The Stupid Thread 2 (Part 1)

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
642

Because it is a judgemental thing. The author is judging the entire group of “white taxpayers” as those that “don’t want to waste money” on SGI education.

You seem to be operating under the assumption that the author is using “white taxpayers don’t want to waste money” in some general sense, but he isn’t. The chart is discussing a very specific cycle.

Yes, it does. How you can arrive at a different interpretation is beyond me.

The dominant group “white taxpayers” don’t want to waste money on SGI education as part of the cycle outlined, which means that the “white taxpayers” actions directly influence the cycle in a negative way.

White taxpayers are part of the problem, that is literally what it is stating.

No, it does not explicitly state this. We know this isn’t true. We pumped $7B into SGI education per the links above. Who do you think paid for that?

Lol… I’m not trying to make “white people” the victim. I’m saying the chart is stupid for the reasons stated. I’m saying the authors premise is factually inaccurate and I’ve got $7B in funding specifically for SGI education to back that up.

Taxpayers, many of which are white, fund SGI education.

Taxpayers, many of which are white, want to maintain or increase educational spending.

It’s complete nonsense. A lack of funding is not holding SGI’s back.

The chart is about the cycle SGI’s are stuck in partially or fully because their schools are underfunded by “white taxpayers” according to the author. It’s dumb to assert “white taxpayers” think it’s a waste of money to support SGI education.

My god, even a majority of Republican’s support increased educational spending per Pew.

1 Like
643

I’m throwing the flag - it’s an infraction to use common knowledge and sense to refute the stated premises in the flow chart. Fifteen yards from the spot of the foul.

3 Likes
644

Well, it’s a good thing I got to start at the opposing goal line due to my inherent white privilege.

Ed, come on, man.

The chart says “SGI attends poorly financed schools” resulting in “SGI drops out or SGI pushed out or SGI performs poorly on exams”.

Why is the school poorly financed?

Answer per the chart: “White taxpayers do not want to waste money”.

How is that not a wrong committed specifically by white taxpayers?

645

All the defensiveness evinced on this thread indicates I am far from alone in buying into grievance politics.

QED.

We could look at literally any factor in the entire cycle and say it influences the cycle in a negative way. Every factor.

Put another way: If instead of a cycle/circle, the author had chosen to present the Figure thus:

White taxpayers are reluctant to invest in public education–>SGI go to underfunded schools–>SGI get inadequate education–>SGI inferior by cultural measures of success

then your point would be valid. But he didn’t. He presented it as a cycle, with no initial cause. It’s you guys–not the author–who have made the behavior of white taxpayers the Ultimate Cause.

Sounds like Grievance Politics to me.

True, but what to what is he ascribing white taxpayer’s reluctance to pay more? Is he ascribing it to racism, to bigotry? Or is it to the eminently reasonable ‘I don’t want to throw good money after bad’?

Grievance politics yet again.

It most certainly does say this. Look at the Figure, and see what factor ‘causes’ the ‘white taxpayers’ factor.

Sure you are. That’s been the entire nexus of your argument–that white people are being unfairly singled out, unfairly blamed. Hell, in your next sentence you provide what you consider to be evidence of this.

I’m not sure how you can make such a sweeping, blanket statement.

Hold on–are you suggesting that if we ask a group of Joe Sixpack White Guy who’s been asked to pay more taxes for inner-city education, that some won’t complain that doing so amounts to throwing more money at a problem that doesn’t seem to be getting any better despite previous attempts to fix it with more money?

I’m not sure how many more times I have to say it, but we can pick any point in the circle and play the same sort of Blame Game.

646

And sorry I keep dovetailing in your posts, but it’s worth noting the contrast:

  • Under IP, a white person commits a wrong by merely asking an Asian person where he is from (the well-documented “microaggression”). That’s how low the bar is for committing a wrong against a non-white.

  • But white people, en masse, refusing to adequately fund public education for SGIs, which in turn causes SGIs to live a struggling and marginalized existence subordinate to whites in society, isn’t a wrong.

Roger that.

2 Likes
647

Okay, so white taxpayer’s reluctance to “waste money” on SGI education is stated as a negative then. I’m glad we agree.

No, either way, the point is valid. It doesn’t matter if the actions of “white taxpayers” is the cause or is a perpetuating factor. Either way, the author is stating as fact that the supposed position of the entire group has a negative influence on SGI outcomes.

Number one, the author is just flat out wrong about what “white taxpayers” are willing to spend money on.

Number two we have examples of SGI funded schools that receive more education $'s then most other schools. Baltimore (#3 / 100) is the example I used earlier.

I don’t even know what this means. It has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with the author assigning part of the blame for poor SGI outcomes on an entire group of people (based on their skin color mind you) because of a crap assumption easily proven inaccurate and teaching it to essentially children as a fact.

No. It’s about pointing out the author is wrong not about playing “victim”.

LOL at the irony here. The author makes a sweeping generalization about an entire group of taxpayers, but that’s totally cool I guess.

Further, we know that schools with less funding achieve better outcomes. Hell, we know countries that spend less on education have better outcomes so I don’t think it’s all that big a stretch to say funding isn’t the issue.

Of course, some will, sure. So, what?

The vast majority of people polled (read 93% iirc) polled want to maintain or increase education spending. Something like 53% of Republican’s favored an increase in spending per Pew. The majority are for maintenance or increasing spending on education. I’m pretty sure a lot of these folks are white considering US demographics.

That’s fine, so again I guess we’re in agreement. The author is stating as fact white taxpayers are to blame for SGI outcomes per the chart along with other factors.

2 Likes
648

Hard not to.

If I make the claim black Americans prefer Coke to Pepsi, every reasonable person reading it knows I am making a point about black Americans. Not all Americans. Black Americans.

It’s gone from surreal to absurd. The torturing of language for political ends here would make Orwell blush.

649

I honestly wouldn’t even care if this was just some guys book. It’s that this is being taught as fact in a required course that irks me. I’ve never bought into the notion that higher education = liberal indoctrination, but this sort of nonsense has me reconsidering.

1 Like
650

I mean, my lanta…

image
image749×502 27.8 KB

Education is the third largest discretionary spend bucket at roughly $70,000,000,000…

We definitely have a funding problem, though…

651

Same here. Once in a while, I get asked to help out on thesis defenses, and I can just imagine a student trying to defend a thesis where such a conclusion/premise - “white people are reluctant to spend money on public education” - was a step at any point in proving up the thesis, regardless of the ultimate argument. That would stop the entire defense in it’s tracks and get a battery of questions:

  • What’s your basis for saying that?
  • What do the data say?
  • Aren’t lots of white people liberal/Democrat who support more spending?
  • Does the data say about white people who are conservative/Republican? Do they support it in any percentage?

In other words, all the puzzlers we’ve been raising challenging the author’s statement. But the argument would be dead in the water if such a claim was part of the proof.

1 Like
652

We need to get back onto the Stupid…

6 Likes
653

It’s because higher education in this country is a dumpster fire. In every sense of the phrase.

Higher edu certainly leans liberal, but calling anything “indoctrination” takes away the responsibility of the student to not be a moron. These aren’t 9 year old being brainwashed by a cult, they’re adults making adult decisions that are on absolutely nobody but themselves.

Edit: This is aimed at the higher edu = lib indoctrination aspect, not you specifically.

654

Too bad they included a picture of the plate. He might have gotten a date if he could have convinced everyone that it was olympic diameter.

7 Likes
655

Dat ratio of Military to everything else…

This pie graph is depressing. No matter how many times I see it.

1 Like
656

According to doctors, both could also suffer from post-traumatic stress syndrome.

1 Like
657

Personally, I think this one is way more depressing:

image
image724×476 16.8 KB

image
image738×636 36.8 KB

MIlitary spending, while very large, is only about half of about 30% of the total federal budget. I mean, we spend 6% of the budget on interest alone.

I sort of agree. I do think these are adults even though they are increasing treated like children by older generations, but I also think these are very impressionable years as well. I mean, lol, a lot of 18 year olds are morons…

1 Like
658

Gotta draw the line somewhere. At a certain point people have to be held responsible for their actions. Imo when they 100% CHOOSE college and CHOOSE the university they attend, they should be 100% held responsible for not being morons and believing everything they read.

All of the tools that are at our disposal to determine if something is bullshit is also at theirs.

659

Where we disagree is on your (and other’s) insistence that white taxpayer reluctance is capital-T The Negative–the factor responsible for SGI socioeconomic difficulties. To make such a claim is to read into the Figure what is simply not there.

I doubt very much if the author was referring to every single white taxpayer in America, but as such is necessary to advance your grievance politics, I don’t expect you to concede such as a possibility. No, you are the victim here.

Anecdotes prove nothing. And as I have said before, the plural of anecdote is not ‘data.’

Then I shall explain it for you. You are single-mindedly focusing on a very tenuous interpretation of the Figure that comports with your belief that white people are unfairly maligned–that they (white people) are suffering some sort of PC backlash which is infecting the educational system. Per your comments on this thread, this supposed backlash is the most important takeaway from the Figure. THAT is textbook grievance politics.

The author made an observation. You guys are the ones turning it into a generalization.

So what??!! That means you are acceding the author’s point. I’m glad we agree.

Nope. The author did not (in the text or the Figure) use judgmental words like “blame.”

660

Wot?

Is data not a compilation of things that have actually happened? aka anecdotes?

661

Get into an anecdote pissing contest with someone and you’ll understand.