack, reiterating much of the same territory, but expanding on it as well:

Friday, April 18, 2008

When words are no longer a means of communication

Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot?

As an intervention into our normative understanding of .the real. and its accompanying politics of convention, this performance piece has numerous conceptual goals. The first is to assert that often, normative understandings of biological function are a mythology imposed on form. It is this mythology that creates the sexist, racist, ableist, nationalist and homophobic perspective, distinguishing what body parts are .meant. to do from their physical capability. The myth that a certain set of functions are .natural. (while all the other potential functions are .unnatural.) undermines that sense of capability, confining lifestyle choices to the bounds of normatively defined narratives.




When words are no longer used as a means to convey ideas but, instead, as a means to confuse and camouflage ideas, the speaker has ceased to be an honest broker and has become a huckster. In case you have somehow been lucky enough to miss it, the quote above comes from the "artist" Aliza Shvarts.
For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages. I created a group of fabricators from volunteers who submitted to periodic STD screenings and agreed to their complete and permanent anonymity. From the 9th to the 15th day of my menstrual cycle, the fabricators would provide me with sperm samples, which I used to privately self-inseminate.

Emphasis mine.I'm not going to address what Ms. Shvarts chooses to call "art" but rather the words she uses to describe and justify this waste of her parent's money. In the bolded passage above "I created a group of fabricators" is camouflage for a much more straightforward construction: "I asked some guys to be sperm donors" But Ms. Shvarts cannot speak in such banal language because she must hide the banality of her point.
...it is a myth that ovaries and a uterus are .meant.[sic] to birth a child.

I beg to differ, Ms Shvarts. Birthing a child is precisely and exactly what ovaries and a uterus are "meant" to do. More specifically, that is what they are designed to do. If I may lapse into "artist" speak for a moment, "They have a function and their form flows from that function." Yes, they may be used for some other purpose (I once used a ratchet to drive nail) but that doesn't change what they were "meant" to do.
[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full post. Graphic Content]

Friday, February 15, 2008

Cackle, Homeschooling?

Just because the gov't is giving out "free" schooling doesn't mean that you break the law if you don't "go along quietly". Instead, you can thank them for offering you that moldy bread and homeschool instead.



So, why would you do that? Two reasons: socialization and education. If you've kept up with current events, then you already know that private schooled kids have better tempers and more maturity than gov't (so-called public) schoolers; and that goes double for homeschoolers. They are the best-behaved and articulate students you're likely to find. They play well with kids their own age, or kids that are older, or kids that are younger. And when they're with adults, they behave like adults.



So, if you're thinking about taking up your local gov't on that offer of moldy bread, we homeschoolers just want you to know that we're worried about how your kids will ever get properly socialized. We don't see how spending hours hiding from the playground bullies, that gov't teachers claim is a "rite of passage", is all that conducive to growing up to be a calm and collected reasonable adult. (Oh, yours is the bully? Never mind.) As the Education Experts say, nothing teaches kids to learn to act like mature adults than to hang out with other kids their exact same age (for 12 years) -- just like in real life. Tee hee.



By the way, given the American separation of church and state, it turns out that you can homeschool even if you don't want to be religious about it. Most homeschooled families aren't doing it for religious reasons.



But what if you're not a credentialed teacher? How can you do a good enough job teaching? Well, there are three answers to this. The first is that you probably won't need techniques to corral 30 kids at a time. (I'm addressing only the small families -- under 20 kids. Heh.)


Secondly, you probably remember your two to four hours of hands-on driving instruction before you were put behind the wheel and sent to the store to get groceries. Teaching is about that difficult. And that's about what credentialed teachers know. You don't need lesson plans. You don't need curricula. You probably don't want those really bad textbooks that keep getting mandated by your state's bored [sic] of education. It turns out that if you're interested in the subject, then your kids likely will be too. The hardest part will be asking them to explain things to you rather than you lecturing things to them. If you talk, they might be listening. If they talk, you know what they've learned. Avoiding being over-burdening on them is the most difficult thing to learn. Kids naturally want to learn -- just maybe not what you want them to learn at the moment. (I'll get to math/science in a moment.)


Thirdly, if you'd really like a shock, it turns out that kids that are left to their own devices (with a lot of books and such lying around) will automatically learn on their own. You could act just like a credentialed 30-kid corraller, and just watch that they don't set the house on fire. This style of homeschooling is actually called "unschooling". There are books about it. It also works well, but it's very frightening at first.


What about testing? Well, some states want you to do more than what's done in gov't schools, and some states want less. But since different kids learn at different rates, you shouldn't be concerned about it. Focus on what they need, and if Johnny needs an extra year to learn something, that's fine. At least he'll be well-adjusted while doing it. And if Jill learns twice as fast, then she won't be bored out of her mind sitting in a class with squalling immature kids who just happen to be her same age.


Everyone (except that San Diego school teacher) can read and write -- so that's easy to teach. But what if you aren't that good at math or science? Well, you could brush up on it and stay a chapter ahead of your kids -- it's only through 12th grade after all, and you can spread it out over several years. Alternatively, you could have your kids read and then explain how it all works so that you'll finally get it. However, one common way that makes parents feel good is to join a group of homeschooling families, and have one of the parents who *is* good at the subject teach kids from the group. Homeschooler parents are typically very friendly, helpful, and well-behaved -- like their kids.


But how will the kids get into college? Fortunately, college's aren't altogether dumb. They are aware that homeschoolers are smarter, better trained, more well-behaved, and better motivated to learn. You just write up a school transcript, standard "course" names, think up some useful grades (hint, does your child know the material? Then it's an "A"), and check for merit scholarships.


I've left this last part last because it's the most difficult to face for many parents.

What if you both work for a living to make ends meet? One of you can't quit your job just to teach your kids. Besides, the gov't school is already "paid for". Good question. If you'd really like to get away from gov't schooling, but feel you can't, what you can do is have your kids perform their "homework" during the day while supervised (i.e., corralled) by the aunt, grandmother, or day-care sitter. Then the "lecture" portion of their learning can take place once you get home. Of course, this is an extra burden on you.
[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full post.]


Well they're your kids. What are you willing to give up so that they get a great education?

Friday, February 8, 2008

Neighbors

To Whom It May Concern,



So, you say that you won't be voting for your party's nominee come this November. You know, I understand your wanting to punish Sen. McCain for the things he's done that you don't like. Lord knows, he's done a few doozies.



What I don't understand is why you want to deliberately punish the rest of the people who, through no more fault than yours, find themselves with a choice between Senators McCain and either Hillary or Obama. Just like you, during the primaries, these people voted for candidates other than McCain because they wanted the best candidate they could get. That makes them your neighbors, whether you realize it or not. They may be a minority in your party, but their your party neighbors.



And now they'll be voting for McCain because he is the best candidate they can get; the best candidate of their party that actually has a chance to win. But you're angry with McCain, with some of the things he's done. So you won't help your neighbors.



Well, I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sorry because I believe that neighbors stick together; they help one another. Sure, it's your vote. But it's a selfish attitude, and one that can, and likely will, spill over into other parts of your life. It's more than just taking your ball and going home. It's pissing in the soup that others want to eat.



However, if that's what you do, I may not like it but I'll tolerate it. I don't like that kind of behavior, but I guess it's the best I can get from you at the moment. I hope you eventually learn to become more neighborly. I believe in helping my neighbors, even if it involves some of my own pain. I hope someday you'll believe in that, too.

Monday, February 4, 2008

Sherlock is Real, Not Churchill

And who should know better than the British about their own
people -- er, legends? Well, apparently not they, themselves.
Here are a few of the results from a UKTV poll.



What percent of the British public think that these made-up characters are real?


  • 65% King Arthur

  • 58% Sherlock Holmes

  • 51% Robin Hood

  • 47% Eleanor Rigby


What percent of the British public think that these real people are fictional?

  • 47% Richard the Lionheart

  • 23% Winston Churchill

  • 23% Florence Nightingale