This is only brainstorming as any such test, exam, or questionnaire would need to be rigorously studied, parameters set, and verified acceptable by the people themselves.How can you design a test that is expected to weed out all but the most advanced and at the same time "the people" can understand it and determine if it is doing the job or if it is biased toward a certain party or certain ideology? I don't think that's possible. You are suggesting creating an institution that is as complex and misunderstood as our current bureaucracy and our current university system. Those are the exact things that people are pissed off about right now. They've felt marginalized, and they kinda have a case for it, now you're saying, let's institutionalize the marginalization of the less educated. Might as well throw in a genetic test while were at it! I will defend my position. THE TEST I AM PROPOSING WOULD BE BASED ON WHAT SOMEBODY REPRESENTING YOU SHOULD KNOW, IT IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT, JUST STUDY, HARD WORK, DEDICATION. The object of such a test is not to "weed out all but the most advanced", you don't have to be the most advanced to learn something you only have to study and work at it. Ethics is an ideology we should be biased toward and if one party is more inclined to understanding their responsibilities and the importance of ethics that is not a bias, it's dedication. I posit that people are only marginalized by "big money" in politics and themselves. The quality of education of colleges is not the problem, the cost of obtaining such an education is. Those that feel as if they are being held down by those possessing a "higher" education need only look in the mirror to find the true obstacle. The education remarks I made earlier, I should have clarified, I meant the compulsory education up to high school that needs reform. I do believe college should be significantly cheaper, if not free, but that is a side note. As of this moment everyone can obtain up to an associate degree entirely free. The government does require all children to attend school through high school, without being too specific. If you are living in poverty up to lower middle class, the federal government will pay you to go to school and house you as well. This may not be a widely known fact, but it is true as long as Trump doesn't cut it. If someone is not educated, they only have themselves to blame, excluding extreme extenuating circumstances. It seems you are unable to visualize any system working, because you don't understand that hard work is how all things worth having are attained. Instant gratification does not apply to repairing a failing democracy. There are immediate actions you could take that would have an instant, measured result(impeaching Trump in my opinion). But we all have to put in the work or we don't have a right to complain. It is the citizens responsibility to defend freedom and democracy, the government is just an instrument of that defense if functioning correctly. Basically, if your tools keep breaking you can't get anything done, its not time to by a new set of the same tools, its time to design new tools that won't break so easily. While I appreciate the criticism; you helped me a lot. I would like to hear yours and others ideas to fix these problems. Solutions not problems.
This is only brainstorming as any such test, exam, or questionnaire would need to be rigorously studied, parameters set, and verified acceptable by the people themselves.How can you design a test that is expected to weed out all but the most advanced and at the same time "the people" can understand it and determine if it is doing the job or if it is biased toward a certain party or certain ideology? I don't think that's possible. You are suggesting creating an institution that is as complex and misunderstood as our current bureaucracy and our current university system. Those are the exact things that people are pissed off about right now. They've felt marginalized, and they kinda have a case for it, now you're saying, let's institutionalize the marginalization of the less educated. Might as well throw in a genetic test while were at it! I will defend my position. THE TEST I AM PROPOSING WOULD BE BASED ON WHAT SOMEBODY REPRESENTING YOU SHOULD KNOW, IT IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT, JUST STUDY, HARD WORK, DEDICATION. The object of such a test is not to "weed out all but the most advanced", you don't have to be the most advanced to learn something you only have to study and work at it. Ethics is an ideology we should be biased toward and if one party is more inclined to understanding their responsibilities and the importance of ethics that is not a bias, it's dedication. I posit that people are only marginalized by "big money" in politics and themselves. The quality of education of colleges is not the problem, the cost of obtaining such an education is. Those that feel as if they are being held down by those possessing a "higher" education need only look in the mirror to find the true obstacle. The education remarks I made earlier, I should have clarified, I meant the compulsory education up to high school that needs reform. I do believe college should be significantly cheaper, if not free, but that is a side note. As of this moment everyone can obtain up to an associate degree entirely free. The government does require all children to attend school through high school, without being too specific. If you are living in poverty up to lower middle class, the federal government will pay you to go to school and house you as well. This may not be a widely known fact, but it is true as long as Trump doesn't cut it. If someone is not educated, they only have themselves to blame, excluding extreme extenuating circumstances. It seems you are unable to visualize any system working, because you don't understand that hard work is how all things worth having are attained. Instant gratification does not apply to repairing a failing democracy. There are immediate actions you could take that would have an instant, measured result(impeaching Trump in my opinion). But we all have to put in the work or we don't have a right to complain. It is the citizens responsibility to defend freedom and democracy, the government is just an instrument of that defense if functioning correctly. Basically, if your tools keep breaking you can't get anything done, its not time to by a new set of the same tools, its time to design new tools that won't break so easily. While I appreciate the criticism; you helped me a lot. I would like to hear yours and others ideas to fix these problems. Solutions not problems. Who's to define "study, hard work and dedication"? Politicians would say they are doing "hard work" others would say most of them have never done an honest day's work in their lives. A lot of people are "dedicated" to destroying democracy. Who's to define "ignorant" and "unconscionable"? You might find those words applied to you.
Those that feel as if they are being held down by those possessing a "higher" education need only look in the mirror to find the true obstacle.I wish you would have told me in the first place that you blame the victims and think people who don't have bootstraps can somehow pull themselves up by those non-existent bootstraps. Your ideas will work just fine in a non-existent world of equal opportunity and merit based advancement. Let's work on making that a reality first, then we can have a test for politicians.
I do not blame victims, I only think we should look inward when things are hard or we fail. I am a Democrat, which I interpolate you are aswell. Infighting is the reason we are not respected.
Lois, I read your comment a few times, but struggle to understand. What does this comment contribute to the discussion? Lausten, at least made reasonable criticisms, but you pose a philosophical question that I think already has a satisfactory answer. I mentioned those three things because with them nothing is out of reach. The test does not exclude anyone, only their lack of willingness can exclude them. This is not a “bootstraps” argument, I am a Democrat and believe in helping those less fortunate, but when those unfortunate circumstances aren’t present, we must look inward when we fail, adjust and try again.
For some reason the forum lost my original response, which I preferred to this one. But for time constraints, I just want to say to Lois last comment, I know you are, but what am I. Because that’s what I understood it to mean.
Lois, I read your comment a few times, but struggle to understand. What does this comment contribute to the discussion? Lausten, at least made reasonable criticisms, but you pose a philosophical question that I think already has a satisfactory answer. I mentioned those three things because with them nothing is out of reach. The test does not exclude anyone, only their lack of willingness can exclude them. This is not a "bootstraps" argument, I am a Democrat and believe in helping those less fortunate, but when those unfortunate circumstances aren't present, we must look inward when we fail, adjust and try again. For some reason the forum lost my original response, which I preferred to this one. But for time constraints, I just want to say to Lois last comment, I know you are, but what am I. Because that's what I understood it to mean.Very mature response!
I do not blame victims, I only think we should look inward when things are hard or we fail. I am a Democrat, which I interpolate you are aswell. Infighting is the reason we are not respected.Your "look in the mirror" comment betrays you. How else should I contribute that? Look inward for what? For a solution to how to distribute the wealth that has accumulated into the hands of a few? For what to do about people who have never worked a day in their life but have millions in inherited dollars? "Inward" things are character, innate abilities and drive, are you saying if you're poor it's evidence that you don't have those things? If not, what are you saying?
Very simply… Be accountable.
But I guess I should surrender to your unconquerable pessimism.
" “Inward" things are character, innate abilities and drive, are you saying if you’re poor it’s evidence that you don’t have those things? If not, what are you saying?" This is clearly not what I meant, I apologize if this was misconstrued. Aren’t those the exact traits and qualities you should look to first when you fail, or should you only find someone to blame? I am trying to be clear without being insensitive. I cites extenuating circumstances earlier as a clear reason one would not be able to succeed. I didn’t get specific because these reasons are innumerable and it’s not my place to judge their merit. But those of us beyond these circumstances must be accountable; admit that desiring something does not make it so or mean we already earned ir, you have to work for it, you have to fail, then get up and keep working for it. And likely fail again, but if you keep getting back up, you will eventually get there.
The money in the hands you referred to, it doesn’t exist. The banks have already pushed the value of a dollar to the zero mark. They borrowed on our deposits until the value was fractions of a cent on the dollar. There seems to be only two outcomes; catastrophic collapse or the continuation of the imaginary currency. If any problem mentioned were out of reach, this would be it. Economic equality is a pipe dream; opportunity equality may be a bit more realistic.
I was hoping for a little optimism and I didn’t start this thread to argue and fight. It is very disconcerting, the climate here isn’t very hospitable.
This is only brainstorming as any such test, exam, or questionnaire would need to be rigorously studied, parameters set, and verified acceptable by the people themselves. The I.Q. test has a very limited functional benefit, although it would provide a small amount of useful data. An above average I.Q. doesn't guarantee success, in reality scores of people (politicians included) with average I.Q. are driven, focused, productive and successful. So let's get the "gimmes" out of the way. It would have to include civics, economics, American history, psychological profile(sketchy, but since Trump necessary), and probably ethics of some sort. I am inclined to include a basic understanding of law, but at the moment can't rationalize how it could fit in, as it is a very comprehensive subject. This test wouldn't have to be incredibly advanced material, but it would represent a concerted effort of the people to raise our standards. I promise if we raise our standards we will elevate our results. But, yes, if I had my way it would be a very comprehensive and difficult exam. It's probably better that I don't, because that is where society would misconstrue their failing for "The Man" holding them down(Not that that doesn't happen).Agree on civics and American history. I'm not sure if those are even taught in public school anymore. Ethics, economics and psych profile are trash imo.
Our society is on the brink of destruction and the majority of society can't be bothered to pay attention for more than a moment. Whether legitimately elected or not, our country is under the thumb of an plutomaniac with an ego complex and the self control of an adolescent. The mere fact that he could be a candidate is an indictment of the system; basically this convoluted, faux democracy is broken beyond repair. It must be disassembled, analyzed, and rebuilt. If we can not handle the prospect of completely dismantling the system, then we can at least take the baby steps toward progress. More accurately concurrent small steps that must be taken. First and foremost, the repeal or reform of Citizens United, with many stipulations added which I will touch on later. Second, articles of impeachment need to be set forth immediately; traditionally there are numerous offenses to the people, the constitution, including general moral turpitude. If any members of Congress try to inhibit this, they should be removed from office aswell. While I know that is a stretch, at some point we must accept desperate times call for desperate measures. All future candidates must pass a mental examination aswell as general and specific knowledge exam based on the office they choose. We cannot allow below average intelligence to navigate the direction of our society any longer. Basically, a marriage of democracy and meritocracy. An institution, not a commission, should be built which will be unbiased, non partisan, scientific fact checkers. At this point, the truth is the hardest thing to discern, we need this. Like politico, but with fail safes and checks and balances to guarantee honesty and accuracy. All debate and campaigning should be done on public broadcasting, without advertising or corporate influence. These corporate entities will fight and claw to stay in the political arena, we must not tolerate this. While a candidate may maintain a website and info center; attack/dirty politics should not be tolerated and disqualify a candidate. The discussion should be that of the serious issues that the people face in their own personal and financial life, not the opinions of others of how everyone should live their life. Abortion is not an issue, healthcare is an issue. The most important change is reforming the educational system. This can not wait. We must raise our standards and expectations of students and teachers alike. Provide resources and training to promote independent thought and creative reason. To teach actual understanding, instead of surface knowledge. And finally eradicate standardized testing, to follow suit with the multitude of countries that have found success without it. I understand that many issues and concerns are left out of this general summary. Such as the Paris accord, economic concerns, and many other important points. And I have noticed on this forum, though lots of members, there are a disproportionate amount of replies. But I hope that some of you can fill in the blank spaces and edit the oversights. Questions or criticisms welcomed, I just wanted to put the idea out there for discussion.The first thing we have to do is get rid of Trump, his family, his cabinet and his thick-headed followers. Without that we're sunk. LoisNot gonna happen. What makes you think so?No legal way to do it, and a revolution would be doomed to failure. There is a legal way to do it. It's called impeachment and removal from office. I agree that's a very.long shot, though. Spam line, spam lime, spam lime.
The current administration has put all its weight behind unconscionable corporations. The populace doesn’t have a chance. We live in a corporatocracy. And that will remain as long as the right wing clings to power.
The current administration has put all its weight behind unconscionable corporations. The populace doesn't have a chance. We live in a corporatocracy. And that will remain as long as the right wing clings to power.Which corporations are you talking about?
Koch industries, flint hills resources, Exxon Mobil, Energy transfer partners, the cartel of banks providing loans for Dakota access pipeline including Citibank, wells Fargo, ing, and half a dozen foreign banks aswell.