Imbecile Nation

[kalm]

Hard to disagree. I’ve long contended that our education system is fine if you live in a supportive district with stable households and parental involvement. But this article, while short on solutions, at least gets me rethinking the importance and need for serious reform.

The question is, in light of current politics what can be done? Restored emphasis on teaching critical thinking and civics? Better, more informed participation from parents?

(Side note: reading the about info for the Dispatch has me interested in following them a bit. )

I don’t pretend to know everything that caused the nation to be such ripe pickings for a hustler like Trump. We all know some of the causes: cultural starvation that created a yearning for rabid partisanship as a simulacrum, economic transformation, weak political parties, atomization of media, the ease of employing mob tactics in the digital age, and on and on. In fact, Trump has been a big and messy enough symptom that one can find his origins in almost any longstanding ill he or she wishes. Confirmation bias didn’t just help make Trump possible; it has confused the work of an honest, complete diagnosis.

This is the kind of algebraic thinking that makes it so hard to address serious problems in America. If one already knows the product of the equation is that their opponents are to blame, solving for X is just a matter of looking for a root cause that originates on the other side. Satisfied that it’s somebody else’s fault, the mind closes with a pleasing “snap.”

The truth about complicated matters such as these is seldom satisfying since no side or group can escape completely unscathed. Indeed, the prevalence of this motivated reasoning is in itself evidence of one of the leading causes of Trump’s acquisition of power and the enthusiastic support by millions for his abuses of it........

The evidence comes from across the country. It transcends divisions of politics, economics, education, ethnicity and gender. You’ve got the nephew of a former president all the way down to a post-adolescent YouTube wannabe. What connects them—the same thing that threatens the health of the republic—is rank imbecility.

https://thedispatch.com/p/the-dangers-o ... jGkzQPr8pw

[SeattleGriz]

When Trump first announced he was running, I told my wife he was going to win. My reasoning was that we are a nation of idiots who watch shit shows like The Kardashians.

[GannonFan]

I agree with the premise of the article - we have an incredible number of dumb people in this country. Granted, we've always had an incredible number of dumb people in this country, but perhaps we're at a tipping point and the few smart folks we do have aren't enough to keep us from falling into the precipice?

I'm not sure schools are the answer - we had an incredible number of dumb people even back in the halcyon days when we thought schools were great and we were bringing apples into the teachers for a job well done. To me, I think the difference now, and has been really for the past 20 or so years, is the ability for incredibly dumb people to not only have their voices and their dim ideas amplified for more to hear, but for them to find other incredibly dumb people to glam on to and feel justified that their dumb ideas have merit. Ever since newspapers went digital and there was an easy section for comments after every story, the incredibly dumb folks have had an avenue they didn't really have before to shout to the rooftops. And now we have message boards and Twitter and Facebook and other social media so there's even more ways for incredibly dumb folks to be heard and to have an audience. I'm not sure what the answer will be for this, it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle. The Dems will try with their truth commissions and reality police, but going full on fascist/Maoist/whatever-you-want-to-call-it-authoritarianism isn't going to make these people any more intelligent and the internet isn't going away anytime soon.

[Pwns]

I agree with the premise of the article - we have an incredible number of dumb people in this country. Granted, we've always had an incredible number of dumb people in this country, but perhaps we're at a tipping point and the few smart folks we do have aren't enough to keep us from falling into the precipice?

I'm not sure schools are the answer - we had an incredible number of dumb people even back in the halcyon days when we thought schools were great and we were bringing apples into the teachers for a job well done. To me, I think the difference now, and has been really for the past 20 or so years, is the ability for incredibly dumb people to not only have their voices and their dim ideas amplified for more to hear, but for them to find other incredibly dumb people to glam on to and feel justified that their dumb ideas have merit. Ever since newspapers went digital and there was an easy section for comments after every story, the incredibly dumb folks have had an avenue they didn't really have before to shout to the rooftops. And now we have message boards and Twitter and Facebook and other social media so there's even more ways for incredibly dumb folks to be heard and to have an audience. I'm not sure what the answer will be for this, it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle. The Dems will try with their truth commissions and reality police, but going full on fascist/Maoist/whatever-you-want-to-call-it-authoritarianism isn't going to make these people any more intelligent and the internet isn't going away anytime soon.

The lack of objectivity by the MSM is a big problem that causes a lot of this. A lot of outlets that promote misconstrued facts or conspiracies will tell you "the MSM won't report this" and they can say that credibly because most of the MSM sucks and has a left bias. And I'm not saying there aren't right-biased sources but the vast majority aren't what you'd call "mainstream" media other than Fox News.


One more thing...I'd argue the stupidest people of the 2016 election cycle are those who voted to nominate Hillary Clinton because or her last name of because they thought we "needed" a women president. I mean, a lot of people that think Trump is genuinely some kind of executive genius aren't really sharp but the people that decided to put him against the Hildabeast take the cake.

[89Hen]

Hard to disagree. I’ve long contended that our education system is fine if you live in a supportive district with stable households and parental involvement. But this article, while short on solutions, at least gets me rethinking the importance and need for serious reform.

The question is, in light of current politics what can be done? Restored emphasis on teaching critical thinking and civics? Better, more informed participation from parents?

People don't give a shit about other people. Even the SJW types really don't. They're just pretending to care about what is important to them or what they think should be important to others. Changing their filter on FB to a rainbow or BLM... wow, that's really caring. We're also practically like the lemmings in Wall-E already, attached to our devices. It's disgusting.

I hate to say, but it could be a cataclysmic event is the only path to a solution. Without WW2 where would this country be today? Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.

[∞∞∞]

Oh the irony of thinking a violent event is the only solution to people not caring about others. So caring.

Anyways people really overthink this stuff. Invest into education, pay people fairly, have strong social safety nets, build accessible housing...just make it so regular people aren't worried if they can pay for food, see the doctor, or retire.

When you create a dog-eat-dog society, you can't be surprised when the dogs eat each other.

[canyoncat]

A subject high school kids need around Junior or Senior year is finance. I work for a mid-size credit union here in Montana and it is crazy to see how people don't know what goes into their credit score, how credit cards affect your score good and bad, student loan debt and how much some people have piled up and having them either deferred or just not paying them. Those who need student loans for school really need counseling on what they are getting into. What to look for when financing a vehicle, do you really need that service contract, oil plan or GAP. What is your trade really worth and how much do you owe on that trade so you are not horribly upside down and trying to finance in the difference.

[kalm]

A subject high school kids need around Junior or Senior year is finance. I work for a mid-size credit union here in Montana and it is crazy to see how people don't know what goes into their credit score, how credit cards affect your score good and bad, student loan debt and how much some people have piled up and having them either deferred or just not paying them. Those who need student loans for school really need counseling on what they are getting into. What to look for when financing a vehicle, do you really need that service contract, oil plan or GAP. What is your trade really worth and how much do you owe on that trade so you are not horribly upside down and trying to finance in the difference.

Agree with these last two ^^ posts but I think Trip also brings the importance of perhaps teaching ethics.

[UNI88]

Oh the irony of thinking a violent event is the only solution to people not caring about others. So caring.

Are you talking about the Capitol riots or the BLM/AnTiFa riots? Your statement accurately applies to both.

Anyways people really overthink this stuff. Invest into education, pay people fairly, have strong social safety nets, build accessible housing...just make it so regular people aren't worried if they can pay for food, see the doctor, or retire.

Yes, we should invest in education. The big question is how? The author's example of the DC teachers' union highlights a real problem in education. The failures of ESSA and NCLB are warnings against greater federal government involvement in education.

How do you pay people fairly? As AOChe has pointed out there is a difference in what is needed in Queens vs. West Virginia. What a 17 y/o high school student should be making at McDonalds is different than what a parent of 2 kids needs to make. Are all jobs worth paying a living wage to the employer?

I'm all for strong social safety nets as long as they're temporary and focused on getting people on their feet (job training, child care).

Accessible housing is an interesting problem that Portland and Oregon are really struggling with. Portland has urban growth boundaries to prevent sprawl and protect the environment but that goal along with excessive permitting costs conflicts with building more affordable housing. Both goals are worthwhile. Politicians need to acknowledge that conflict so they can deal with it effectively.

Trip, you and I both want the same things. The best approach isn't to sideline me or people who think like me because we disagree but to work together on solutions. The right and left's unwillingness to respect each other and compromise is a much, much bigger problem for this country than Trump.

[∞∞∞]

Yes, all jobs are worth paying a living wage; everyone should be able to live on 40 hours a week. It used to be that poverty was an issue of being unemployed, not that you weren't paid enough. If an employer can't pay a living wage, they shouldn't be in business (I think it was FDR which said something similar). When the minimum wage was created, it was intended from the onset to be a livable wage.

I can agree to a variable minimum wage adjusted for location though.

And housing needs to be built upwards, at least in urban areas. I live in NoVA and we're gonna become the next San Fran or Seattle because apparently people expect land in a densely populated area. Want to live in an urban area? You have to deal with density, housing included.

I'm not informed enough to tackle the education question...smarter people can figure it out. All I know is studies have shown that education, dollar-for-dollar, typically has the best ROI for a society: stability, efficiency, technologically, medically, socially, economically (all intertwined).

[UNI88]

Yes, all jobs are worth paying a living wage; everyone should be able to live on 40 hours a week. It used to be that poverty was an issue of being unemployed, not that you weren't paid enough. If an employer can't pay a living wage, they shouldn't be in business (I think it was FDR which said something similar). When the minimum wage was created, it was intended from the onset to be a livable wage.

I can agree to a variable minimum wage adjusted for location though.

And housing needs to be built upwards, at least in urban areas. I live in NoVA and we're gonna become the next San Fran or Seattle because apparently people expect land in a densely populated area. Want to live in an urban area? You have to deal with density, housing included.

I'm not informed enough to tackle the education question...smarter people can figure it out. All I know is studies have shown that education, dollar-for-dollar, typically has the best ROI for a society: stability, efficiency, technologically, medically, socially, economically (all intertwined).

We disagree on paying everyone a living wage. I don't think a high schooler necessarily needs a living wage and I'm not sure that someone mopping the floors should be paid enough to make enough to support a family of four in Queens. I also think that employers that don't want to pay a living wage will automate some functions to avoid the higher costs of labor.

I agree that we should be building up in urban areas but that requires a change in expectations. Parents tend to dream of raising their kids in a house with a yard. They'll need to adapt to raising their kids in a highrise that is hopefully near a park.

I'm with you on education, I just don't trust the federal government to make it better. Education should be considered infrastructure to be invested in. It's a critical element of the USA being the land of opportunity. Give the states funding and more freedom to find what is best for them. I would rather have 50 states as laboratories working on improving education than a bunch of ivory tower academics coming up with a theoretical approach they think will work for everyone.

[GannonFan]

Yes, all jobs are worth paying a living wage; everyone should be able to live on 40 hours a week. It used to be that poverty was an issue of being unemployed, not that you weren't paid enough. If an employer can't pay a living wage, they shouldn't be in business (I think it was FDR which said something similar). When the minimum wage was created, it was intended from the onset to be a livable wage.

I can agree to a variable minimum wage adjusted for location though.

And housing needs to be built upwards, at least in urban areas. I live in NoVA and we're gonna become the next San Fran or Seattle because apparently people expect land in a densely populated area. Want to live in an urban area? You have to deal with density, housing included.

I'm not informed enough to tackle the education question...smarter people can figure it out. All I know is studies have shown that education, dollar-for-dollar, typically has the best ROI for a society: stability, efficiency, technologically, medically, socially, economically (all intertwined).

We disagree on paying everyone a living wage. I don't think a high schooler necessarily needs a living wage and I'm not sure that someone mopping the floors should be paid enough to make enough to support a family of four in Queens. I also think that employers that don't want to pay a living wage will automate some functions to avoid the higher costs of labor.

I agree that we should be building up in urban areas but that requires a change in expectations. Parents tend to dream of raising their kids in a house with a yard. They'll need to adapt to raising their kids in a highrise that is hopefully near a park.

I'm with you on education, I just don't trust the federal government to make it better. Education should be considered infrastructure to be invested in. It's a critical element of the USA being the land of opportunity. Give the states funding and more freedom to find what is best for them. I would rather have 50 states as laboratories working on improving education than a bunch of ivory tower academics coming up with a theoretical approach they think will work for everyone.

The living wage thing is far more complicated than what Trip is laying out. What does "living" mean anyway? What's included in that? Decent house? What kind of house? How big? Where's it located? Include 3 meals a day? What kind of meals? Only food you can make at home? What about takeout food or a restaurant, and if you do include going out for food, how often is the right amount? What about other things? How about a car or Uber service? Can you even take Uber while on a "living" wage? How about a cell phone for everyone? What brand and how current the version? Unlimited data? How about streaming services? Is Netflix included? How about vacations? Is it "living" to be able to afford a week down the beach or in the mountains? Renting a house or staying in hotels? What other kind of entertainment? How many movies in theaters or live music shows is included in "living" per year? Starts to get really complicated when you need to come up with a dollar amount of what constitutes "living". Especially when someone with more means can have more "living" than you do.

And UNI's right, you start raising the cost of labor, and it's not brain surgery to predict that people will reduce labor when the costs go up. Go into a McDonald's these days, one of the refurbished ones, and tell me what you see. Where you used to have multiple people at the counter ready to take an order, now you have kiosks that you walk up to, touchscreen in your order, and you wait until it shows up on the counter. You don't need to talk to anyone, which is great because there's so many less people working there than before. Sure, the ones left are probably making a little more money, but they're doing so at the expense of the elimination of several other positions. I work in manufacturing. We still manufacture a crap load of stuff in this country. Thing is, we do so by designing out the people - do everything with the fewest number of people possible, automate wherever you can.

And the housing thing is a tough one too. Again, if you have the means, you can always have more. You can have the big house, the big yard, the fancy lawn equipment, etc. So the poor guy on the "living" wage is going to wonder how come he can't live like that too.

I've always said, I'm fine with increasing the minimum wage. But we need to be realistic what that means and how long it lasts. Increase minimum wage and it absolutely means less employment in exchange for better buying power for those that get to keep their jobs, but it also leads to inflationary pressures that, in the long run, negate the increased buying power those folks had in the short term. It's a feel good measure that doesn't do a whole lot, but it does displace some lower rung workers in the meantime.

[∞∞∞]

I mean this in the best possible way, but the line about a high schooler not needing a livable wage comes from a position of privilege. A teenager making a livable wage can mean a big quality-of-life difference for low-income and lower-middle class families.

Automation will always be around, nothing new. Jobs go away, new ones created, society adjusts and moves on. That's why providing universal education and job-training programs are important in a society. People will always lose jobs to societal progress and economic changes, but we don't want people out of the workforce long; I'd rather taxpayers invest $40K upfront if that person contributes $100K throughout their life.

edit: also want to add that freedom and economic equality go hand in hand. The rich have more freedom than poor people, and "freedom" means nothing if you're unable to pursue your options for fear of starvation, becoming homeless, or having no healthcare. When "freedom" means nothing anymore, then you begin to see breakdowns in democracy and empathy.

[89Hen]

Oh the irony of thinking a violent event is the only solution to people not caring about others. So caring.

Anyways people really overthink this stuff. Invest into education, pay people fairly, have strong social safety nets, build accessible housing...just make it so regular people aren't worried if they can pay for food, see the doctor, or retire.

When you create a dog-eat-dog society, you can't be surprised when the dogs eat each other.

You're so cute.

[89Hen]

And housing needs to be built upwards, at least in urban areas. I live in NoVA and we're gonna become the next San Fran or Seattle because apparently people expect land in a densely populated area. Want to live in an urban area? You have to deal with density, housing included.

You should move to my side of the river. MoCo only wants high-rise, multi-family housing being built. They're giving the middle finger to all the suburbanites that pay way more taxes than the apartment dwellers. There are good things about having a lot of different housing options, but high-rise affordable living does little to help with all the other things we're talking about.

[UNI88]

Hard to disagree. I’ve long contended that our education system is fine if you live in a supportive district with stable households and parental involvement. But this article, while short on solutions, at least gets me rethinking the importance and need for serious reform.

The question is, in light of current politics what can be done? Restored emphasis on teaching critical thinking and civics? Better, more informed participation from parents?

(Side note: reading the about info for the Dispatch has me interested in following them a bit. )

I don’t pretend to know everything that caused the nation to be such ripe pickings for a hustler like Trump. We all know some of the causes: cultural starvation that created a yearning for rabid partisanship as a simulacrum, economic transformation, weak political parties, atomization of media, the ease of employing mob tactics in the digital age, and on and on. In fact, Trump has been a big and messy enough symptom that one can find his origins in almost any longstanding ill he or she wishes. Confirmation bias didn’t just help make Trump possible; it has confused the work of an honest, complete diagnosis.

This is the kind of algebraic thinking that makes it so hard to address serious problems in America. If one already knows the product of the equation is that their opponents are to blame, solving for X is just a matter of looking for a root cause that originates on the other side. Satisfied that it’s somebody else’s fault, the mind closes with a pleasing “snap.”

The truth about complicated matters such as these is seldom satisfying since no side or group can escape completely unscathed. Indeed, the prevalence of this motivated reasoning is in itself evidence of one of the leading causes of Trump’s acquisition of power and the enthusiastic support by millions for his abuses of it........

The evidence comes from across the country. It transcends divisions of politics, economics, education, ethnicity and gender. You’ve got the nephew of a former president all the way down to a post-adolescent YouTube wannabe. What connects them—the same thing that threatens the health of the republic—is rank imbecility.

https://thedispatch.com/p/the-dangers-o ... jGkzQPr8pw

We need to expand how we define idiot so that we include in the pool all of the marks that think socialism will work this time. They're being hustled too.

[SeattleGriz]

We're also practically like the lemmings in Wall-E already, attached to our devices. It's disgusting.

I refer to Amazon as Buy N Large.

[AZGrizFan]

Hard to disagree. I’ve long contended that our education system is fine if you live in a supportive district with stable households and parental involvement. But this article, while short on solutions, at least gets me rethinking the importance and need for serious reform.

The question is, in light of current politics what can be done? Restored emphasis on teaching critical thinking and civics? Better, more informed participation from parents?

(Side note: reading the about info for the Dispatch has me interested in following them a bit. )

I don’t pretend to know everything that caused the nation to be such ripe pickings for a hustler like Trump. We all know some of the causes: cultural starvation that created a yearning for rabid partisanship as a simulacrum, economic transformation, weak political parties, atomization of media, the ease of employing mob tactics in the digital age, and on and on. In fact, Trump has been a big and messy enough symptom that one can find his origins in almost any longstanding ill he or she wishes. Confirmation bias didn’t just help make Trump possible; it has confused the work of an honest, complete diagnosis.

This is the kind of algebraic thinking that makes it so hard to address serious problems in America. If one already knows the product of the equation is that their opponents are to blame, solving for X is just a matter of looking for a root cause that originates on the other side. Satisfied that it’s somebody else’s fault, the mind closes with a pleasing “snap.”

The truth about complicated matters such as these is seldom satisfying since no side or group can escape completely unscathed. Indeed, the prevalence of this motivated reasoning is in itself evidence of one of the leading causes of Trump’s acquisition of power and the enthusiastic support by millions for his abuses of it........

The evidence comes from across the country. It transcends divisions of politics, economics, education, ethnicity and gender. You’ve got the nephew of a former president all the way down to a post-adolescent YouTube wannabe. What connects them—the same thing that threatens the health of the republic—is rank imbecility.

https://thedispatch.com/p/the-dangers-o ... jGkzQPr8pw

I think where he misses the boat is that Trump was far from the first hustler to come along and be elected.

[SDHornet]

Yes, all jobs are worth paying a living wage; everyone should be able to live on 40 hours a week. It used to be that poverty was an issue of being unemployed, not that you weren't paid enough. If an employer can't pay a living wage, they shouldn't be in business (I think it was FDR which said something similar). When the minimum wage was created, it was intended from the onset to be a livable wage.

I can agree to a variable minimum wage adjusted for location though.

And housing needs to be built upwards, at least in urban areas. I live in NoVA and we're gonna become the next San Fran or Seattle because apparently people expect land in a densely populated area. Want to live in an urban area? You have to deal with density, housing included.

I'm not informed enough to tackle the education question...smarter people can figure it out. All I know is studies have shown that education, dollar-for-dollar, typically has the best ROI for a society: stability, efficiency, technologically, medically, socially, economically (all intertwined).

We disagree on paying everyone a living wage. I don't think a high schooler necessarily needs a living wage and I'm not sure that someone mopping the floors should be paid enough to make enough to support a family of four in Queens. I also think that employers that don't want to pay a living wage will automate some functions to avoid the higher costs of labor.

I agree that we should be building up in urban areas but that requires a change in expectations. Parents tend to dream of raising their kids in a house with a yard. They'll need to adapt to raising their kids in a highrise that is hopefully near a park.

I'm with you on education, I just don't trust the federal government to make it better. Education should be considered infrastructure to be invested in. It's a critical element of the USA being the land of opportunity. Give the states funding and more freedom to find what is best for them. I would rather have 50 states as laboratories working on improving education than a bunch of ivory tower academics coming up with a theoretical approach they think will work for everyone.

The good thing about the China Virus is that it pretty much kneecapped a lot of nostalgia for dense urban living. Another good thing from the CV is that it showed you don't have to live in one of these dense areas to work a well paying high end job. I'm not saying dense urban living will disappear, but their appeal and demand will certainly decrease in certain areas.

[AZGrizFan]

We disagree on paying everyone a living wage. I don't think a high schooler necessarily needs a living wage and I'm not sure that someone mopping the floors should be paid enough to make enough to support a family of four in Queens. I also think that employers that don't want to pay a living wage will automate some functions to avoid the higher costs of labor.

I agree that we should be building up in urban areas but that requires a change in expectations. Parents tend to dream of raising their kids in a house with a yard. They'll need to adapt to raising their kids in a highrise that is hopefully near a park.

I'm with you on education, I just don't trust the federal government to make it better. Education should be considered infrastructure to be invested in. It's a critical element of the USA being the land of opportunity. Give the states funding and more freedom to find what is best for them. I would rather have 50 states as laboratories working on improving education than a bunch of ivory tower academics coming up with a theoretical approach they think will work for everyone.

The living wage thing is far more complicated than what Trip is laying out. What does "living" mean anyway? What's included in that? Decent house? What kind of house? How big? Where's it located? Include 3 meals a day? What kind of meals? Only food you can make at home? What about takeout food or a restaurant, and if you do include going out for food, how often is the right amount? What about other things? How about a car or Uber service? Can you even take Uber while on a "living" wage? How about a cell phone for everyone? What brand and how current the version? Unlimited data? How about streaming services? Is Netflix included? How about vacations? Is it "living" to be able to afford a week down the beach or in the mountains? Renting a house or staying in hotels? What other kind of entertainment? How many movies in theaters or live music shows is included in "living" per year? Starts to get really complicated when you need to come up with a dollar amount of what constitutes "living". Especially when someone with more means can have more "living" than you do.

And UNI's right, you start raising the cost of labor, and it's not brain surgery to predict that people will reduce labor when the costs go up. Go into a McDonald's these days, one of the refurbished ones, and tell me what you see. Where you used to have multiple people at the counter ready to take an order, now you have kiosks that you walk up to, touchscreen in your order, and you wait until it shows up on the counter. You don't need to talk to anyone, which is great because there's so many less people working there than before. Sure, the ones left are probably making a little more money, but they're doing so at the expense of the elimination of several other positions. I work in manufacturing. We still manufacture a crap load of stuff in this country. Thing is, we do so by designing out the people - do everything with the fewest number of people possible, automate wherever you can.

And the housing thing is a tough one too. Again, if you have the means, you can always have more. You can have the big house, the big yard, the fancy lawn equipment, etc. So the poor guy on the "living" wage is going to wonder how come he can't live like that too.

I've always said, I'm fine with increasing the minimum wage. But we need to be realistic what that means and how long it lasts. Increase minimum wage and it absolutely means less employment in exchange for better buying power for those that get to keep their jobs, but it also leads to inflationary pressures that, in the long run, negate the increased buying power those folks had in the short term. It's a feel good measure that doesn't do a whole lot, but it does displace some lower rung workers in the meantime.

Details, schmetails. Much like the Green New Deal, the devil is ALWAYS in the details....

[kalm]

Hard to disagree. I’ve long contended that our education system is fine if you live in a supportive district with stable households and parental involvement. But this article, while short on solutions, at least gets me rethinking the importance and need for serious reform.

The question is, in light of current politics what can be done? Restored emphasis on teaching critical thinking and civics? Better, more informed participation from parents?

(Side note: reading the about info for the Dispatch has me interested in following them a bit. )



https://thedispatch.com/p/the-dangers-o ... jGkzQPr8pw

We need to expand how we define idiot so that we include in the pool all of the marks that think socialism will work this time. They're being hustled too.

Kind of like those who believe pure capitalism doesn't lead to the same end? Didn't see much talk of socialism in the article when I read it but hey...

Boo!!!

[kalm]

Hard to disagree. I’ve long contended that our education system is fine if you live in a supportive district with stable households and parental involvement. But this article, while short on solutions, at least gets me rethinking the importance and need for serious reform.

The question is, in light of current politics what can be done? Restored emphasis on teaching critical thinking and civics? Better, more informed participation from parents?

(Side note: reading the about info for the Dispatch has me interested in following them a bit. )



https://thedispatch.com/p/the-dangers-o ... jGkzQPr8pw

I think where he misses the boat is that Trump was far from the first hustler to come along and be elected.

He literally devotes a paragraph to that.

[UNI88]

We need to expand how we define idiot so that we include in the pool all of the marks that think socialism will work this time. They're being hustled too.

Kind of like those who believe pure capitalism doesn't lead to the same end? Didn't see much talk of socialism in the article when I read it but hey...

He didn't talk about socialism because his objective is to portray conservatives as imbeciles who fell for a hustler. He might not even be aware enough to realize that people who voted for Hillary were just as gullible in falling for a hustler. That imbeciles aren't limited to the right-wing, they're on both sides of the aisle falling for the hustles of disruptors and extremists.

Arguing that conservatives are imbeciles (or evil) is beyond arrogant

[kalm]

Kind of like those who believe pure capitalism doesn't lead to the same end? Didn't see much talk of socialism in the article when I read it but hey...

He didn't talk about socialism because his objective is to portray conservatives as imbeciles who fell for a hustler. He might not even be aware enough to realize that people who voted for Hillary were just as gullible in falling for a hustler. That imbeciles aren't limited to the right-wing, they're on both sides of the aisle falling for the hustles of disruptors and extremists.

Arguing that conservatives are imbeciles (or evil) is beyond arrogant

1) Did you read the article? His examples explicitly list examples of both sides acting like imbeciles (DC teachers unions, RFK junior)

2) The Dispatch is self described as conservative on their about page.

[UNI88]

He didn't talk about socialism because his objective is to portray conservatives as imbeciles who fell for a hustler. He might not even be aware enough to realize that people who voted for Hillary were just as gullible in falling for a hustler. That imbeciles aren't limited to the right-wing, they're on both sides of the aisle falling for the hustles of disruptors and extremists.

Arguing that conservatives are imbeciles (or evil) is beyond arrogant

1) Did you read the article? His examples explicitly list examples of both sides acting like imbeciles (DC teachers unions, RFK junior)

2) The Dispatch is self described as conservative on their about page.

Calling 74 million Trump voters imbeciles is a little bigger than calling so many thousands of members of the DC Teacher's union imbeciles. IMO the left is in the early stages of throwing unions under the bus - police unions were first, I would have guessed that construction unions would be next but maybe it's the teacher's unions.

And JFK Jr's perspective on Aaron's death seemed a little more in line with a Trump supporter's perspective.

I self-describe as a progressive.