Quantcast
Late shows on Trump's first solo press conference

Forums - Politics Discussion - Late shows on Trump's first solo press conference

Scoobes said:
Slimebeast said:

I'm not gonna comment anymore if you spin things.

1. Vetting procuders are beside this point. It's a non issue to my argument. It's as if you deny the whole massive flood of criticism against Trump based on him being against immigration and being isolationist. By people who are "antiracist", "tolerant", "multicultural" etc etc etc. It's the single biggest thing that leftists are upset about with Trump, his agenda against immigration.

2. "Fox has huge coverage though". Fox is just one channel. Media as a whole is dominated by the left.

Don't lecture me on how the education system should be. I am saying that right now, the education systems are spewing leftist propaganda to young people all over the world. Of course at the same time, they are able to convey some understanding of critical thinking in general in many topics. It's not a contradiction. They still brainwash people on political and social issues.

"Leftist propaganda". Sorry, but I'm too tired to give a definition now. I have argued about this at length on this forum for years and written pages of texts about it.

3. Yes, the rise of China, despite its evil, as a counter-balance against "Merkel" (Merkel as a symbol of the current world order) is a good example of the new world order I am hoping for.

I'm not spinning anything.

1. I'm basing this on what the outcomes will be of the policies he puts forth and proper vetting procedures absolutely should be part of his immigration policies. They actually are/were as the ban was supposed to be temporary whilst his cabinet came up with more extreme vetting, but as I've said there was no evidence current vetting wasn't working. 

@ bolded: Forget the politics of the situation, you always get the name calling and upsetting people on the opposite side (Obama had it in his term, Bush in his etc.). That's part of democracy. The big issue is his competency in formulating his ideas into proper real-world policies. He makes it far too easy for media outlets to pick up on his many blatant mistakes. The blanket immigration ban was illegal yet he put it through anyway (he should have advisors that would have known this was a likely outcome and formulated alternatives). His fabrication of stats that don't exist everytime he speaks to the public; yesterday he made up a terrorist attack in your country. This isn't how to build faith in your competence if a simple google search can tell if you're lying. 

If you're already Left/democrat then it just confirms your beliefs and if you're centrist then you're left wondering if he's really up to the job. 

2. I can't really comment on this unless you give me your examples so I'll leave it. Feel free to add to this when you're more awake!

3. I think you're making a similar mistake to the UK government and seriously overestimating Merkels ability. China are just as likely to strike up trade deals and ally with Germany/EU because of the US' isolationism as anything else. 

I can attest to how bad the school systems are in the US. Just look at the riots in the University system reecently. Its better to riot and cause turmoil, and to shut down free speech, than to have an open debate. Its their way or the highway, and all they want is free, free, free. Everything is a right and neccesity to college students now. But it starts in the lower parts of the schooling system as well. At least in California it is. They teach to the lowest comomn denominator, and they dont push or challenge or reward those who should be advanced. Its better apparently to have all kids come out equally stupid instead of letting those who should excell the opurtunity to do so.

 

On a side note just because I have always wondered and its hard to find info online about that is accurate, what are the requirements for getting free college education in european countries? I am most interested in Germany and England. Does everyone get in no matter what? Do they have to pass a test? Is it based on how well you do in school?



Around the Network
thranx said:
Scoobes said:

I'm not spinning anything.

1. I'm basing this on what the outcomes will be of the policies he puts forth and proper vetting procedures absolutely should be part of his immigration policies. They actually are/were as the ban was supposed to be temporary whilst his cabinet came up with more extreme vetting, but as I've said there was no evidence current vetting wasn't working. 

@ bolded: Forget the politics of the situation, you always get the name calling and upsetting people on the opposite side (Obama had it in his term, Bush in his etc.). That's part of democracy. The big issue is his competency in formulating his ideas into proper real-world policies. He makes it far too easy for media outlets to pick up on his many blatant mistakes. The blanket immigration ban was illegal yet he put it through anyway (he should have advisors that would have known this was a likely outcome and formulated alternatives). His fabrication of stats that don't exist everytime he speaks to the public; yesterday he made up a terrorist attack in your country. This isn't how to build faith in your competence if a simple google search can tell if you're lying. 

If you're already Left/democrat then it just confirms your beliefs and if you're centrist then you're left wondering if he's really up to the job. 

2. I can't really comment on this unless you give me your examples so I'll leave it. Feel free to add to this when you're more awake!

3. I think you're making a similar mistake to the UK government and seriously overestimating Merkels ability. China are just as likely to strike up trade deals and ally with Germany/EU because of the US' isolationism as anything else. 

I can attest to how bad the school systems are in the US. Just look at the riots in the University system reecently. Its better to riot and cause turmoil, and to shut down free speech, than to have an open debate. Its their way or the highway, and all they want is free, free, free. Everything is a right and neccesity to college students now. But it starts in the lower parts of the schooling system as well. At least in California it is. They teach to the lowest comomn denominator, and they dont push or challenge or reward those who should be advanced. Its better apparently to have all kids come out equally stupid instead of letting those who should excell the opurtunity to do so.

 

On a side note just because I have always wondered and its hard to find info online about that is accurate, what are the requirements for getting free college education in european countries? I am most interested in Germany and England. Does everyone get in no matter what? Do they have to pass a test? Is it based on how well you do in school?

The stuff happening at universities isn't a US-only issue. Barring certain speakers because you disagree with them has been happening at universities in Europe as well and is actually the complete antithesis of the university education system where open debate is usually seen as the best way to air out grievances. This really is a political issue that goes much further than just education as many seem to be much happier living in their own little political bubble rather than being exposed to the full political spectrum.

As for the "free" thing, I look at the US costs for a college education and it's become insane. I get that education at university costs money, but I have to wonder if even half of students are getting their money's worth. It's effectively trapping younger generations with unpayable amounts of debt before they even start working, but as most professions now require a degree (even if they really don't need one for the job itself) they have to go just to meet the bare minimum spec for even a half decent job. 

I don't know how it works in Germany, but in England it's now similar to the US but there is an upper limit for tuition fees (£9250/year, introduced in 2012 from £3000/year). The fee is payable via a government loan and I believe the loan amount you receive is means-tested. The government then directly pay the loan amount to the University. A second maintenance loan is normally also applied for to cover living costs.

The student doesn't have to pay anything back until they are earning over £21,000/year. To be perfectly honest, the vast majority of graduates are unlikely to pay off their loan amount in their working life so the government will likely take a slight hit in the long-term. In this regard it is little more than a graduate tax, although it's still a significant hit to your monthly pay. 

@ bolded

I don't think that's true. The US education system isn't that bad based on the UN Human Development Report. As a whole you could probably do with improving standards in Maths and Science, but it's not as bad as you think it might be. Also, I'm pretty sure I've read reports suggesting that raising standards with the lowest performing students to be more in-line with the rest is more likely to also raise standards for the whole class as the poorly performing students are less likely to play up and disrupt the rest. Plus it depends where you are. I'm sure if you went to a school in Silicon Valley you'd receive some of the best education in the World. 

It's a bit of a weird one as I went to a Grammar school (a segregated school designed to push the more "gifted" pool of students based on a test at 11 years old, not something most of the Country does anymore) and got a really good (free) education. By the time I started uni though, everyone at uni was at a similar level regardless of their school. On the flipside, for the pupils who fail to get into a Grammar school, they are some of the worst performing in the whole of the UK (well below where they should be, even assuming the "brightest" are at other schools). 



Scoobes said:
thranx said:

I can attest to how bad the school systems are in the US. Just look at the riots in the University system reecently. Its better to riot and cause turmoil, and to shut down free speech, than to have an open debate. Its their way or the highway, and all they want is free, free, free. Everything is a right and neccesity to college students now. But it starts in the lower parts of the schooling system as well. At least in California it is. They teach to the lowest comomn denominator, and they dont push or challenge or reward those who should be advanced. Its better apparently to have all kids come out equally stupid instead of letting those who should excell the opurtunity to do so.

 

On a side note just because I have always wondered and its hard to find info online about that is accurate, what are the requirements for getting free college education in european countries? I am most interested in Germany and England. Does everyone get in no matter what? Do they have to pass a test? Is it based on how well you do in school?

The stuff happening at universities isn't a US-only issue. Barring certain speakers because you disagree with them has been happening at universities in Europe as well and is actually the complete antithesis of the university education system where open debate is usually seen as the best way to air out grievances. This really is a political issue that goes much further than just education as many seem to be much happier living in their own little political bubble rather than being exposed to the full political spectrum.

As for the "free" thing, I look at the US costs for a college education and it's become insane. I get that education at university costs money, but I have to wonder if even half of students are getting their money's worth. It's effectively trapping younger generations with unpayable amounts of debt before they even start working, but as most professions now require a degree (even if they really don't need one for the job itself) they have to go just to meet the bare minimum spec for even a half decent job. 

I don't know how it works in Germany, but in England it's now similar to the US but there is an upper limit for tuition fees (£9250/year, introduced in 2012 from £3000/year). The fee is payable via a government loan and I believe the loan amount you receive is means-tested. The government then directly pay the loan amount to the University. A second maintenance loan is normally also applied for to cover living costs.

The student doesn't have to pay anything back until they are earning over £21,000/year. To be perfectly honest, the vast majority of graduates are unlikely to pay off their loan amount in their working life so the government will likely take a slight hit in the long-term. In this regard it is little more than a graduate tax, although it's still a significant hit to your monthly pay. 

@ bolded

I don't think that's true. The US education system isn't that bad based on the UN Human Development Report. As a whole you could probably do with improving standards in Maths and Science, but it's not as bad as you think it might be. Also, I'm pretty sure I've read reports suggesting that raising standards with the lowest performing students to be more in-line with the rest is more likely to also raise standards for the whole class as the poorly performing students are less likely to play up and disrupt the rest. Plus it depends where you are. I'm sure if you went to a school in Silicon Valley you'd receive some of the best education in the World. 

It's a bit of a weird one as I went to a Grammar school (a segregated school designed to push the more "gifted" pool of students based on a test at 11 years old, not something most of the Country does anymore) and got a really good (free) education. By the time I started uni though, everyone at uni was at a similar level regardless of their school. On the flipside, for the pupils who fail to get into a Grammar school, they are some of the worst performing in the whole of the UK (well below where they should be, even assuming the "brightest" are at other schools). 

You can go to school for the same or less than you pay in england, and also get get subsidized student loans that the government backs as well. seems real similar to the english system. where it departs is probably that people are given a choice, and many choose to spend much more than needed to get their education, either due to failing classes and taking them over, taking the wrong classes, or not completing their classes but still owing debt. Tuition in the us for instate 4 year university is around 8k-10k for almost every state, less if you go to a 2 year college for some of the education. I have often felt its somewhat of a myth of the high education costs in the US. Its more of what people choose to do. Ive also wondered if free university education in other countries is tied to academic performance. it should be