- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
I personally think mobile phones, especially smartphones, are a bad idea, but it is not my business to tell other people whether they may or may not use them.
Moreover, how people communicate with each other, like what we say, is none of the government's business.
Being a bad idea is not a justification for having a law against it. It is up to individuals to exercise judgment, and decide for themselves.
Having said that, in a cooperative environment like a classroom, everybody should focus on the task at hand, use good manners, take the needs of the group into account, and exercise self-control.
The nitty gritty of what we are really talking about when we call water wet is the set of the effects of one end of the molecule having a charge of +2 (split between two hydrogen "tips," each having a charge of +1 each)
and the other end having a charge of -2.
These hydrogen bonds are weak, which enables the them to attach and break nearly constantly (between 0 degrees and 100 degrees Celsius.) This is what gives water its fluidity.
The polar nature of the water molecule causes it to adhere to other molecules. Attachment to other types of molecules is adhesion and causes water make other things wet.
Attachment to other water molecules is cohesion and causes water to stick together, create surface tension (bead up), and make itself wet.
My experience is that conservatives are extraordinarily compassionate.
Taking from some, to give to others sounds like compassion, but it is not. Compassion is when people give only their own, not someone else's. When libs in government pretend to be compassionate, they are giving away somebody else's money. Obama acted like he was Mother Theresa when he gave Haiti $100,000,000 after the earthquake, but he was never giving away his own money; he was giving away ours. There was no compassion involved in that at all.
Conservatives tend to believe that individuals are able to solve their own problems, and that it is kindest and most respectful to let them do so. If they need a little help, we do give, but as individuals, and not through government.
Conservatives don't trust government to solve people's problems. Government solutions are famous for making problems worse, in addition to creating new ones. How is it kind to set people up to get screwed by bureaucracy and governmental incompetence?
Conservatives believe people are more responsible for their own lives than for someone else's, and that the road to freedom runs through personal accountability and responsibility. The minute someone else takes the job of trying to fix your life, you are less free.
Conservatives recognize that the government's primary responsibility is to protect the rights and freedoms of its own citizens. That means leaving them with the opportunity to fail or succeed on their own.
It also means putting people in other countries at the back of the line. That shows the most compassion for the citizens of our own country.
Obviously there is no one-size-fits-all way to do this, and I think you are acknowledging that reality.
On the one hand, if a child is in school six or seven hours a day, then it seems unfair to extend that into what should be their free time.
Consider that 7 hours a day for 190 days a year comes to 1330 hours. Let's assume kids are awake for 14 hours a day, equaling 5110 hours. This makes school only 26% of their waking lives. That SHOULD mean that schools are responsible for helping the kids learn only 26% of what they need to know to be successful in life.
The other 74% of what they learn should come from parents, friends, relatives, neighbors, religious leaders, bosses at work, etc..
That is not society's expectation, though, is it? When kids do not learn enough of what they need, the schools are blamed, not the parents, grandparents, churches, or neighbors, despite the fact that they are the ones who are failing most of the kids.
As a result, schools have increasingly picked up the slack, and homework is much of how they fill in the for the missing parts of the 74%. For most kids, the majority of their education (formal and informal) is provided by school teachers, and the homework they assign.
This is why finishing high school (whether with diploma or GED) is one of the main predicting factors of lifelong income.
When I have been a student (total of over 27 years) I had homework, and when I did it, I learned more.
When I was a teacher, I assigned homework. According to the tests I gave my students, the ones who did the homework learned more (or at least more of what I was teaching.)
There are three main reasons homework is a highly useful part of the educational program.
- 1 - Homework is a way to develop and hone skills.
Most of what comprises education is skills:
Applying the scientific method
To develop skills, people need to practice. In class, there is often guided practice, so that students can get additional guidance in the skill, but there is too little class time to effectively develop the skills. Homework is the independent practice required to master skills.
- 2 - Homework is an opportunity to acquire knowledge.
Some of what students are supposed to obtain at school (in addition to skills) is knowledge. There is a whole lot more information in the curriculum than is transmittable in 190 hours (one school year of a one-hour class.) This means that students need to spend time outside of class learning some of the information, usually by reading from the textbook.
Sometimes the knowledge is also used to develop skills. In English classes, for example, students have to read a book so they can discuss it in class. The analysis and discussion skills are the focus, and it helps for the whole class to have the same basis of info to discuss. There is not enough time to read the whole book in class, so students need to read it outside of class, as homework. Then the class time can be devoted to learning and practicing thinking and discussion skills.
- 3 - Homework is a way to teach and instill independence.
Hidden in the development of skills and acquisition of knowledge is another set of skills that add up to the ability to learn independently. The highest goal of school is to teach students how to become independent learners and critical thinkers so they can live the rest of their lives learning what they need or want to know without having to depend on institutions or other people.
When I was a teacher, I told my students that the whole point of my job was to become obsolete.
Of course, how useful or necessary the homework is depends largely on what the curriculum is, and whether it matches the needs of the individual student.
One of the interesting things about stock prices is that they are an exercise in consensus reality. Even more interesting is that the consensus is less about current reality than about expectations of future reality;stock indices do not measure what people think those stocks are currently worth, but rather that they will be worth in the future.
The stock prices are only vaguely associated with the value of the companies. What rising stock prices really tell us is that a fairly large number of people are certain enough to risk their money on a bet that people will have enough money to invest in the future that they will pay more than the current price. Rising stock prices are primarily an indication of economic optimism.
This optimism becomes contagious, largely because stock indices are so widely publicized.
Contagious optimism encourages people to take risks to start (or invest in) new businesses, bring new products and services to the marketplace. That is, in general, good news for people who need jobs, and for people who want tax revenues to increase so that government programs can be paid for.
If people were wealthy they wouldn't be complaining about capitalism...
I think you are discounting how common envy is.
Wealth is primarily held in created items, many of which are so common in most societies that we no longer recognize these things as wealth.
Consider the incredible wealth of a plastic Ziploc bag or an empty two-liter soda bottle with a screw cap. For most of the history of our species, just one of those would have contributed immeasurable advantages to the owner, yet we throw them away by the billions.
What makes many people think they are "poor" or not is nothing more than with whom they compare themselves. For hundreds of millions of years, our ancestors (human and not) have struggled to survive, and lived on the edge of starvation. By comparison, an urban homeless person is incredibly wealthy and well-off, yet they are considered to be destitute. People far wealthier than them often look at other people with envy, and then complain about the same capitalism that made them so much wealthier than their ancestors.
Envy is a powerful destroyer of gratitude and happiness.
Well articulated points.
I would like to elaborate a little on the mechanisms that cause population to stabilize in wealthier nations.
It is more than just not needing to produce spare children for the ones who would die were the nation still poor.
In poor economies, security is only available through family, particularly sons. However, the wealthier a nation is, the more security can be built through other means. Excess income (over what is needed to survive TODAY) can be put aside in savings, insurance, capital investment in diverse income streams, and education.
The investment in education is critical. Education enables people to learn how to earn without strenuous physical labor, which brings more women into the workforce. There is a very high correlation between the rate of educating women and population stabilization or reduction.