We're under the illusion

[Paddy]

that we're in charge.  That we live in a representative republic where we elect our government to do our will.  I, for one, am skeptical.  Forget state and federal government, can we even control our local (city,town) governments?  How much frustrating crap is happening in your local community over which you and your fellow citizens are completely powerless?

Like they won't fix the local streets which are full of potholes.  They keep raising water, sewer and trash pickup rates without good cause.  City councils want to increase local sales taxes.  Parents can't even control the local school districts (where the 'superintendents' are paid $100,000+/yr but there's not enough money to continue music education, sports, etc.)

Have we lost all control?

[Manedwolf]

Pork and lobbyists.

Money goes into general fund, money gets sucked out for pet projects to try for votes in a home district.

And if you try to talk to a representative, it's:

Citizen: "Sir, I really need to talk to you, sir..."

Politician: "Not now, I'm sorry, I'm busy..."

versus

Lobbyist: "Here's a large check for your campaign."

Politician: "Sir! Step into my office, or come up to the lake house this weekend. Why..."

[wooderson]

How much should superintendents earn? If he only earns the wage of a teacher (~$42k nationally) - what reason is there for him to take on the added responsibility and work?

We're not talking a CEO situation, where 'the boss' earning hundreds of times as much as 'the worker' - we're talking 3x-5x the salary of the teacher. In any district of reasonable size, the super's salary is a drop in the bucket. Even the absurd salaries paid to some high school football coaches here in Texas are largely irrelevant to budgetary concerns.

[Paddy]

Didn't mean to gore any oxes there, woody, really.  It's just that I've dealt with at least one super in the past and it seems to me their purpose is merely political.  I fail to see how they add any value at all to the (failing) K-12 educational system.

[The Rabbi]

Riley, you live in California.  That explains a lot.

[jnojr]

Didn't mean to gore any oxes there, woody, really.  It's just that I've dealt with at least one super in the past and it seems to me their purpose is merely political.  I fail to see how they add any value at all to the (failing) K-12 educational system.

+1

And the question goes far beyond what a principal or superintendant makes.  Why do we need "Boards of Education" in huge, shiny buildings that cost tens of millions of dollars filled with hundreds or thousands of bureaucrats?

Why can't schools be administered strictly on a local level?  Why can't rural schools emphasize "hard skills" and conservative values without interference from the "Big City", demanding that sex ed and tolerance for "alternative lifestyles" must take the place of PE, welding, etc?

Government has reached a critical mass.  It's of such size and scope now that it cannot do anything but grow, stagnate, consume ever-increasing amounts of resources while producing nothing, and constantly pass more and more restrictions on liberty.  Will we act before it's too late, before that government "takes steps" to ensure its' own survival at our expense?

[Standing Wolf]

Have we lost all control?

Nope. We abandoned it.

[wooderson]

Not goring any oxes - I'm not involved in public education in the least and plan on having zero kids. It's just that when we pick targets for our ire, we often pick the most visible individuals, but they aren't necessarily the problem (whether that involves their salary or whatever).

Why have a superintendent? Because a city of 100k may have 10 elementary schools, five junior highs and two high schools (those numbers may be off slightly, not sure). He gets charged with administrating all of them, uniformity of approaches and so on.

Why have boards of education? Because they're elected positions in most districts, exercising precisely the kind of 'local control' being talked about (whether they're a force for good or evil is another question).

Why have a bureaucracy? Because someone has to manage maintenance crews and construction oversight and teacher hiring and so on.

[wooderson]

Why can't schools be administered strictly on a local level?  Why can't rural schools emphasize "hard skills" and conservative values without interference from the "Big City", demanding that sex ed and tolerance for "alternative lifestyles" must take the place of PE, welding, etc?

Because we, as a society, generally believe that every child deserves roughly the same educational opportunities as any other child.
In this day and age, whether that be rural or urban (and remember, most Americans are urban), that involves a weak version of 'college prep.' Parents don't want junior written off to vocational school early on (in their opinion - me, I wish I could have taken metal shop in school), they want him to go to college whether or not that's good for him.

Tolerance of 'alternative lifestyles' - I don't even know what that means. Where are kids being force to 'love the gays' or something in defiance of the community feelings/religion?

Sex ed - real sex ed, not that abstinence crap - is good policy.

[roo_ster]

Why can't schools be administered strictly on a local level?  Why can't rural schools emphasize "hard skills" and conservative values without interference from the "Big City", demanding that sex ed and tolerance for "alternative lifestyles" must take the place of PE, welding, etc?

Because we, as a society, generally believe that every child deserves roughly the same educational opportunities as any other child.
In this day and age, whether that be rural or urban (and remember, most Americans are urban), that involves a weak version of 'college prep.' Parents don't want junior written off to vocational school early on (in their opinion - me, I wish I could have taken metal shop in school), they want him to go to college whether or not that's good for him.

Tolerance of 'alternative lifestyles' - I don't even know what that means. Where are kids being force to 'love the gays' or something in defiance of the community feelings/religion?

Sex ed - real sex ed, not that abstinence crap - is good policy.

Thank for proving jnojr's point.

[Ned Hamford]

Tolerance of 'alternative lifestyles' - I don't even know what that means. Where are kids being force to 'love the gays' or something in defiance of the community feelings/religion?

No major defiance of community feelings on it, but I can speak from experiance that in Westchester NY if a flaming (almost cartoon character) homosexual licks you against your will and you forcefully push him away you will face a week's suspension. Happened to my older brother. Person mentioned wasn't singling my brother out btw, he did it to alot of people, my brother was just the first to resist so forcefully that the person was knocked on their ass.  My brother was almost suspended for a month when hearing his sentence he cursed at the administrator and said the licker was lucky he wasn't punched.  Public High School 

[Perd Hapley]

Tinky-winky licked your brother?   

[tyme]

I don't agree with Heinlein's "specialization is for insects" sentiment, but I think the bureaucratic (and corporate) condition unhealthily causes people to be responsible for too small a slice of the big picture.  Even in simple situations where there's no threat of litigation if one makes an unpopular choice, too many people are content to throw up their hands and say, "it's not my job."  This strikes me as one of the major differences between free societies and socialistic/hierarchical societies.

n this day and age, whether that be rural or urban (and remember, most Americans are urban), that involves a weak version of 'college prep.' Parents don't want junior written off to vocational school early on (in their opinion - me, I wish I could have taken metal shop in school), they want him to go to college whether or not that's good for him.

Parents largely take too little responsibility for their part in their children's education.  It doesn't take a good high school to prepare a child for college.  All it takes is a dedicated parent.


"If I grab a woman's ass, and she punches me, she's fighting for her rights.  But if a *Not nice word for gay men* grabs my ass, and I punch his lights out, I'm a homophobe."

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

"It's not so much that power corrupts, as that power attracts the corruptible."  Frank Herbert, speaking via a Bene Gesserit axiom.

Well, by now nearly all of our positions of authority are sought out and occupied exclusively by the corruptible.  These sorts of people can't possibly be good at what they do.  The best we can hope for is that they're so afraid of getting booted out of office that they'll make a passing effort at not being egregiously bad at what they do.

Any aspect of our lives that government runs will be run incompetently.  The only thing we can do is make sure that we, individually, retain as much control over our lives as possible. 

[Perd Hapley]

Thompson Gunner, that is good stuff.  The way I see it, the people who end up with power (like the people who end up getting money) are usually the people that wanted it bad enough to do what it takes to get it.  Hence, the rich and powerful tend to be the ambitious.  This is often a bad thing.  But it is inevitable.

The best we can hope for is that they're so afraid of getting booted out of office that they'll make a passing effort at not being egregiously bad at what they do.

That's an integral part of a representative republic, yes.

[Ned Hamford]

Tinky-winky licked your brother?   

Now that you mention it, its been awhile since I made fun of him over that...
 

[Fjolnirsson]

Riley, you live in California.  That explains a lot.

I think Rabbi meant this at least partially tongue in cheek. But, Riley, you know I used to be a neighbor(of sorts). I lived just a couple cities over from you, and I have to tell you, it's a lot different up North. Folks like to talk about the East coast, and how things in Oregon are the same as CA. It just isn't true. Are there influences, some of them unwelcome, and growing? Sure. But the Bay Area has a cancer, and I used to feel exactly as you do when I lived there.

[Monkeyleg]

Over the years, I've attended more state and local level public committee hearings than I can count.

I've come to realize that, by the time citizens are invited to give their input, the fix is already in. The votes have been decided, the contractor has already bought off the legislators needed, and the hearings are nothing more than theater.

There are exceptions, of course. But it takes a really ticked-off citizenry to alter a course that's been set in stone.

If more citizens paid more attention earlier on in the process, things would be different.

A brief case in point: in a post last year, I railed about how the city was forcing us to accept street and sewer upgrades that citizens didn't want, nor could most afford. But it was the city engineer--an elected official--who ramrodded these changes through.

I just found out that he resigned the city council, and has taken a city engineer job in another state.

Could it be that he knew he'd be booted out of office next April, and so got out of Dodge when the getting was good?

[Tallpine]

The way I see it, the people who end up with power (like the people who end up getting money) are usually the people that wanted it bad enough to do what it takes to get it.  Hence, the rich and powerful tend to be the ambitious.  This is often a bad thing.  But it is inevitable.

Which is why we should choose leaders by lottery

I've come to realize that, by the time citizens are invited to give their input, the fix is already in. The votes have been decided, the contractor has already bought off the legislators needed, and the hearings are nothing more than theater.

Exactly.

I actually heard a city councilman say that to a group of people who were angrily protesting a "proposed" ordinance.  I was so flabbergasted that I didn't know how to respond.  A couple months later we moved out of town.

[Manedwolf]

've come to realize that, by the time citizens are invited to give their input, the fix is already in. The votes have been decided, the contractor has already bought off the legislators needed, and the hearings are nothing more than theater.

That happened in my sister's area of PA, where a truck bypass road through their neighborhood had already "rushed through" before the citizens were even notified, and they'd started surveying before it was even approved.

So the neighbors simply moved all the survey markers anywhere from a few inches to a few feet in different directions every night. 

This delayed it until the state's attorney could be made aware of it, a lawyer could be hired, and the whole thing was stopped as being blatantly against the law.

[Werewolf]

Tolerance of 'alternative lifestyles' - I don't even know what that means. Where are kids being force to 'love the gays' or something in defiance of the community feelings/religion?

Uhhhhh...
Oklahoma.

My grown daughters all went to school from late 80's thru 2000. When in an early elementary grade they all, one after the other came home with a book called "Tommy has two Mommies" or something like that. Required reading.

My niece 10 years their junior came home with the same book a few years back.

Now if that's not indoctrination then what is it?

Oklahoma=Conservative but that doesn't mean that the teacher's union is and it isn't. Complain to the school board and get booed into silence and accused of being an intolerant homophobe.

I'd say we've lost control.

[wooderson]

Now if that's not indoctrination then what is it?

I don't know, what is it? Did it make your daughters gay? Did it force them to buddy up with the local gay kid and be best friends?

Ironically, 'Heather Has Two Mommies' is the 11th-most banned book in the US.

[Werewolf]

Now if that's not indoctrination then what is it?

I don't know, what is it? Did it make your daughters gay? Did it force them to buddy up with the local gay kid and be best friends?

Ironically, 'Heather Has Two Mommies' is the 11th-most banned book in the US.

What it did was teach young children with no other frame of reference that homosexuality is a normal state of human affairs. Whether one agrees or disagrees re: the normality of homosexuality the schools are no place for it to be mainstreamed - at least not in elementary schools and probably not until late high school or even college.

So yes it was indoctrination. And no amount of complaints from parents in the neighborhood got the school to stop sending the book home with our kids - it's still happening 15 years later.

[Pew pew pew]

Now if that's not indoctrination then what is it?

I don't know, what is it? Did it make your daughters gay? Did it force them to buddy up with the local gay kid and be best friends?

Ironically, 'Heather Has Two Mommies' is the 11th-most banned book in the US.

What it did was teach young children with no other frame of reference that homosexuality is a normal state of human affairs. Whether one agrees or disagrees re: the normality of homosexuality the schools are no place for it to be mainstreamed - at least not in elementary schools and probably not until late high school or even college.

So yes it was indoctrination. And no amount of complaints from parents in the neighborhood got the school to stop sending the book home with our kids - it's still happening 15 years later.

It is a normal state of human affairs. That's the reality of the United States. There is no reason people should have to hide who they prefer to have a relationship with. Should we not teach children at all about other religions until their late highschool/college years? Fear and bigotry often come from unfamiliarity. You can still teach your children it is wrong and that it is an immoral, sinful way of life. Children also need to learn, regardless of religion or upbringing, that life is different for people with different beliefs and they had better get used to it.

Why shield them from it forever? Children spend a huge amount of time in schools, and they learn social issues whether or not it's taught in class. Why not address such issues in a positive way?

[Pew pew pew]

I suppose my point shouldn't have been limited to homosexuality. It was more geared towards people who think we should completely avoid teaching any social issues in schools. Schools are about educating out children with useful skills in order to better their lives society as a whole. How can we avoid teaching about some social issues in such an institution?