We're all used to politicians using the law as a pinata to get what they want, but I'm very disgusted at what I've recently read and I want to share this with you. I will TRY not to be overly bias, I will TRY to give you all the facts I can, but there is a limit to what I can take when it comes to dehumanizing others.
My story starts here:
https://www.texastribune.org/2013/04/29/ag-benefits-domestic-partners-violate-constitution/
As I read it, I shook my head in shame that Texas is still so hell bent on treating Homosexuals like second class citizens, but that is an argument for another day. What caught my eye was the second to the last paragraph. To give you, the reader, context of what is going on, several state owned facilities, namely a Ft. Worth area school district, decided to give same sex domestic partnerships benefits to the significant other by extending health benefits to any and all domestic partnerships so long as they pay the extra fee. The state government heard about this and decided to stick its nose into the situation. State house and senate members were scrambling to try and pressure the district into stopping it. Sen. Dan Patrick, whom unfortunately represents me, went so far as to question whether the school district's new policy of granting benefits to domestic partnerships, for couples that pay the extra fee, was violating Texas law.
While this was going on, the Texas house introduced HB1568.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB01568I.pdf#navpanes=0
The summary of the bill is as such: IF a district is allowing anyone but married couples or their dependents receive benefits, then the state can reduce their funding by 7.5%. ON TOP OF THAT, there is a small bit of legislation that allows small, underfunded districts, to get financial help form other districts. To get help, they have to cover a certain percentage of their operating cost, then the out of district help will cover the rest (this is a severe paraphrasing). The second part of HB1568 states that the state can also raise that operating cost percentage by 7.5%
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/ED/htm/ED.41.htm
http://law.onecle.com/texas/education/42.2531.00.html
The result? A district's funding will be cut by 7.5% and the amount to be covered increased 7.5% essentially locking that district out of receiving funding from anyone but the district's tax payers.
Why is this a problem? Moral and financial reasons.
Financial: if a district has to cover at least 60% of their own costs to get help, then this bill will reduce their ability to cover it down to 56.5% while raising the bar to get it up to 67.5%, a difference of 11%. Using small numbers for the ease of understanding, if a district takes in $1,000,000/year form all sources (local, state, other districts), then this is what has to happen to get the money from other districts: of the $1,000,000 operating cost, the school district has to cover $600,000. $400,000 from the taxpayers and 200,000 from the state. Now, the decrease in funding has lowered the state income to $185,000 totaling $585,000. The bar for covering their own costs was also increased by 7.5% so now THAT level is $675,000. That district is just $90,000 short of qualifying for the other district help money. So now, what was only a decrease in funding of $15,000 has become a decrease in $215,000.
So, they have just punished a school district for being poor just because now, a domestic partner can now have health insurance.
Just so it's clear, multiply those dollar amounts by 100 and you'll get a fairly accurate cost for running a school district. Yeah, that $215,000 is now $215,000,000. That's the cost of operating 1-2 schools. The end result is the only way those districts could get that funding back is to close whole schools. The already over crowded classes will get 1-3* more schools worth of kids added to the rooms.
*1-3 was chosen because different schools have different operating costs depending on the levels they teach.
Moral: All of that said, the state is punishing the teachers, students, and parents because a HANDFULL of people are paying extra money into a health plan so their partners can be taken care of. Entire schools will shut down, education will be severely affected, all because the state doesn't like homosexuals. The frosting on this little cake is that not all domestic partnerships are homosexual ones, there's plenty of people who have domestic partnerships who are straight. Atheists would be among those numbers, so would Wiccans, and a host of other religious/spiritual groups that don't do marriages in the christian "traditional" sense. So the Wiccan couple that have been together for 15 years would no longer have health benefits because they live in a partnership and not a christian marriage. How's that for equality?
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal...except the gays...and the wiccans and the atheists...and women. Just Christians, they're equal...except Jehova's Whitnesses and Mormons, they're crazy."
--The Declaration of Independence
Final thoughts:
I can understand if someone's faith or life experiences make them uncomfortable around things they're not used to seeing, like homosexuals, but for the majority to create laws that oppress the minority by using the people and their children as a weapon is strictly against the founding fathers' wishes and appalling at that. I wrote a letter to the school district and started this whole chain of events, encouraging them to fight the state on this matter. I encourage you to do the same.
Pflugerville ISD
Charles Dupre, Superintendent:
(512)594-0000
Charles.Dupre@pflugervilleisd.net
Until next time!
Don't forget to like, share, +1, follow, and comment!
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Monday, May 6, 2013
Today's America and the Millennial Generation
I'm back again! Hopefully, this will be a growing trend and I'd like to see more of you drop by and leave comments.
There is this idea, a prevailing promise made by those of us who are older to those who are younger that "you will do better than us, we will give you a life that we were only able to dream of when we were your age." The idea that each generation will be richer, healthier, longer lived, and better off than the previous one was. Yet here in 2013, we find ourselves confronted with some VERY nasty truths: We will NOT be richer, we are NOT healthier, we will NOT live longer, and we will not be better off than our elders. This is a rough time to be young, specifically, a millennial. There's a lot of people asking what happened, why this is happening, and who we we blame? As the saying goes, the truth...is a hard thing to swallow.
Millenials in the age of outsourcing
For anyone born through from 1980-2000, the concept of outsourcing isn't a foreign concept: Labor is too expensive here in the states, so we contract it out to other countries that will charge significantly less to do the same work at a similar level of quality (hopefully).This migration of low paying jobs put a lot of the older generation out of work and they did what anyone else would do in that situation; look for a new place to work or retrain to work in a different field. A lot of unskilled entry level labor jobs are now either outsourced or automated, the IT field is a great example. These entry level jobs used to be a way for the unskilled to enter a field, you do your time as a peon, build your knowledge and skills and you can move up to a better position. However, with the majority of those jobs gone, only the highly educated jobs remain. Everyone wants them, but there are two problems: 1) companies not only want education, but also experience 2) there's only so many positions available. So how is some with a master's degree in computer science and no practical job experience supposed to compete against someone with 15 years of experience in the field and an associate's degree? No idea.
Health and longevity
There has been a fundamental shift in the way the world works of the last 50 years. After The depression era ended and WW2 was finished, there was HUGE boom in business. Many intelligent people began to create companies that would change the landscape of food forever. With the popularization of fast food in the 60's and 70's, cooking at home slowly became a thing of the past. Why spend an hour making a meatloaf when you can pick up a Burger and fries from McDonalds in 3-5 min? So we have a generation of people raised on fast food, but the fist food from the 60's was healthier than today's fast food because in the late 60's early 70's sugar was expensive, so it was used sparingly. But in the late 70's the sugar prices rose sharply and an alternative was found and implemented: High Fructose Corn Syrup. For reasons slightly beyond my understanding, this sweetener is bad for us and when consumed in high quantities increases health risks by huge percentages. Those who grew up in the 60's and 70's remained healthy mostly because they still cooked at home from time to time and they had healthy food growing up. However, Millennials were raised on fast food. Through the 80's and 90's as various diet fads took hold, the HFCS content was upped to make up for the poor taste of fat free foods and the like. This created in us a huge addiction to sweets, we were raised on the stuff. So, we ate and ate because mom and dad both work and don't have time to fix dinner. The damage is done. We are addicted to the stuff and our health is affected too. The best we can do is try and reduce the damage to our health this material has done. How? Learn to cook. Learn to make foods that don't come in a box marked "instant". Learn to make your own pasta, your own pizzas (not healthy, but still better than the alternative), your own fruit juices. This addiction to sweets has shortened our lives and we can not change that, what we can do is teach OUR children that fast food is a treat, something to be consumed in moderation.
Where my generation went wrong
We made a mistake. We don't want to admit it, but we did. We are probably one of the larger (if not largest) generation of "liberal arts" majors. Why? We do what we love, we are exploring and pushing culture to its limits and we enjoy every moment of it. Problem is, culture doesn't earn you anything unless you're ultra gifted. We all want to be the next Yo-Yo Ma, the next F. Scott Fitzgerald, the next Andy Warhol, but those people are unique and so few of us have that quality and no matter how hard we wish it, it won't appear there. I, myself, am a musician, I thought oh, I'll be a music teacher and move my way up to getting bigger money on the professional level. Well, more and more I find myself wondering if I made the right choice, will I ever get a job that will pay me more than $50,000/yr? Chances are, no, I will not, but the can-do attitude instilled in my by parents, teachers, and mentors make me believe that if I work myself to the bone, then I can can earn as much or more than an entry level petroleum engineer (about 75-80K/yr). Too many of us are convinced that even though we're unemployable, we can still find a way to get our money's worth from our diploma. Some will (Doug Walker from thatguywiththeglasses.com is a great example), and some won't. I think its time we collectively said "it was good while it lasted, but now we need to fix this."
The blame game
Everyone wants to find who's to blame, but the problem is there's not just one source. I've read many arguments that go all sorts of directions and what I've been able to piece together is this. The Millennials are to blame for their lack of work ethic concerning finding a new path. If you've got a degree in English and haven't gotten yourself into an actual career 5 years after you've graduated, then its time to go to community college and get an associates degree in something more practical. Baby boomers and Gen-X, you each get a slice of the blame for different reasons. Baby boomers, you preached and preached that it was all about education, get education, get a PhD, they'll hire you then! That isn't the case. Education is helpful, but what we really needed to be told is "don't go into liberal arts, get a degree in something that will allow you to be productive and stick with it." Gen-X...by far the most self centered generation ever, the message of your generation was "screw everybody else I'm gonna get what I want". I see it in your children, the self serving attitude, the greed, the lack of empathy for others. It has served you well because those of you who weren't above trying to stick it to "the man" got an education and used that ruthlessness to obtain a fair amount of wealth. However, you never learned that if you hog all the toys, then the other kids are gonna get mad. My generation has had to learn "to make do with what we have" but we're still trying to understand "why you need so much when all you do is hold onto it?" To both the boomers and the X's, you've set up a world filled with distractions; shiny objects and electronics that we grew up with. It was the environment YOU gave us that made us what we are, we didn't invent the cell phone, smart phone, the MP3 player, or the laptop, we were given these things to keep us occupied because mommy and daddy didn't want to put up with raising us. We are products of our upbringing. Now, I've bagged a LOT on the older people, I want to point out that we, Millennials, still have a share of the blame. I mentioned we need to change our work ethic and I mean it. I have seen too many of us content to live at home with our parents while skating by on part time jobs and it has to change. We may not have been given the best work ethic around, but with some effort we can work together to get ourselves out of our situation. Again, Doug Walker is a great reference, he turned his "Nostalgia Critic" review into a business and has over a dozen contract employees. We don't have the money to buy nice things, we don't have the skill to get the high paying jobs, but we DO have creativity and that's a good quality to have when you try and open your own business.
Where do we go from here?
Well, its already established that the current generation will never have the income or earning power that our predecessors had, but we will do what we've always done. We make do with what we have. There no use in bemoaning our place or regretting the past, its done and its time to move on. I want this generation to be the one that is faced with an insurmountable challenge, and fights it, and overcomes it. We're entering an age where new markets are emerging alongside new frontiers and we are there to capitalize on it, not just financially, but culturally as well. Don't be afraid to step outside your shell and learn new skills and take a new job, you never know when it might just pay off.
As a closing note, I wanted to write this because I have read some articles about what is going on in my generation and it made me think and reconsider my own situation. I've linked two of these articles below:
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/11/hipsters_on_food_stamps.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/magazine/do-millennials-stand-a-chance-in-the-real-world.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Join me next week for a new article, but in the meantime, please comment on it, like it, share it on FB, +1 it, and all that jazz.
There is this idea, a prevailing promise made by those of us who are older to those who are younger that "you will do better than us, we will give you a life that we were only able to dream of when we were your age." The idea that each generation will be richer, healthier, longer lived, and better off than the previous one was. Yet here in 2013, we find ourselves confronted with some VERY nasty truths: We will NOT be richer, we are NOT healthier, we will NOT live longer, and we will not be better off than our elders. This is a rough time to be young, specifically, a millennial. There's a lot of people asking what happened, why this is happening, and who we we blame? As the saying goes, the truth...is a hard thing to swallow.
Millenials in the age of outsourcing
For anyone born through from 1980-2000, the concept of outsourcing isn't a foreign concept: Labor is too expensive here in the states, so we contract it out to other countries that will charge significantly less to do the same work at a similar level of quality (hopefully).This migration of low paying jobs put a lot of the older generation out of work and they did what anyone else would do in that situation; look for a new place to work or retrain to work in a different field. A lot of unskilled entry level labor jobs are now either outsourced or automated, the IT field is a great example. These entry level jobs used to be a way for the unskilled to enter a field, you do your time as a peon, build your knowledge and skills and you can move up to a better position. However, with the majority of those jobs gone, only the highly educated jobs remain. Everyone wants them, but there are two problems: 1) companies not only want education, but also experience 2) there's only so many positions available. So how is some with a master's degree in computer science and no practical job experience supposed to compete against someone with 15 years of experience in the field and an associate's degree? No idea.
Health and longevity
There has been a fundamental shift in the way the world works of the last 50 years. After The depression era ended and WW2 was finished, there was HUGE boom in business. Many intelligent people began to create companies that would change the landscape of food forever. With the popularization of fast food in the 60's and 70's, cooking at home slowly became a thing of the past. Why spend an hour making a meatloaf when you can pick up a Burger and fries from McDonalds in 3-5 min? So we have a generation of people raised on fast food, but the fist food from the 60's was healthier than today's fast food because in the late 60's early 70's sugar was expensive, so it was used sparingly. But in the late 70's the sugar prices rose sharply and an alternative was found and implemented: High Fructose Corn Syrup. For reasons slightly beyond my understanding, this sweetener is bad for us and when consumed in high quantities increases health risks by huge percentages. Those who grew up in the 60's and 70's remained healthy mostly because they still cooked at home from time to time and they had healthy food growing up. However, Millennials were raised on fast food. Through the 80's and 90's as various diet fads took hold, the HFCS content was upped to make up for the poor taste of fat free foods and the like. This created in us a huge addiction to sweets, we were raised on the stuff. So, we ate and ate because mom and dad both work and don't have time to fix dinner. The damage is done. We are addicted to the stuff and our health is affected too. The best we can do is try and reduce the damage to our health this material has done. How? Learn to cook. Learn to make foods that don't come in a box marked "instant". Learn to make your own pasta, your own pizzas (not healthy, but still better than the alternative), your own fruit juices. This addiction to sweets has shortened our lives and we can not change that, what we can do is teach OUR children that fast food is a treat, something to be consumed in moderation.
Where my generation went wrong
We made a mistake. We don't want to admit it, but we did. We are probably one of the larger (if not largest) generation of "liberal arts" majors. Why? We do what we love, we are exploring and pushing culture to its limits and we enjoy every moment of it. Problem is, culture doesn't earn you anything unless you're ultra gifted. We all want to be the next Yo-Yo Ma, the next F. Scott Fitzgerald, the next Andy Warhol, but those people are unique and so few of us have that quality and no matter how hard we wish it, it won't appear there. I, myself, am a musician, I thought oh, I'll be a music teacher and move my way up to getting bigger money on the professional level. Well, more and more I find myself wondering if I made the right choice, will I ever get a job that will pay me more than $50,000/yr? Chances are, no, I will not, but the can-do attitude instilled in my by parents, teachers, and mentors make me believe that if I work myself to the bone, then I can can earn as much or more than an entry level petroleum engineer (about 75-80K/yr). Too many of us are convinced that even though we're unemployable, we can still find a way to get our money's worth from our diploma. Some will (Doug Walker from thatguywiththeglasses.com is a great example), and some won't. I think its time we collectively said "it was good while it lasted, but now we need to fix this."
The blame game
Everyone wants to find who's to blame, but the problem is there's not just one source. I've read many arguments that go all sorts of directions and what I've been able to piece together is this. The Millennials are to blame for their lack of work ethic concerning finding a new path. If you've got a degree in English and haven't gotten yourself into an actual career 5 years after you've graduated, then its time to go to community college and get an associates degree in something more practical. Baby boomers and Gen-X, you each get a slice of the blame for different reasons. Baby boomers, you preached and preached that it was all about education, get education, get a PhD, they'll hire you then! That isn't the case. Education is helpful, but what we really needed to be told is "don't go into liberal arts, get a degree in something that will allow you to be productive and stick with it." Gen-X...by far the most self centered generation ever, the message of your generation was "screw everybody else I'm gonna get what I want". I see it in your children, the self serving attitude, the greed, the lack of empathy for others. It has served you well because those of you who weren't above trying to stick it to "the man" got an education and used that ruthlessness to obtain a fair amount of wealth. However, you never learned that if you hog all the toys, then the other kids are gonna get mad. My generation has had to learn "to make do with what we have" but we're still trying to understand "why you need so much when all you do is hold onto it?" To both the boomers and the X's, you've set up a world filled with distractions; shiny objects and electronics that we grew up with. It was the environment YOU gave us that made us what we are, we didn't invent the cell phone, smart phone, the MP3 player, or the laptop, we were given these things to keep us occupied because mommy and daddy didn't want to put up with raising us. We are products of our upbringing. Now, I've bagged a LOT on the older people, I want to point out that we, Millennials, still have a share of the blame. I mentioned we need to change our work ethic and I mean it. I have seen too many of us content to live at home with our parents while skating by on part time jobs and it has to change. We may not have been given the best work ethic around, but with some effort we can work together to get ourselves out of our situation. Again, Doug Walker is a great reference, he turned his "Nostalgia Critic" review into a business and has over a dozen contract employees. We don't have the money to buy nice things, we don't have the skill to get the high paying jobs, but we DO have creativity and that's a good quality to have when you try and open your own business.
Where do we go from here?
Well, its already established that the current generation will never have the income or earning power that our predecessors had, but we will do what we've always done. We make do with what we have. There no use in bemoaning our place or regretting the past, its done and its time to move on. I want this generation to be the one that is faced with an insurmountable challenge, and fights it, and overcomes it. We're entering an age where new markets are emerging alongside new frontiers and we are there to capitalize on it, not just financially, but culturally as well. Don't be afraid to step outside your shell and learn new skills and take a new job, you never know when it might just pay off.
As a closing note, I wanted to write this because I have read some articles about what is going on in my generation and it made me think and reconsider my own situation. I've linked two of these articles below:
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/11/hipsters_on_food_stamps.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/magazine/do-millennials-stand-a-chance-in-the-real-world.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Join me next week for a new article, but in the meantime, please comment on it, like it, share it on FB, +1 it, and all that jazz.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Extremism of all flavors
How do I define extremism?
Just so I have everyone on the same page with me, I define it as a single minded fixation on one idea with little regard (or respect) for opposing points of view. So there is a difference between someone making a claim and using well balanced evidence to back it up and a person who makes a claim and uses only evidence that supports their claim to insist they were right.
Just so I have everyone on the same page with me, I define it as a single minded fixation on one idea with little regard (or respect) for opposing points of view. So there is a difference between someone making a claim and using well balanced evidence to back it up and a person who makes a claim and uses only evidence that supports their claim to insist they were right.
Extremists come in all shapes and sized so don't think I'm just referring to Muslims hellbent on jihad, that's only one type and a relatively small one at that.
Extremists among you!!
We all know them, they occupy little parts of our lives, be they the person on facebook who only posts political updates to the bible thumper down the street that thinks it's his/her duty to save the gays from their sinful lifestyle. Those examples are easy to spot, but what about not-so-easy to spot extremists? Well, it all depends on your locale and disposition, but there's ways to find them, look for folks who have an unhealthy fixations on something and will defend it at all costs (Living in Texas that usually comes in the form of 2nd amendment supporters). Take some time and look around and in short order you'll come up with a list of at least 5 people who fit that description.
What do I do now?
Well, here's the kick: try and see it from there point of view. These people feel the way they do because of a certain reason, some thing happened. Put their shoes on and look at the situation through their eyes, sometimes you'll be surprised to find you agree with them, but just take issue with how its worded or presented. A friend of mine is on the far end of the political spectrum and at first I loathed talking politics with him because I was scared I'd get an inbox full of hate mail, but after many conversations and debates I found that he and I are not very different, we simply view the same solution to a problem from different perspectives. He and I have our disagreements, but we never talk bad about each other to anyone because we have a mutual understanding that we're simply coming from different backgrounds. Strangely enough, even though our methods differ, we still desire similar, if not the same outcome to a situation. It is ALWAYS useful to have a differing opinion than that of your own because it help you understand that not everyone is as crazy as we normally think.
So.....?
So.....?
The major theme I'm trying to get across is that we as a people are looking for more and more reasons/ways to segregate ourselves and it's time we do the opposite. There is much more to be gained by cooperating and finding our common threads than pushing everyone away. This can be applied to the political arena, matters of belief/non-belief, society, and just about anything else you can think of.
That's all I feel like talking about for now, I'll be back when I've got my thoughts gathered for my next post: "Today's America and the Millennial Generation"
That's all I feel like talking about for now, I'll be back when I've got my thoughts gathered for my next post: "Today's America and the Millennial Generation"
Note: As a favor to me, could you please make sure you use your turn signals and stop at stop lights? I'm becoming paranoid about that. (spread the word!)
Like it, share it, +1 it, facebook it, reddit it, and link it! I want to share my thoughts with more of you and your friends...and their friends...and their friends...and so on.
Like it, share it, +1 it, facebook it, reddit it, and link it! I want to share my thoughts with more of you and your friends...and their friends...and their friends...and so on.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
GOP, Welfare, and Political Segregation
Hello again! I hope you all have had fun since we last talked!
Today I feel like grabbing the third rail of social interaction, I'm going to talk about politics. I count myself as an independent centrist with some democratic/left-wing leanings, but like many who call themselves a republican I too would like the government a bit further out of my day to day life. In fact, there's MANY things about the republican party I agree with.
So, why am I not a republican? Simple: The republican party I want hasn't existed since the 1800's. I am a big believer in self reliance, I believe each person is responsible for their own actions and that 99% of their successes and failures are on their shoulders. So when I watch the news and I see republicans talking about laws that limit the freedoms of 52% of the population I am a little more than bothered. When I see republicans talking about trying to make laws that say the united states' official religion is Christianity they're trampling on the rights of 76 million people (according to 2008 statistics).
I want everyone to know that through my eyes they have the right to practice religion (or not) as they see fit, yet when see people say "this is a christian country, the founding fathers said so." I have to trot out the first 10 words of the first amendment to the bill of rights.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
Everyone like to say the next words "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." But, they forget the first amendment says fairly clearly that the government CAN NOT support a religion. So the idea the country is a christian country is not a true one. The accurate statement is: "This country is predominantly christian." So if you're a practicing satanist, you have the right to say a prayer to him in school right next to the person saying the christian prayer and the person saying a prayer to Zeus.
The republican party has been branded the "rich white man's party" and for good reason, the party's ideals have been hijacked by extremists. We rail and shout at muslim extremists but when pastors that advocate the murder of non believers are allowed audiences with the leaders of the country and have the power to get people elected, it is time to step back and check your priorities.
I will say it out loud, right here and now: the republican party has lost its way. No longer is it the party about restricting government power and spending, it is the party of christian extremist trying to turn these United States into a christian version of Saudi Arabia.
Moving on
Welfare is a tough issue to discuss in government, should we have it, how much should it cost, how much should it yield? I support welfare, but not in the traditional sense. There are people out there who genuinely need help and this country has made a mission of making sure everyone gets a fair shot at success. I support those in dire need receiving some government assistance, but for a limited time and it is only usable once every several years. There's many problems that can be solved through social programs with the goal of providing information rather than products. A common issue for those at the bottom of the class ladder is access to information regarding sex and disease. A program to encourage safe sex or abstinence can help a great deal simply by communicating that sex has a high probability of leading to children and that there are consequences. STD's too can be mentioned, show people what could happen if they aren't safe of don/t see a doctor from time to time. A program like this, aimed at teens can reduce the number of women dependent on welfare because they can't find a better job due to having to take care of kids. This isn't condoning sex, it's admitting that sex is out there and people should be careful. Preventing 1000 pregnancies could result in up to 1000 fewer people needing welfare services and further reducing the strain on the system.
The nastier side of welfare is the dependency, too many have grown up on it and are used to it and see it as a way of life. Welfare is easy to abuse, especially since there's so many asking for it. It is easy to loose someone in the system and let them collect money they should not be collecting. Its easy to cheat the system too, I once watched someone use a food stamp card at Sams to buy a 56" plasma screen TV. She got around it by including some food in her purchase.
The moral of the story I'm going for here is: yes, we need some welfare, but we need to update and overhaul the system if we're going to make it sustainable. So, don't downright dismiss it if you don't like and don't don't champion it if it isn't going to work correctly or is easy to abuse.
One last bit concerning the "Affordable Healthcare Act". I can see how it is intended to work. Millions of people don't have insurance, when they go to the hospital, they can't pay the bill wich is then hoisted upon the government to pay. This costs MILLIONS AND MILLIONS every year. I looked into insurance for myself, I found some for under $100 a month and it covers all of my needs. If you're spending money on internet and cell phones and cable TV (Data phones coming around $100/mo avg., Cable/internet for about $150/mo avg). Then your priorities are backwards. You need to entertain yourself AFTER you've taken care of yourself. There is no reason you should sacrifice your health insurance for cable TV. GO THE F*** OUTSIDE AND VISIT THE PARK! PLAY A SPORT, RIDE A BIKE, GET OFF YOUR A**!
I am proud to say that even though I make less than $1,000/mo I still have the ability to pay for health insurance because I don't spend it on frivolous things like cable TV. Get insurance and stop leeching off the government, if we can do that, then we can reduce the cost of medicaid to the taxpayer.
Finally...
I want to talk about political segregation for a minute. I have seen in the last few years so many people sling derogatory terms at others for no reason or crime other than simply not belonging to their preferred political party.
Libitards, Repugnacans, and a few I won't mention just for the strength of words. I can not tell you how frustrating it is when I see a good idea being drowned out by partisan bitching. It could be an idea that fixes the entire social/class system of the country, but just because a democrat came up with it, it HAS to be evil (according to the republicans). A new way of saving money in the government and reducing spending AND taxes has been devised but it's an evil plan by the republicans to defund everything and return us to the days of the old west where we shot everyone for everything! (according to the democrats). I find it deplorable that people are looking for a reason to segregate each other. Don't think I mean by race, this applies to any and all skin colors.
All in all, I just wanted to advocate some social responsibility. Don't treat others like trash just because they don't agree with you on how to run the country. Be responsible for your self and your health before you burn your money on sitting and watching TV. And PLEASE be responsible when deciding on your political affiliations, what one politician does does not mean others will follow suit. Voting straight ticket only serves to give crazy people the opportunity to do real damage*.
*Such as electing a home school mother who has no degree in education or core studies (math/science/history/language, yet worked in accounts receivable for a small oil company) to the state board of education because she campaigned on getting rid of "obamacare" when Texas school funding (derived from sales tax) and curriculum has nothing to do with federal level healthcare. It's true, I swear it!
Today I feel like grabbing the third rail of social interaction, I'm going to talk about politics. I count myself as an independent centrist with some democratic/left-wing leanings, but like many who call themselves a republican I too would like the government a bit further out of my day to day life. In fact, there's MANY things about the republican party I agree with.
So, why am I not a republican? Simple: The republican party I want hasn't existed since the 1800's. I am a big believer in self reliance, I believe each person is responsible for their own actions and that 99% of their successes and failures are on their shoulders. So when I watch the news and I see republicans talking about laws that limit the freedoms of 52% of the population I am a little more than bothered. When I see republicans talking about trying to make laws that say the united states' official religion is Christianity they're trampling on the rights of 76 million people (according to 2008 statistics).
I want everyone to know that through my eyes they have the right to practice religion (or not) as they see fit, yet when see people say "this is a christian country, the founding fathers said so." I have to trot out the first 10 words of the first amendment to the bill of rights.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
Everyone like to say the next words "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." But, they forget the first amendment says fairly clearly that the government CAN NOT support a religion. So the idea the country is a christian country is not a true one. The accurate statement is: "This country is predominantly christian." So if you're a practicing satanist, you have the right to say a prayer to him in school right next to the person saying the christian prayer and the person saying a prayer to Zeus.
The republican party has been branded the "rich white man's party" and for good reason, the party's ideals have been hijacked by extremists. We rail and shout at muslim extremists but when pastors that advocate the murder of non believers are allowed audiences with the leaders of the country and have the power to get people elected, it is time to step back and check your priorities.
I will say it out loud, right here and now: the republican party has lost its way. No longer is it the party about restricting government power and spending, it is the party of christian extremist trying to turn these United States into a christian version of Saudi Arabia.
Moving on
Welfare is a tough issue to discuss in government, should we have it, how much should it cost, how much should it yield? I support welfare, but not in the traditional sense. There are people out there who genuinely need help and this country has made a mission of making sure everyone gets a fair shot at success. I support those in dire need receiving some government assistance, but for a limited time and it is only usable once every several years. There's many problems that can be solved through social programs with the goal of providing information rather than products. A common issue for those at the bottom of the class ladder is access to information regarding sex and disease. A program to encourage safe sex or abstinence can help a great deal simply by communicating that sex has a high probability of leading to children and that there are consequences. STD's too can be mentioned, show people what could happen if they aren't safe of don/t see a doctor from time to time. A program like this, aimed at teens can reduce the number of women dependent on welfare because they can't find a better job due to having to take care of kids. This isn't condoning sex, it's admitting that sex is out there and people should be careful. Preventing 1000 pregnancies could result in up to 1000 fewer people needing welfare services and further reducing the strain on the system.
The nastier side of welfare is the dependency, too many have grown up on it and are used to it and see it as a way of life. Welfare is easy to abuse, especially since there's so many asking for it. It is easy to loose someone in the system and let them collect money they should not be collecting. Its easy to cheat the system too, I once watched someone use a food stamp card at Sams to buy a 56" plasma screen TV. She got around it by including some food in her purchase.
The moral of the story I'm going for here is: yes, we need some welfare, but we need to update and overhaul the system if we're going to make it sustainable. So, don't downright dismiss it if you don't like and don't don't champion it if it isn't going to work correctly or is easy to abuse.
One last bit concerning the "Affordable Healthcare Act". I can see how it is intended to work. Millions of people don't have insurance, when they go to the hospital, they can't pay the bill wich is then hoisted upon the government to pay. This costs MILLIONS AND MILLIONS every year. I looked into insurance for myself, I found some for under $100 a month and it covers all of my needs. If you're spending money on internet and cell phones and cable TV (Data phones coming around $100/mo avg., Cable/internet for about $150/mo avg). Then your priorities are backwards. You need to entertain yourself AFTER you've taken care of yourself. There is no reason you should sacrifice your health insurance for cable TV. GO THE F*** OUTSIDE AND VISIT THE PARK! PLAY A SPORT, RIDE A BIKE, GET OFF YOUR A**!
I am proud to say that even though I make less than $1,000/mo I still have the ability to pay for health insurance because I don't spend it on frivolous things like cable TV. Get insurance and stop leeching off the government, if we can do that, then we can reduce the cost of medicaid to the taxpayer.
Finally...
I want to talk about political segregation for a minute. I have seen in the last few years so many people sling derogatory terms at others for no reason or crime other than simply not belonging to their preferred political party.
Libitards, Repugnacans, and a few I won't mention just for the strength of words. I can not tell you how frustrating it is when I see a good idea being drowned out by partisan bitching. It could be an idea that fixes the entire social/class system of the country, but just because a democrat came up with it, it HAS to be evil (according to the republicans). A new way of saving money in the government and reducing spending AND taxes has been devised but it's an evil plan by the republicans to defund everything and return us to the days of the old west where we shot everyone for everything! (according to the democrats). I find it deplorable that people are looking for a reason to segregate each other. Don't think I mean by race, this applies to any and all skin colors.
All in all, I just wanted to advocate some social responsibility. Don't treat others like trash just because they don't agree with you on how to run the country. Be responsible for your self and your health before you burn your money on sitting and watching TV. And PLEASE be responsible when deciding on your political affiliations, what one politician does does not mean others will follow suit. Voting straight ticket only serves to give crazy people the opportunity to do real damage*.
*Such as electing a home school mother who has no degree in education or core studies (math/science/history/language, yet worked in accounts receivable for a small oil company) to the state board of education because she campaigned on getting rid of "obamacare" when Texas school funding (derived from sales tax) and curriculum has nothing to do with federal level healthcare. It's true, I swear it!
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Gun Violence + Schools = ?
Yesterday, a lone gunman armed with three weapons went into a school in Connecticut killing 20 children and 6 adults. This is a somber time for the nation, a time for us to ask "why", also a time for us to ask "can we do better?"
No doubt, there will be a huge storm of far left liberals using this tragedy as fodder for their cries to make all guns illegal. I count myself as a member of the center, subscribing to ideologies presented by both sides of the political spectrum, but I do not believe it was the gun's fault for this tragedy.
Pardon my brief moment of heartlessness, but the weapons functioned exactly as they were supposed to. Upon the increase of pressure upon the trigger, the weapon activated a hammer that drew back and struck the ignition cap of the bullet. The bullet's explosive charge ignited, launching the bullet and the barrel of the weapon guided the bullet out in a straight line. However, what each of the weapons had NO control over, was where they were pointed or whom they were pointed at. I want to be VERY technical here with word choice: Guns aren't DESIGNED to kill, they are DESIGNED to fire projectiles at high velocity in a single direction with accuracy. Guns' primary USE is to kill or wound people.
That being said, we now get to the question "Why?"
I do not know why this man did what he did. I do not like it, not one bit. What I do know is he demonstrated something, that schools are not fortresses and we have limitations to how far we are able to protect.
This is not a bad thing to know, it gives us the ability to evaluate our current ability and to learn from it. I do not mean to say the ends justify the means, but we must learn from this tragedy.
The next question "can we do better?" is a complicated question pulling at many pieces of our lives. I personally believe there should be a psych evaluation for first time gun buyers and ANYONE purchasing a weapon (be it the first or four thousandth) have a record check done for any kind of behavior demonstrating mental instability. I do not wish to deny people their second amendment rights, but we must make a better effort stop those whom are highly likely to abuse this right. I also must ask those opponents of the 3 day waiting period "what is so important that you absolutely HAVE to have a gun RIGHT THIS SECOND?"
I mentioned earlier that schools are not fortresses. They should not be. As of 2010, there are 67,140 elementary schools in the United States. Not all of them can afford the security measures we'd like, not all of them are in high risk areas. Some of these schools have daily incidents of children bringing weapons to school but never make the news because they're in impoverished areas when such things are the norm.
There are a few simple steps we can take to make schools safer. First, replace any glass doors with solid doors. In the time I've worked for schools, I have noticed many elementary schools have all doors made of glass, secondary schools have fewer doors made of glass, but only by a small margin. Second, classrooms with glass viewing windows in the doors should be replaced with smaller windows placed far enough away from the door handle that someone can't break the window and reach in for the door handle. Third, elementary schools have large playgrounds (which is good for the kids), but these playgrounds are fenced with simple waist high chain link fences. Replace these with 6-8ft stone/brick walls, this prevents someone from doing a drive by, makes general access tougher, and has the added bonus of preventing the pedophiles from coming by and watching or taking pictures.
Those three things are obscenely expensive, it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to do that for each school in the US, so what's a more practical solution? Just keep your eyes open for suspicious behavior. Everyone is so burred in their own worlds they seldom look up from their phones of turn off the mp3 players. If we were to just pay attention to the world around us, we'd be able to prevent a lot of the tragedies we see on the news.
This holiday season has been marred by horrible events. Please take some time out of your own plans to talk to your neighbors, get to know your community, do a random act of great kindness because sometimes, these little things, these insignificant actions mean the difference between someone committing suicide or deciding life is worth living, helping a neighbor in extreme poverty may prevent them from robbing a store just to buy their kid a Christmas present. We call this the season of peace on Earth and good will towards our fellows, then lets do it and make it count. There are 26 fewer of us tonight, lets make something good happen in their memory.
No doubt, there will be a huge storm of far left liberals using this tragedy as fodder for their cries to make all guns illegal. I count myself as a member of the center, subscribing to ideologies presented by both sides of the political spectrum, but I do not believe it was the gun's fault for this tragedy.
Pardon my brief moment of heartlessness, but the weapons functioned exactly as they were supposed to. Upon the increase of pressure upon the trigger, the weapon activated a hammer that drew back and struck the ignition cap of the bullet. The bullet's explosive charge ignited, launching the bullet and the barrel of the weapon guided the bullet out in a straight line. However, what each of the weapons had NO control over, was where they were pointed or whom they were pointed at. I want to be VERY technical here with word choice: Guns aren't DESIGNED to kill, they are DESIGNED to fire projectiles at high velocity in a single direction with accuracy. Guns' primary USE is to kill or wound people.
That being said, we now get to the question "Why?"
I do not know why this man did what he did. I do not like it, not one bit. What I do know is he demonstrated something, that schools are not fortresses and we have limitations to how far we are able to protect.
This is not a bad thing to know, it gives us the ability to evaluate our current ability and to learn from it. I do not mean to say the ends justify the means, but we must learn from this tragedy.
The next question "can we do better?" is a complicated question pulling at many pieces of our lives. I personally believe there should be a psych evaluation for first time gun buyers and ANYONE purchasing a weapon (be it the first or four thousandth) have a record check done for any kind of behavior demonstrating mental instability. I do not wish to deny people their second amendment rights, but we must make a better effort stop those whom are highly likely to abuse this right. I also must ask those opponents of the 3 day waiting period "what is so important that you absolutely HAVE to have a gun RIGHT THIS SECOND?"
I mentioned earlier that schools are not fortresses. They should not be. As of 2010, there are 67,140 elementary schools in the United States. Not all of them can afford the security measures we'd like, not all of them are in high risk areas. Some of these schools have daily incidents of children bringing weapons to school but never make the news because they're in impoverished areas when such things are the norm.
There are a few simple steps we can take to make schools safer. First, replace any glass doors with solid doors. In the time I've worked for schools, I have noticed many elementary schools have all doors made of glass, secondary schools have fewer doors made of glass, but only by a small margin. Second, classrooms with glass viewing windows in the doors should be replaced with smaller windows placed far enough away from the door handle that someone can't break the window and reach in for the door handle. Third, elementary schools have large playgrounds (which is good for the kids), but these playgrounds are fenced with simple waist high chain link fences. Replace these with 6-8ft stone/brick walls, this prevents someone from doing a drive by, makes general access tougher, and has the added bonus of preventing the pedophiles from coming by and watching or taking pictures.
Those three things are obscenely expensive, it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to do that for each school in the US, so what's a more practical solution? Just keep your eyes open for suspicious behavior. Everyone is so burred in their own worlds they seldom look up from their phones of turn off the mp3 players. If we were to just pay attention to the world around us, we'd be able to prevent a lot of the tragedies we see on the news.
This holiday season has been marred by horrible events. Please take some time out of your own plans to talk to your neighbors, get to know your community, do a random act of great kindness because sometimes, these little things, these insignificant actions mean the difference between someone committing suicide or deciding life is worth living, helping a neighbor in extreme poverty may prevent them from robbing a store just to buy their kid a Christmas present. We call this the season of peace on Earth and good will towards our fellows, then lets do it and make it count. There are 26 fewer of us tonight, lets make something good happen in their memory.
Friday, November 23, 2012
The "Family Values" Lie
"Family Values", those magic words used by both sides of the political spectrum we've heard for who knows how many years is a deceiving phrase. The more I hear it in the news, the more I hear the word "Republican". It seems, the republican party has a special romantic interest with this word yet I feel the need to quote Inigo Montoya:
So what are REAL family values? I'm gonna stick my neck out and say this: REAL family values are the values that say we treat each other with respect, that no matter someone's lifestyle choices you care for your family. When your brother's boyfriend breaks up with him, you're there to comfort him through those hard times. When your sister has lost her job, home, children, and life savings due to a nasty and public divorce, you stand by her. When your children get in trouble, you discipline them, but you never stop believing that they can be better than you. That your needs do not come before the needs of your loved ones and as a parent, you are responsible for raising your children.
You won't find a single elected official who will say to the contrary (and if you do, they won't be elected for long).
I would love to vote for republicans because some of their ideas are good ones, but so long as they keep using "family values" as a catch all for gay bashing, then no republican shall get my vote. No one deserves to be unjustly discriminated against because of what they do in the privacy of their own home.
I have observed that whenever the words
"Republican" and "Family Values" are used in the same
conversation, it's not so much about real family values, it's about
homosexuals. I believe republicans use family values as a political safety word
to protect themselves from outright insulting homosexuals.
So what are REAL family values? I'm gonna stick my neck out and say this: REAL family values are the values that say we treat each other with respect, that no matter someone's lifestyle choices you care for your family. When your brother's boyfriend breaks up with him, you're there to comfort him through those hard times. When your sister has lost her job, home, children, and life savings due to a nasty and public divorce, you stand by her. When your children get in trouble, you discipline them, but you never stop believing that they can be better than you. That your needs do not come before the needs of your loved ones and as a parent, you are responsible for raising your children.
You won't find a single elected official who will say to the contrary (and if you do, they won't be elected for long).
I would love to vote for republicans because some of their ideas are good ones, but so long as they keep using "family values" as a catch all for gay bashing, then no republican shall get my vote. No one deserves to be unjustly discriminated against because of what they do in the privacy of their own home.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
The news has been reduced to a Vaudeville carnival
Through the years prior today, I have noticed a trend in journalism. The quality of the material being broadcast has declined sharply.
I know from the point of view of those in the media, I'm only some random schmuck who further dilutes the overall collective of journalism, but I believe I have a point.
Many journalists enter the field with the dreams and desires to have their names listed along with Murrow, Frost, and others. But, through a whole slew of terrible management decisions, these bright aspiring individuals have their light extinguished. Everyone panders to their masters: the heads of the news companies, who have their own insidious plots. They put pressure on the anchors and staff to write stories that fit their agendas, use certain words and phrases to turn public opinion in their favor. On top of all of this, they are also pressured to refrain from attacking their corporate sponsors. They could be sponsored by a company which runs illegal Chinese immigrant sweatshops that kill kittens, and they would sweep all of that under the rug with a song and dance about how great the company is and how the mean old opposition is being unfair and wrong.
I know from the point of view of those in the media, I'm only some random schmuck who further dilutes the overall collective of journalism, but I believe I have a point.
Many journalists enter the field with the dreams and desires to have their names listed along with Murrow, Frost, and others. But, through a whole slew of terrible management decisions, these bright aspiring individuals have their light extinguished. Everyone panders to their masters: the heads of the news companies, who have their own insidious plots. They put pressure on the anchors and staff to write stories that fit their agendas, use certain words and phrases to turn public opinion in their favor. On top of all of this, they are also pressured to refrain from attacking their corporate sponsors. They could be sponsored by a company which runs illegal Chinese immigrant sweatshops that kill kittens, and they would sweep all of that under the rug with a song and dance about how great the company is and how the mean old opposition is being unfair and wrong.
Why do we, the consumer, sit back and let the news companies spoon feed us lies and half truths? Why don't we write in mass numbers to them and tel them to give us the news and not the opinions?
Answer: We're stupid and Lazy.
We're too lazy to fact check the claims that are broadcast over the airwaves and we just accept it as truth.
"What? Bill O'Reilly said that I'm a burden on society because I'm black? Well, I may not like it, but it's on the news, it MUST be true!"
That's an exaggeration...well...it's Bill O'Reiley in my example, so maybe it's not. I'd also believe it if some one told me he read my blog and going to smear me on his show tonight. It's people like him (along with a few notable others) who cater to the lowest common denominator.
That's an exaggeration...well...it's Bill O'Reiley in my example, so maybe it's not. I'd also believe it if some one told me he read my blog and going to smear me on his show tonight. It's people like him (along with a few notable others) who cater to the lowest common denominator.
Bill, here's a request: Instead of yelling at people and talking over them because you don't like their opinions, let them have their say. YOU invited them on your show to tell their side of the story so let them say it, then tell them you respectfully disagree on several grounds and ask them to corroborate their claims and leave the final decision to the viewers. If you treat your viewers like they're capable of making their own choices on controversial ideas, then you're going to be head and shoulders above many talk show hosts both literally and figuratively.
Much of what I see on the local networks is nothing more than drivel, why have 4 broadcasts a day when there's only enough to fill the content of one or two? We all know that the big news will interrupt regular programming.
Mostly local news consists of three things, local flavor, local tragedy, and low level investigation. Low level investigation is the anchor's attempt to find the one story to get them out of the purgatory they call the city station. It usually involves blowing a non-story out of proportion. Local tragedy is always important because it tells us the state of the city, whether a house burnt down and caught the entire block on fire, or someone was kidnapped, it's all valid reporting. Now the last type of news is the type I loath the most; local flavor. They go out and talk to a random person who has done nothing of significance and make them the story, or three anchors pretend to laugh at a video of an animal doing something cute. It's filler and the world knows it. They don't have anything else to say or do and they need to fill the last two or three minutes of air time before the next 5 minute commercial block starts. I would rather watch the traffic reports, at least they affect me.
So why am I throwing a fit over something like this? Because it matters. We're being spoon fed crap and we've been trained to like it. I for one would like to demand a higher level of reporting from the news outlets. Local news: scrap the crap and tell your journalists to find corrupt politicians, engage the citizens in a dialogue about local events and law, talk about the state/federal representatives in thare and hold them accountable for their actions, promote the knowledge of the things that effect EVERYONE.
So why am I throwing a fit over something like this? Because it matters. We're being spoon fed crap and we've been trained to like it. I for one would like to demand a higher level of reporting from the news outlets. Local news: scrap the crap and tell your journalists to find corrupt politicians, engage the citizens in a dialogue about local events and law, talk about the state/federal representatives in thare and hold them accountable for their actions, promote the knowledge of the things that effect EVERYONE.
Even the major news outlets like CNN have had their balls chopped off. I have discovered CNN specifically putting up an inflammatory non-story news report for the sole purpose of getting people to fight about it in the comments section so they can have 3 days worth of "What do you think" articles to talk about. While I will be reasonable and count it as an ATTEMPT to engage the readership, I classify it as a FAILED attempt. I don't want to read an article about one illegal immigrant and have to endure days of them putting the ensuing flame war on the front page and calling THAT news.
My note to the major networks: sometimes, there's just no news. DEAL WITH IT.
Journalists, go after the stories you know you should, bite the hand that feeds you. YOU need to remind us there's more to life than squirrels on surfboards and calling your company's political enemy a dirt bag. Also, please stop using shock value to sell a story, tell us how it is.
To everyone else, tell congress to clean the news up. Eradicate corporate sponsorship of the news, and let the real journalists do their thing. Until then, make your own news because those guys aren't cutting it.
A final note: I want everyone to know I respect the REAL journalists, the brave men and women who put their lives in danger by entering unfriendly countries for the purpose of letting the world know of the atrocities taking place in those borders. These brave people, along with their support crew help change the world and I thank EACH and EVERY one of you!
Friday, August 10, 2012
School discipline and families
Articles like this (click here for the text) make me unhappy.
Not because of what he does, but because people treat it like it's a sudden revelation that's never been thought of in the history of the world's civilizations.
"Hmm, treat kids with respect and talk out their problems instead of blindly punishing them?"
Well, how about I put it like this; every time you make a lane change without looking over your shoulder, you get a ticket. Some magic MacGuffin is in your vehicle watching you and whenever you change lanes, regardless of circumstance, gives you a ticket for not looking over your shoulder.
Does looking over your shoulder make you a safer driver? Certainly! Does NOT doing so constitute grounds for punishment? Certainly not!
That example right there is the equivalent of what many kids go through at schools.
We're going to break this entire article down section by section and not only take a look at what is being said, but also what is not being said.
Section 1: The Dark Underbelly of School Discipline
Dark underbelly? No, we all know exactly what is going on, no one wants to admit it. If you have kids and are in the least bit attentive and use your brain, you'll know something's wrong with the way discipline works. First, every time a news article throws segregated statistics at the public, they continue to propagate the idea that race determines one's limits.
Eric Harris and Dylan Keibold
If the names are unfamiliar, then that is unfortunate. They may not be the direct cause, but they certainly contributed to the "Zero Tolerance" policy most campuses have adopted. Those boys are the two shooters in the Columbine shootings, where they injured/killed 36 people including themselves.
You can ask any one who's had a gun aimed at them and shots fired with the intent to kill (like our brave solders), it is in those moments that you find out the limits of your mortality. You try to save your life. Teachers are no different, we will try everything in our power to protect our students, but there is a threshold where the instinct to survive overwhelms everything else and we are compelled to run too.
It was in the spirit of preventing this tragedy from happening again, and creating a drug free environment that "Zero Tolerance" was created.
This isn't to absolve parents of their own idiocy though. I've said it before, parents are stupid. Teachers are NOT a substitute for them and yet they expect teachers to raise their children. Okay, fine, we'll raise your children too. Then we get grief for not raising them the way the parents wanted.
TOO BAD.
If you are a parent who's abdicated your responsibilities to your child's teachers and don't like the outcome, it's YOUR FAULT. YOU are to blame, your lack of interest in the human being YOU brought into the world is not their fault, if you didn't want a child then have an abortion or give it up for adoption! You'll never hear a teacher say any of that because they're too scared, the moment a teacher speaks out about the subject they get fired so fast it makes their heads spin and it's not the principal's fault. The principal has to do it to protect the rest of the school from the rest of the stupid parents who will flood the school and the district office with complaints. So what do we do? Fire the teacher who told the truth and pretend everything is A-okay.
These knee jerk reactions are why we use "Zero Tolerance", teachers know that two kids pretending to stab each other with pencils are only goofing off and pretending they're in a horror movie. But, we have to write them up and send them to the office or else we get in trouble.
Suspensions were supposed to be a hefty slap to the face, used only in extreme situations where the principal really didn't want to expel the student. But, for many of the lower achievers who are proud of that mark, they see it as a badge of honor. How can you be cool of you don't get suspended for telling a teacher "you're a dumb motherfucker if you think I need to know how to read this bullshit"?
That's the kind of language that gets thrown at teachers by some of these students. The sad part is, sometimes they believe it too. Most of the time they say things like that to see if they can make the teacher explode. We're good at shrugging it off, but it will eventually wear us down.
Suspensions are not bad, they may be overused, but they're not bad. I applaud the Principal in the article for actually practicing alternative methods, and to the rest of the educational community, I say "why haven't YOU joined in too?"
Actually I know exactly why: we're outmatched. With class sizes pushing 30:1 in favor of students, we just don't have time to do that with every single problem student on top of everything else. Its not an issue of we don't want to, it's an issue of there are not enough hours in the day.
This section of the article finishes with a mention of alternative learning schools (ALC's) and how they're bad. I flat out disagree. There are some people out there who just don't care about school, they don't want to be there and they will do everything in their power to get out. Laws require them to be in school so why not put them somewhere where they won't disrupt those that are learning and taking their education seriously.
The article tries its hardest to tell us that each child is unique but should be treated equally. That's nonsense, everyone is different and should be treated differently. Before you get your undies in a twist about me being a racist or something, I will be clear about what I mean. Every child requires a different approach in the pursuit of convincing them that education is important. Every child reacts to information differently. Every child learns differently.
I once taught a trombone player who no matter what he did, could only play one note. No matter where the slide was on that instrument, the same sound would come out. I sat with him for three days trying every method at my disposal and making new ones up, but nothing worked. Eventually I could find no other way to explain the concept he needed to learn and I just told him what I wanted in college terms. I used explanations that were 10 years ahead of what his understanding should be. I explained the science behind what he was doing and all of a sudden it clicked for him. In another two lessons not only could he could play the trombone successfully, he was able to self teach the rest of his materials.
With that diversion aside I want to stress that ALC's are not pretty, but I dare a single parent to say they want their kids sharing a class with someone who routinely brings a lighter to school and has no qualms about setting fire to the building just so he/she doesn't have to be in class. Tell me that's not disruptive behavior, I DARE you to tell me.
Section 2: How Mr. Sporleder stumbled across an epiphany in Spokane
I categorize this entire section as a "Nah, really?!" statement. Seriously! Here's a few excerpts from the article to prove my point:
"Severe and chronic trauma (such as living with an alcoholic parent, or watching in terror as your mom gets beat up) causes toxic stress in kids." -John Medina
"Punishing misbehavior just doesn’t work. You’re simply adding trauma to an already traumatized kid."
NAH, REALLY?! So you're saying that being abused is bad for kids and not allowing them refuge from it at school is bad too?!
It really raises my hackles that this is being treated as some ground breaking discovery! Its all true info, just implement it!
Section 3: This is your (damaged) brain on ACEs
This section is one that I rather enjoy, it's where they actually bring in proof to support their claims. Now it is rather unfortunate that several of their claims and numbers are being misrepresented to suit their own desires.
The article cites this chart to back their claims made earlier in the article. I applaud their efforts, but all they've done is shown is that children with traumatic childhoods are more likely to become alcoholics. A brief summary of the chart: the vertical axis is the percent chance a child will become an alcoholic, the horizontal axis is the number of types of traumatic experiences (up to 10) a child has. This chart says nothing about how that info affects school work or discipline.
This chart discusses the chances of developing depression per gender versus the number of types of traumatic childhood experiences. Like the previous chart, it mentions nothing about how it affects school work or discipline.
Now, we can infer that there is a higher ratio of children with these higher numbers in discipline oriented classrooms (or ALC's), but where is the chart that says just that? The article gave us great examples, but failed to apply them to the subject at hand: how a traumatic life may affect a child's education.
Section 4: Natalie Turner’s two simple rules for dealing with troubled students
The two simple rules are good, in fact I would love to use them, but I have two issues with it. One, you can not stop class for 30 minutes to have a heart to heart with a student. That gets you in trouble with the principal. You're a teacher, you followed the two rules and the student has connected with YOU. Sending the student to talk to the councilors won't help, the student didn't connect with them, he/she connected with YOU. You can't leave your class unattended to talk to him or her, if anything happens in there while you're gone you're fired immediately. I can't justify using this system until there is a way for me to talk to them without ending the class for the day and disrupting the learning of the others. I fully accept that this student needs special attention and help, but if you are the only one the student trusts to talk about these matters and they won't talk to the councilors, then you better be prepared to put up with not being able to teach anymore.
My second issue is the examples given of complex abuse are things I would call the child abuse tip line for. By the way, if you suspect a child is in one of the living situations listed in this section and may be in dangerous living conditions, call (800) 4-A-CHILD and leave an anonymous tip. It's free, it's guaranteed anonymous for your protection so don't hesitate to call and protect someone who can't protect themselves.
Section 5: The red zones of Lincoln High
I'm not a fan of buzz words but if it works, then use it. The important thing is that it gets them to calm down and working thins out like adults. I whole heatedly support this idea, teaching them to calm down and work out their differences verbally and politely is a huge step to preventing them from becoming future criminals. Unless you're Jason Borne, you don't start a fist fight with a level head. This idea of cooling off should be applied to the political world as well. I am a rather big fan of two opposing ideologies sitting down and working out their differences peacefully. So perhaps our leaders can learn form the examples provided by the students of this school.
Section 6: What else do the kids say?
This is a look at what the kids of the school have to say and how they're doing. I'm happy for them, happy that they are overcoming their problems, able to learn to deal with them and are becoming successful. Each one of them had a rough time, I feel especially for the young bullied girl because it should have never gotten that far, yet it did. The young boy who was removed from his family and sent to foster care has done admirably in dealing with the difficulties of his personal life and I hope he is able to accept that those issues were not his fault in any way. These are good kids who needed help, help from an over worked system of underpaid teachers and administrators and they finally got what they needed.
Section 7: School’s ACE survey helps kids, teachers understand each other
They give us a sampling of the questions they ask and some of the results, a rather unfortunate look into the lives of these kids. Then the article goes on to once again draw a conclusion that this causes diseases in the future. I still can not accept that these are related directly to physical health. I can accept a direct correlation to mental health and an indirect link to physical health, but not direct physical.
Section 8: The Health Clinic at Lincoln High
Children are impressionable, we have always been aware of that and what possesses some people to have families then neglect their offspring is nothing but sickening to me. I am not surprised at the revelation that kids need more mental help than physical, now the data backs up what teachers have instinctively know for a long time. Kids from broken or damaged homes need help. The fact that they built a health center to help teach these kids to heal and be safe mentally and physically all through volunteer efforts is an admirable achievement. There are many school districts that could learn from this and make great changes for so many disadvantaged students.
The rest of the article wraps up the whole story of this school and its principal, their desire to continue improving this new program, and the wish for a successful example towards other school districts. I wish them the best in this endeavor.
My personal conclusion about the entire article is that it is foolish to treat this like a novel concept when in fact it should have been done long ago. I would personaly condemn many states and communities for neglecting their disadvantaged populations for so long, but it is also important to keep in mind the limitations created by the parents. If you should take anything away form this, take this; if you ever want to be a parent, be active and positive in your child's life. If you're irresponsible enough to blow your government assistance on a tv as opposed to keeping your family fed and clothed then consider birth control or abortion. Don't let a child be born into a family that will abuse it.
If you suspect ANY child is in an abusive home or situation, do not hesitate to call (800) 4-A-CHILD or else YOU are part of the problem.
Not because of what he does, but because people treat it like it's a sudden revelation that's never been thought of in the history of the world's civilizations.
"Hmm, treat kids with respect and talk out their problems instead of blindly punishing them?"
Well, how about I put it like this; every time you make a lane change without looking over your shoulder, you get a ticket. Some magic MacGuffin is in your vehicle watching you and whenever you change lanes, regardless of circumstance, gives you a ticket for not looking over your shoulder.
Does looking over your shoulder make you a safer driver? Certainly! Does NOT doing so constitute grounds for punishment? Certainly not!
That example right there is the equivalent of what many kids go through at schools.
We're going to break this entire article down section by section and not only take a look at what is being said, but also what is not being said.
Section 1: The Dark Underbelly of School Discipline
Dark underbelly? No, we all know exactly what is going on, no one wants to admit it. If you have kids and are in the least bit attentive and use your brain, you'll know something's wrong with the way discipline works. First, every time a news article throws segregated statistics at the public, they continue to propagate the idea that race determines one's limits.
Eric Harris and Dylan Keibold
If the names are unfamiliar, then that is unfortunate. They may not be the direct cause, but they certainly contributed to the "Zero Tolerance" policy most campuses have adopted. Those boys are the two shooters in the Columbine shootings, where they injured/killed 36 people including themselves.
You can ask any one who's had a gun aimed at them and shots fired with the intent to kill (like our brave solders), it is in those moments that you find out the limits of your mortality. You try to save your life. Teachers are no different, we will try everything in our power to protect our students, but there is a threshold where the instinct to survive overwhelms everything else and we are compelled to run too.
It was in the spirit of preventing this tragedy from happening again, and creating a drug free environment that "Zero Tolerance" was created.
This isn't to absolve parents of their own idiocy though. I've said it before, parents are stupid. Teachers are NOT a substitute for them and yet they expect teachers to raise their children. Okay, fine, we'll raise your children too. Then we get grief for not raising them the way the parents wanted.
TOO BAD.
If you are a parent who's abdicated your responsibilities to your child's teachers and don't like the outcome, it's YOUR FAULT. YOU are to blame, your lack of interest in the human being YOU brought into the world is not their fault, if you didn't want a child then have an abortion or give it up for adoption! You'll never hear a teacher say any of that because they're too scared, the moment a teacher speaks out about the subject they get fired so fast it makes their heads spin and it's not the principal's fault. The principal has to do it to protect the rest of the school from the rest of the stupid parents who will flood the school and the district office with complaints. So what do we do? Fire the teacher who told the truth and pretend everything is A-okay.
These knee jerk reactions are why we use "Zero Tolerance", teachers know that two kids pretending to stab each other with pencils are only goofing off and pretending they're in a horror movie. But, we have to write them up and send them to the office or else we get in trouble.
Suspensions were supposed to be a hefty slap to the face, used only in extreme situations where the principal really didn't want to expel the student. But, for many of the lower achievers who are proud of that mark, they see it as a badge of honor. How can you be cool of you don't get suspended for telling a teacher "you're a dumb motherfucker if you think I need to know how to read this bullshit"?
That's the kind of language that gets thrown at teachers by some of these students. The sad part is, sometimes they believe it too. Most of the time they say things like that to see if they can make the teacher explode. We're good at shrugging it off, but it will eventually wear us down.
Suspensions are not bad, they may be overused, but they're not bad. I applaud the Principal in the article for actually practicing alternative methods, and to the rest of the educational community, I say "why haven't YOU joined in too?"
Actually I know exactly why: we're outmatched. With class sizes pushing 30:1 in favor of students, we just don't have time to do that with every single problem student on top of everything else. Its not an issue of we don't want to, it's an issue of there are not enough hours in the day.
This section of the article finishes with a mention of alternative learning schools (ALC's) and how they're bad. I flat out disagree. There are some people out there who just don't care about school, they don't want to be there and they will do everything in their power to get out. Laws require them to be in school so why not put them somewhere where they won't disrupt those that are learning and taking their education seriously.
The article tries its hardest to tell us that each child is unique but should be treated equally. That's nonsense, everyone is different and should be treated differently. Before you get your undies in a twist about me being a racist or something, I will be clear about what I mean. Every child requires a different approach in the pursuit of convincing them that education is important. Every child reacts to information differently. Every child learns differently.
I once taught a trombone player who no matter what he did, could only play one note. No matter where the slide was on that instrument, the same sound would come out. I sat with him for three days trying every method at my disposal and making new ones up, but nothing worked. Eventually I could find no other way to explain the concept he needed to learn and I just told him what I wanted in college terms. I used explanations that were 10 years ahead of what his understanding should be. I explained the science behind what he was doing and all of a sudden it clicked for him. In another two lessons not only could he could play the trombone successfully, he was able to self teach the rest of his materials.
With that diversion aside I want to stress that ALC's are not pretty, but I dare a single parent to say they want their kids sharing a class with someone who routinely brings a lighter to school and has no qualms about setting fire to the building just so he/she doesn't have to be in class. Tell me that's not disruptive behavior, I DARE you to tell me.
Section 2: How Mr. Sporleder stumbled across an epiphany in Spokane
I categorize this entire section as a "Nah, really?!" statement. Seriously! Here's a few excerpts from the article to prove my point:
"Severe and chronic trauma (such as living with an alcoholic parent, or watching in terror as your mom gets beat up) causes toxic stress in kids." -John Medina
"Punishing misbehavior just doesn’t work. You’re simply adding trauma to an already traumatized kid."
NAH, REALLY?! So you're saying that being abused is bad for kids and not allowing them refuge from it at school is bad too?!
It really raises my hackles that this is being treated as some ground breaking discovery! Its all true info, just implement it!
Section 3: This is your (damaged) brain on ACEs
This section is one that I rather enjoy, it's where they actually bring in proof to support their claims. Now it is rather unfortunate that several of their claims and numbers are being misrepresented to suit their own desires.
The article cites this chart to back their claims made earlier in the article. I applaud their efforts, but all they've done is shown is that children with traumatic childhoods are more likely to become alcoholics. A brief summary of the chart: the vertical axis is the percent chance a child will become an alcoholic, the horizontal axis is the number of types of traumatic experiences (up to 10) a child has. This chart says nothing about how that info affects school work or discipline.
This chart discusses the chances of developing depression per gender versus the number of types of traumatic childhood experiences. Like the previous chart, it mentions nothing about how it affects school work or discipline.
Now, we can infer that there is a higher ratio of children with these higher numbers in discipline oriented classrooms (or ALC's), but where is the chart that says just that? The article gave us great examples, but failed to apply them to the subject at hand: how a traumatic life may affect a child's education.
Section 4: Natalie Turner’s two simple rules for dealing with troubled students
The two simple rules are good, in fact I would love to use them, but I have two issues with it. One, you can not stop class for 30 minutes to have a heart to heart with a student. That gets you in trouble with the principal. You're a teacher, you followed the two rules and the student has connected with YOU. Sending the student to talk to the councilors won't help, the student didn't connect with them, he/she connected with YOU. You can't leave your class unattended to talk to him or her, if anything happens in there while you're gone you're fired immediately. I can't justify using this system until there is a way for me to talk to them without ending the class for the day and disrupting the learning of the others. I fully accept that this student needs special attention and help, but if you are the only one the student trusts to talk about these matters and they won't talk to the councilors, then you better be prepared to put up with not being able to teach anymore.
My second issue is the examples given of complex abuse are things I would call the child abuse tip line for. By the way, if you suspect a child is in one of the living situations listed in this section and may be in dangerous living conditions, call (800) 4-A-CHILD and leave an anonymous tip. It's free, it's guaranteed anonymous for your protection so don't hesitate to call and protect someone who can't protect themselves.
Section 5: The red zones of Lincoln High
I'm not a fan of buzz words but if it works, then use it. The important thing is that it gets them to calm down and working thins out like adults. I whole heatedly support this idea, teaching them to calm down and work out their differences verbally and politely is a huge step to preventing them from becoming future criminals. Unless you're Jason Borne, you don't start a fist fight with a level head. This idea of cooling off should be applied to the political world as well. I am a rather big fan of two opposing ideologies sitting down and working out their differences peacefully. So perhaps our leaders can learn form the examples provided by the students of this school.
Section 6: What else do the kids say?
This is a look at what the kids of the school have to say and how they're doing. I'm happy for them, happy that they are overcoming their problems, able to learn to deal with them and are becoming successful. Each one of them had a rough time, I feel especially for the young bullied girl because it should have never gotten that far, yet it did. The young boy who was removed from his family and sent to foster care has done admirably in dealing with the difficulties of his personal life and I hope he is able to accept that those issues were not his fault in any way. These are good kids who needed help, help from an over worked system of underpaid teachers and administrators and they finally got what they needed.
Section 7: School’s ACE survey helps kids, teachers understand each other
They give us a sampling of the questions they ask and some of the results, a rather unfortunate look into the lives of these kids. Then the article goes on to once again draw a conclusion that this causes diseases in the future. I still can not accept that these are related directly to physical health. I can accept a direct correlation to mental health and an indirect link to physical health, but not direct physical.
Section 8: The Health Clinic at Lincoln High
Children are impressionable, we have always been aware of that and what possesses some people to have families then neglect their offspring is nothing but sickening to me. I am not surprised at the revelation that kids need more mental help than physical, now the data backs up what teachers have instinctively know for a long time. Kids from broken or damaged homes need help. The fact that they built a health center to help teach these kids to heal and be safe mentally and physically all through volunteer efforts is an admirable achievement. There are many school districts that could learn from this and make great changes for so many disadvantaged students.
The rest of the article wraps up the whole story of this school and its principal, their desire to continue improving this new program, and the wish for a successful example towards other school districts. I wish them the best in this endeavor.
My personal conclusion about the entire article is that it is foolish to treat this like a novel concept when in fact it should have been done long ago. I would personaly condemn many states and communities for neglecting their disadvantaged populations for so long, but it is also important to keep in mind the limitations created by the parents. If you should take anything away form this, take this; if you ever want to be a parent, be active and positive in your child's life. If you're irresponsible enough to blow your government assistance on a tv as opposed to keeping your family fed and clothed then consider birth control or abortion. Don't let a child be born into a family that will abuse it.
If you suspect ANY child is in an abusive home or situation, do not hesitate to call (800) 4-A-CHILD or else YOU are part of the problem.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
(applies to women too)
Monday, April 30, 2012
Your teachers are NOT paid too much money
I have yet to meet one, but there are people out there who believe
school teachers are paid too much. They are wrong. Everyone has a right to
their own opinion, even wrong ones, but this is an opinion that shouldn't be
allowed.
Why do they think
that?
In explaining this
we come across a multi-faced problem, the biggest ones are; the state, parents,
students, and teachers.
The state is the
eternal thorn in the side of every teacher. The state has in some form or
another provided free education, available to any child, so it is only natural
that they wish the institutions they fund to meet certain standards in quality.
The most popular form of this takes the form of state testing. The critical
flaw in this line of reasoning is in how the testing and the state mandated
curriculum overlap (I will use Texas as an example because I am the
most familiar with it). The state standards for the curriculum are set by the
texas board of education. A semi-civilian/state business who's role is to
oversee all school districts in the state (and in extreme cases, take over or
shut down schools or districts). There are fifteen people in charge of this
organization and the unfortunate part is they are all associated
to political parties. So instead of 15 people who wish to provide the
highest standards in knowledge and turn the student population into free
thinkers (whom are able to objectively review information, make decisions for
themselves, and synthesize new information), they want to redact Thomas
Jefferson's emphasis on the separation of church and state and emphasize the
importance of religion to the founding fathers. Anyone who simply reads some
basic history books will learn that the founding fathers were non
denominational or spiritualists and they designed the Establishment Clause in
the 1st amendment for that reason. The primary issue teachers take
with the state is the state testing. Because so much of our job security relies
on students passing it, teachers tend to suspend teaching the subjects in lieu
of teaching students how to take the test and what will be on the test. We have
to do this because it is all that we know that will be on the test, if we try
to go beyond the test, we risk the grades going down, lowering government aid,
and risk intervention from outside agencies.
The students are
the easiest problem to fix and are directly related to the issue of the
parents. Kids are kids, they will always misbehave and they will always find a
reason to do it as often as possible, but with the parents standing behind the
teachers the children will improve drastically.
The teachers as part of the problem invokes the classic adage:
"those who cannot do, teach". You can not fathom how wrong this
is. I have personally refused to accept
jobs I am qualified for because I desire more practical experience in my field
before I teach so I can expand the knowledge of my subject. Then there are the
few unfortunate teachers that prove the adage right, they have spent twenty
years a geologist for an oil company that just went out of business and need a
new job. They're too old to be hired at another company so they tell themselves
"well, geology is a type of science, so I'll teach!" so they get
their certification and begin to fail miserably at inspiring and teaching. They
do not understand how to teach children, they never had to manage a room of
thirty or forty kids without a safety net of any kind (the master teacher to
back them up or the assistant principal on standby). So they yell and scream at
the kids assuming that is how it works. This is a terrible idea, one of the most
important functions of a teacher is to impart the desire to achieve greater
things and yelling at the kids isn't going to work. Another BIG issue is one
teacher trying to teach a class of over thirty-five students. There are very
few fields of study that involve classes of that size (music and physical
education being two of them). Music teachers are used to classes of fifty and
larger because that is the environment they were taught their subject in. However
when a math teacher has to teach forty disinterested kids, it quickly devolves
to hell on earth. So why do we have classrooms with thirty plus kids on
average? Because of budget cuts. Schools know they don't have enough space so
they try to get a building expansion, but the taxpayers don't want to pay
anymore so the school has to make do. The school shuffles the room assignments
around to free up some extra space to hire more teachers but when the school
district proposes another tax hike to pay for their salaries, the tax payers
say no. These kids are the ones who will be running the businesses you shop at,
the backbone of your community and yet so few are willing to contribute what is
needed to make their education more valuable.
The last group that causes unmitigated pain in the word of
teaching is the most significant: parents. At some point in the 80's or 90's
parents activated some form of telepathic osmosis and decided that school
wasn't a place to learn, it was a free babysitter. "My kid dun need no
lernun', he gun be a tow truck drivr like mah daddy, and me." Well bravo
sir, you're now part of the problem. I have nothing against tow truck drivers,
they perform a necessary function, what I do have a problem with is people down
playing the importance of education just because they don't think they'll need
it later. Even the lowliest of jobs require math, reading, basic science, critical
thinking, and reasoning. There is NO reason for parents to tell a child that
education is not important, NONE what so ever. Parents, teachers aren't trying
to tell you how to raise your children, they're giving you tools to make it
easier and to give your child a better chance at being that famous doctor or
lawyer or scientist. No matter the economic background, if a parent is willing
to be interested in their child's life and education, the teacher will bend
over backwards and jump through as many hoops as possible to help, guaranteed.
Parents, YOU are the final say as to whether what we teach matters so please
PLEASE help your teachers.
Finally, we return to the subject that this article was written
for. NO your teacher is not paid too much. Teachers are willing to spend their
own meager earning to try and give their students a chance at success, something
the parents should be doing. We work hard to make the day's lesson a positive
and memorable experience, worthy of the student saying "Yes, this is
important to know."
I wish to impart one last piece of info before you return to your
daily routine, how much a teacher is paid.
about $46,500/yr
Lets break it down:
the summer break is on average 2-3 months long, some districts
allow teachers to take all their salary during only the school year, some get
it all 12 months. We will look at both types.
Monthly pay:
9 month: 46,500/9= 5,166/mo
12 month: 46,500/9= 3,875/mo
Daily pay:
9 month (30 day/mo avg): 5,166/30=172.20/day
12 month (365 days): 46,500/365=127.39/day
per student*:
9 month (180 students): 172.20/180=0.95/student
12 month (180 students): 127.39/180=0.70/student
*the average teacher has 6 classes of 30 students each (6*30=180)
That is before taxes (federal/state/local/social/etc.) which
varies from state to state. If you wish to get more accurate, then the final result
would be to subtract 7 to 13 cents from the per student numbers.
Conclusion: Your child's teacher is paid 0.70 to 0.95 cents a day
to teach them. If you think being paid less than a dollar a day per student is
a fair wage then you are wrong. Plain and simple wrong.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
99% of you won't re-post this because of breast cancer
First:
I want it to be known that I HATE activist text images. Specifically the ones you see on facebook that talk about some real life problem then concludes by saying "I bet 99% of WON'T repost this, but if you have a heart then share this on your wall!"
That is bullshit
Being 'aware' of something doesn't make it better, it just becomes common knowledge that you're not doing anything about it. I don't care that you support bully awareness! You're not helping! If you want to help stop bullying, go and volunteer to be a mentor for troubled kids at a school. Seriously, I'm tired of everyone saying "I'm [insert problem here] aware". Don't talk about it, don't 'be aware', don't mess around. FIX THE PROBLEM. If you have a kid, preemptively stop them from being a bully by teaching them to not be a jerk OR to be so passive. Bullies pick on those they think won't defend themselves, so teach your kid to stand up and do something about it. This goes for Haiti awareness too, don't just talk about donating money, get some serious cash, donate it then volunteer to go in and help them rebuild. There's a whole mess of problems out there, don't be aware, be a fixer.
Next Rant:
I DO NOT SUPPORT BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH
That doesn't mean I don't like women or value others. I simply do not support the idea that women should be placed above men. I don't believe the other way either, you knee-jerking idiots. If you want to make a huge deal out of researching and curing a gender specific cancer, then I call for equal treatment. Why not have a prostate cancer awareness month? Sell armbands that read I LOVE NUTS! It'll never happen though, it's not marketable. It's quirky and funny seeing little boys and girls wear wrist bands that read "I love boobies!" but the moment you have a little girl wear one that says "I love nuts!" her parents will be arrested and investigated for child abuse.
Individuals and companies pour millions into breast cancer research and that's wonderful, it will be a golden day when breast cancer is beaten. However, in the meantime, prostate cancer is still there, we have no idea how to figure out who will get it and if its not caught fast enough the result is death (like most cancers). So women, men go to bat for breast cancer research, why can't YOU go to bat for prostate cancer research?
Conclusion:
I WILL SUPPORT BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH WHEN THERE IS PROSTATE AWARENESS MONTH OF EQUAL IMPORTANCE.
I want it to be known that I HATE activist text images. Specifically the ones you see on facebook that talk about some real life problem then concludes by saying "I bet 99% of WON'T repost this, but if you have a heart then share this on your wall!"
That is bullshit
Being 'aware' of something doesn't make it better, it just becomes common knowledge that you're not doing anything about it. I don't care that you support bully awareness! You're not helping! If you want to help stop bullying, go and volunteer to be a mentor for troubled kids at a school. Seriously, I'm tired of everyone saying "I'm [insert problem here] aware". Don't talk about it, don't 'be aware', don't mess around. FIX THE PROBLEM. If you have a kid, preemptively stop them from being a bully by teaching them to not be a jerk OR to be so passive. Bullies pick on those they think won't defend themselves, so teach your kid to stand up and do something about it. This goes for Haiti awareness too, don't just talk about donating money, get some serious cash, donate it then volunteer to go in and help them rebuild. There's a whole mess of problems out there, don't be aware, be a fixer.
Next Rant:
I DO NOT SUPPORT BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH
That doesn't mean I don't like women or value others. I simply do not support the idea that women should be placed above men. I don't believe the other way either, you knee-jerking idiots. If you want to make a huge deal out of researching and curing a gender specific cancer, then I call for equal treatment. Why not have a prostate cancer awareness month? Sell armbands that read I LOVE NUTS! It'll never happen though, it's not marketable. It's quirky and funny seeing little boys and girls wear wrist bands that read "I love boobies!" but the moment you have a little girl wear one that says "I love nuts!" her parents will be arrested and investigated for child abuse.
Individuals and companies pour millions into breast cancer research and that's wonderful, it will be a golden day when breast cancer is beaten. However, in the meantime, prostate cancer is still there, we have no idea how to figure out who will get it and if its not caught fast enough the result is death (like most cancers). So women, men go to bat for breast cancer research, why can't YOU go to bat for prostate cancer research?
Conclusion:
I WILL SUPPORT BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH WHEN THERE IS PROSTATE AWARENESS MONTH OF EQUAL IMPORTANCE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)