School Choice - It's Time

[nsacpi]

School curricula should also not shy away from our current racism, including this none-too-subtle promise to save the suburban mom from the bogeyman. August 12, 2020 ladies and gentlemen.

The “suburban housewife” will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge! @foxandfriends @MariaBartiromo

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
August 12, 2020

 

[sturg33]

The obsession has no limits

 

[Jaw]

School curricula should also not shy away from our current racism, including this none-too-subtle promise to save the suburban mom from the bogeyman. August 12, 2020 ladies and gentlemen.

The “suburban housewife” will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge! @foxandfriends @MariaBartiromo

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
August 12, 2020

Do you have stats to refute his statement? Something showing that violent crime rates are not significantly higher in low income or government housing areas than in suburbia?

 

[thethe]

Do you have stats to refute his statement? Something showing that violent crime rates are not significantly higher in low income or government housing areas than in suburbia?

Come on Jaw.

You know better....

 

[Tapate50]

Do you have stats to refute his statement? Something showing that violent crime rates are not significantly higher in low income or government housing areas than in suburbia?

One could simply look up Atl metro crime stats, vs say well north in the burbs. Seems like it would be a simple exercise to get to ones point....

 

[sturg33]

A reminder that the lecturer is enthusiastically supporting NYCs racist ID policy

 

[nsacpi]

Do you have stats to refute his statement? Something showing that violent crime rates are not significantly higher in low income or government housing areas than in suburbia?

Well if they do, we have a ready made excuse to keep those "animals" bottled up in the 'to.

But I thought you were about treating people on an individual basis rather than lumping them together into a class to be favored or disfavored.

De facto segregation is one of the biggest barriers to allowing poor minorities the same access to good educational opportunities that the children of rich people have. Breaking it down is a way of providing more school choice. A form of choice that rich people have exercised for generations.

 

[thethe]

Well if they do, we have a ready made excuse to keep those "animals" bottled up in the 'to.

But I thought you were about treating people on an individual basis rather than lumping them together into a class to be favored or disfavored.

Those that want to make a better life can always move to the suburbs.

The idea is to not attract a large enough percentage where you get those that make the statistics what they are.

 

[sturg33]

De facto segregation is one of the biggest barriers to allowing poor minorities the same access to good educational opportunities that the children of rich people have.

This very smart person supports segregating people based on whether they have taken a non approved drug... Which nearly 2/3 of black people have chosen not to

 

[Jaw]

Well if they do, we have a ready made excuse to keep those "animals" bottled up in the 'to.

But I thought you were about treating people on an individual basis rather than lumping them together into a class to be favored or disfavored.

Social engineering of an area by moving people there based on their income isn't treating people like individuals.

To illustrate Tapate's point, I recommend looking into the history of Clayton county Georgia over the past 30 or so years. This exact scenario played out there, to the ongoing dismay of the county and their crime stats. But hey, it enabled Atlanta to pull lots of graft for the Olympics and gentrification for some rich white liberals.

 

[nsacpi]

Social engineering of an area by moving people there based on their income isn't treating people like individuals.

To illustrate Tapate's point, I recommend looking into the history of Clayton county Georgia over the past 30 or so years. This exact scenario played out there, to the ongoing dismay of the county and their crime stats. But hey, it enabled Atlanta to pull lots of graft for the Olympics and gentrification for some rich white liberals.

The point is to provide some low income housing in rich school districts. Are you really objecting to that? Shouldn't poor children have some access to these great educational opportunities that rich kids have.

 

[thethe]

The point is to provide some low income housing in rich school districts. Are you really objecting to that? Shouldn't poor children have some access to these great educational opportunities that rich kids have.

Hmm - If you held the teachers union accountable for their atrocious performance as well as school administration we would have better schools for these children.

The answer is not to make nice neighborhoods less safe because that is what would happen statistically.

You just don't want to hold the people at fault accountable for some reason. Its strange.

 

[Jaw]

The point is to provide some low income housing in rich school districts. Are you really objecting to that? Shouldn't poor children have some access to these great educational opportunities that rich kids have.

I disagree. I think that is the excuse, not the point.

Georgia provides additional staff, resources, and funding to low income schools. My wife works in one, my daughter goes to school there. Teachers are given financial incentives to work in those schools. Why would moving kids away from those extra resources be expected to improve their academic success?

 

[thethe]

I disagree. I think that is the excuse, not the point.

Georgia provides additional staff, resources, and funding to low income schools. My wife works in one, my daughter goes to school there. Teachers are given financial incentives to work in those schools. Why would moving kids away from those extra resources be expected to improve their academic success?

Focusing on the ineffectiveness of the schools would require them to point the figure at their preferred political ideology.

 

[nsacpi]

I disagree. I think that is the excuse, not the point.

Georgia provides additional staff, resources, and funding to low income schools. My wife works in one, my daughter goes to school there. Teachers are given financial incentives to work in those schools. Why would moving kids away from those extra resources be expected to improve their academic success?

Actually there is a good bit of research that shows students from low income homes benefit from being in schools with students that come from predominantly better educated families. There is an educational benefit from being in a school district with involved parents that accrues to the students that come from households without such parents.

This is one of the ways we can break the legacy of many generations of racism in this countries. Otherwise there is a high degree of transmission of the pathologies that are part of that legacy from one generation to the next. And yes it is a form of social engineering, if you want to apply that label to it. But then so is "segregation forever."

 

[thethe]

Actually there is a good bit of research that shows students from low income homes benefit from being in schools with students that come from predominantly better educated families. There is an educational benefit from being in a school district with involved parents that accrues to the students that come from households without such parents.

So what happens when those percentages get lower when large low income housing is placed in these neighborhoods?

So now more kids suffer so we can bring some up to a mean performance level?

That sounds kind of dumb to me.

 

[Jaw]

Actually there is a good bit of research that shows students from low income homes benefit from being in schools with students that come from predominantly better educated families. There is an educational benefit from being in a school district with involved parents that accrues to the students that come from households without such parents.

This is one of the ways we can break the legacy of many generations of racism in this countries. Otherwise there is a high degree of transmission of the pathologies that are part of that legacy from one generation to the next. And yes it is a form of social engineering, if you want to apply that label to it. But then so is "segregation forever."

Wouldn't the typical nsacpi approach to this be to offer incentives for lower income parents to be more involved in their schools?

Both of my kids were admitted to the gifted curriculum, recommended to skip grades, and have generally had no problem succeeding academically. At a low income school.

The problem is rarely the school.

 

[nsacpi]

Wouldn't the typical nsacpi approach to this be to offer incentives for lower income parents to be more involved in their schools?

Both of my kids were admitted to the gifted curriculum, recommended to skip grades, and have generally had no problem succeeding academically. At a low income school.

The problem is rarely the school.

I can only share what some of the research shows. But I'm also in favor of other ways of breaking the de facto segregation that we have in this country, including school vouchers. To favor one method doesn't preclude favoring others.

 

[nsacpi]

The problem is rarely the school.

I agree. But if you have a school district that is very high in kids from low income households with various problems, then it is a virtually impossible task to achieve good results. I know some teachers in those schools. The county I live in generally is very wealthy. But we've managed the nifty trick of turning a couple towns into ghettos to warehouse low income households. I think providing more low income housing in our wealthy towns addresses a lot of problems, not just education.

 

[nsacpi]

So what happens when those percentages get lower when large low income housing is placed in these neighborhoods?

So now more kids suffer so we can bring some up to a mean performance level?

That sounds kind of dumb to me.

There is a point where increasing the proportion of kids from low income households causes educational outcomes to decline. I would not advocate increasing low income housing in school districts near that point. Btw the program that your boy terminated was a very modest one. It certainly did not threaten the quality of educational outcomes anywhere, and it provided some modest benefits in chipping away at the baleful effects of the de facto segregation in our country.