morpeth

You make a good point that the values of parents can make a huge difference in performance of students, no disagreement.

My point about teacher's salaries is simply that there is little correlation between teacher salaries and quality of education if the state curriculum, and ideology reduces the standards by which they are judged. The voucher system provides competition between schools so that public schools don't have a monopoly. That in itself is a positive.

While just anecdotal evidence, I asked a few private school teachers why they accepted lower pay and benefits to teach in private school. They responded the freedom to teach without state restrictions and for the best interests of students, more discipline in the classroom, and often parents more serious about their students' education.

As far as private schools being better they are not always so. Many offer better safety and discipline which I assume is a positive, and some may offer better academic standards. I do know of private schools whose academic standards are the same or even lower than for example the standards in a public school for better students ( say in honors classes in high school). My point is parents should have the choice.

Yes in science class of course helpful to have better equipment. But computers unnecessary for English, Math, History, Civics, Art etc. If school cant teach basic English and Math of what use is a brand new building ?

Basically if the US behind other nations in educational standards, being "excellent" by US standards may not mean much. However parents like to think their kids schools are excellent, and teachers do everything possible to convince them.

zargof

I can only conclude that his narcissism can't let him accept that more people voted for Clinton than he did. He clearly hasn't thought through the implications of what he's saying.

The more I see, the more I know it's who in his inner circle is going to have the most influence over him that is going to be important. If it is people like Preibus and Pence, then it is going to bad, but still in the realms of sanity. But if it's the likes of Bannon and Flynn, then God help the planet.

Giantaxe

From what I've seen, teachers get treated very poorly in the US. Yes, they have generous pension benefits, but the pay hardly matches what it is possible for many to get in other professions. And that's before we start talking about things that are not directly related to pay and the difficulties teachers find in moving from one localized school district to another. "Divide and conquer" seemed to be the name of the game for many districts, and without a union I can only imagine that teachers would be treated worse. In countries that tend to do well in international comparisons, teachers tend to be paid better in relation to average salaries and - just as important - teaching is a more respected profession. The trashing of teachers my many politicians here is hardly helpful.

Otoh, I do agree that unions have been unhelpful in two big respects. Firstly, pay for seniority. Secondly, the difficulty in firing teachers. Both are big problems.

Or, to put it more succinctly, if you can "cherry pick" your students (which private schools effectively do one way or another even if its by virtue of charging fees) it's a heck of a lot easier to teach. That's certainly the reason why people I know chose to teach in private schools. It's also why comparing public and private schools is so statistically difficult.

robin1234

I was going to say his court will be like one of those late Roman emperors, Heliogabalus or similar. But closer to our time, I think he's a bit like Henry VIII. Lazy, narcissistic, and a bully. Henry VIII was fortunate enough to have a series of good ministers to run his government.

I wonder what trump's equivalent of dissolution of the monasteries will be.

zargof

Well he hasn't beheaded any of his wives... yet. But yeah, maybe he'll set up the Church of Trump.

Ebonhawke

Breitbart has been a big proponent of Trump's during the campaign. I'm assuming that a lot of their revenue stems from advertising based on the number of clicks on an article / site. I'm sure they had a tremendous influx in revenue this election season. As election night fades into the past, I wonder if they'll 'turn' on him in order to continue to drive revenue.

This election cycle demonstrated that sensationalistic stories (whether factual or not) could generate intense debate and opportunity for media. With Bannon as Trump's Chief Strategist, he could be privy to a number of controversies that could present a significant opportunity for a journalistic 'scoop', especially if Trump's popularity numbers tank.

Leslie

Breitbart and their ilk have made their fortune on OUTRAGE. Being outraged is, apparently, very popular with a certain subset of the human race. So, what happens when the people who claim to have been mistreated, ignored, and endured a system that was specifically rigged against them, just them, nobody else ... suddenly become the winners. They got everything, right? Where does all that outrage go?

Leslie

They were beheaded in a court of law. Shitty old Trump, this is what he uses the legal system for. To keep his ex-wives silent. Ugh.

Leslie

And now his "court" is splitting and turning against itself. I'm so surprised. KellyAnne Conway seems to be confused about who won the election.

morpeth

I don't think historically teachers during prior periods of higher standards, at least in US, below college level were better paid on a comparative basis. I just don't know where this idea has arisen that what teachers are paid is the problem. There are by the way people who would like to teach who are extremely qualified, yet the road blocks set up to meet administrative requirements preclude them doing so.

As you point out seniority and security of positon is a major problem. What a racket ! Hard to fire a teacher for low performance, and longer teacher is there more they get paid regardless of declining educational results.

And now in universities a lot of work being shoved onto adjunct professors while tenured professors and administrators reap the benefits- and since so easy to get student loans, universities just need to shove people in the door as there is no cost control exercised.

Good point about comparing private vs public schools that statistically difficult to compare for the reasons you cited. I still believe it is fundamentally unfair that the poor and working class have less choices because of ideological blinders against vouchers- and ridiculous public policy to allow this racket of public schools to continue to be rewarded for declining standards.

Ebonhawke

I think that there are at least two options

- It can be redirected, which is what prompted my thought above. Since the government will be controlled entirely by Republicans, trying to redirect that continuing outrage to Democratic targets becomes more and more difficult. It would be much harder to foment outrage at a New England House of Representative's comments in 2019, than it is to direct it towards alleged improprieties by the Republican administration.

- It can be flipped, from outrage to apathy. If the administration doesn't meet the lofty expectations of the people who elected them, that outrage can form a barrier to generating the same enthusiasm for voting for a populist candidate.

Both of the possibilities above are not good for a Republican party looking to make electoral gains in 2018 and 2020. With Priebus as the Chief of Staff, at some point, he may be forced into a decision that balances his loyalty to Trump, versus his loyalty to the party.

scrubbedexpat099

Please don’t read this unless you are feeling strong. This is a list of 13 major crises that, I believe, confront us. There may be more. Please feel free to add to it or to knock it down. I’m sorry to say that it’s not happy reading.

1. Donald Trump
The next occupant of the White House will be a man who appears to possess no capacity for restraint, balance or empathy, but a bottomless capacity for revenge and vindictiveness. He has been granted a clean sweep of power, with both houses and the supreme court in his pocket. He is surrounding himself with people whose judgment and knowledge of the world are, to say the least, limited. He will take charge of the world’s biggest nuclear and conventional arsenals, and the most extensive surveillance and security apparatus any state has ever developed.

2. His national security adviser
In making strategic military decisions, he has a free hand, with the capacity to act even without the nominal constraint of Congress. His national security adviser, Michael T Flynn, is a dangerous extremist.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...lobal-collapse

Worth a read and very depressing.

I would put in population as number 1 but I thought the Trump comments would be appreciated.

zargof

Republicans won't have a super majority in the Senate, so Democrats can filibuster and obstruct in the same way the GOP has for the past six years. That will be enough for most of them.

Assuming that the Democrats don't fold like a bunch of pussies that they usually do.

Ebonhawke

My original thought was that the Romney meeting was a Trump vengeance plot. By having the meeting with Romney, it allowed the media to bring up all the bad things that he said about Trump, and then all of the Trump's spokespeople could go on the various media shows and slam Romney's record and feel that they got their payback for the things that Romney said on the campaign trail. If true, would continue to lower the bar for political conduct, and further dissuade qualified people from joining his administration. However, this tactic doesn't seem to be out of the realm of possibility for those that perceive a vindictive temperament by Trump and some of his advisors.

However, just saw a brief where apparently Romney has a second meeting with the Trump transition team tomorrow - so perhaps not. Appointing Romney to a cabinet position, even if it's not SoS, to possibly appease some Republicans who weren't in his camp will simply infuriate his base.

Ebonhawke

As I've stated before (can't remember if it was this forum or another), this is one reason that Trump's election wasn't the worst potential long-term outcome of this election. The worst-case potential outcome was the same results for the House and Senate, but Clinton winning the Presidential race by a similar margin.

Had that happened, the Republicans would simply continue to do nothing for the next two years, except launch wild goose chase investigations after Clinton, Trump would sit in his tower, and continue to make nonsense tweets to keep fuelling the outrage of the people who voted for him in the 'rigged' election.

In 2018, the Senate seats up for election are mostly Democratic incumbents. With a Democratic President that's been painted (fairly or unfairly) as being corrupt, and no progress happening in the country (because the Republican House and Senate won't actually let anything move forward), there could be a dramatic swing in the number of seats that the Republicans pick up in the Senate.

At the conclusion of the 2020 election, you could theoretically have a Tea Party President, with Republican super majorities in both the House and Senate, which should scare the crap out of a lot of people