Wake up

"I take issue not with you, but with the majority of people that don't seem to comprehend the dire consequences that will soon become irreversible by our continued reliance on other countries. You speak to globilization and the need for me to deal with it, that's fine I'll deal with it, but I beleive that continued acceptance of the globilization catchphrase will cement our undoing.
Recession for the US economy is inevitable. The dollar is becoming weaker against the Euro and the Yen. Housing sector will continue to decline as lenders continue to stay away from subprime borrowers. Real jobless rates are higher than truly reported and continue to rise. Economic growth forcasts for 2008 have already begun to drop. I could go on. The problem is that it seems nobody wants to accept what is going on. We already have to cower down to the nations that are members of OPEC. We have made concessions to China. We have become weak and we are in for a rude awakening. Some will say that I am just spreading doom and gloom .... whatever. I say take a look around and realize that we need to quit talking like we are in a classroom and start doing some things that will make us strong and independent .... if that means saying to hell with globilization then so be it."
Quit hitting the snooze button and wake up."

At the risk of sounding like a Republican, I disagree. To ignore the global economy would be a disaster. For one, the price of goods would skyrocket much faster than American wages could ever catch up. We've taken some hits from globalization, but instead of running from it, we need to become better competitors. We need to improve our workforce by having the best education system in the world, and we must innovate, innovate, innovate. Additionally, someone once said, and I wish I could remember who it was, but it was something like "often when trade crosses borders, armies do not."

The public school system isn't going to change kids, no, but it is very flawed because it is based on an outdated model that might have worked in 1960 but not today. Even our honors level kids are not prepared the way they are in other countries, kids who are motivated and will become our genetic researchers and software engineers. We are just unwilling to change, unwilling to sink the kind of money into it, and unwilling to drop the needless bureaucracy. As long as there is a such thing as an "education" major in college nothing will change. As long as you have a budget of 300 to buy materials for 5 science classes of 30 kids, nothing will change. I agree that public service would be of great use to modern day students to learn about things like work ethic and responsibility, but most public service isn't going to teach them the complex subject knowledge that they need. We have to reform public schools from the top down.

Virginia, my rant is not democratic or republican it is more of I hope an (intelligent?) redneck view point. The global economy is directly related to the US economy, as the US economy goes, so goes the global economy. While I question our ability to influence other countries on a political level (credibility) we do have a significant affect on the flow of goods and products. The problem, at least IMHO is that our economic health is at the whim and under the control of other nations. China has been and continues to purchase both physical assets and US Treasury Bonds.

"In 2007, acquisitions in the United States by foreign ventures hit $407 billion, up 93 percent from the previous year, according to Thomson Financial. The top countries investing were Canada, Britain and Germany; the Middle East and Asia -- especially China -- are quickly catching up." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/27/AR2008012702380.html

"The report quoted the statistics released by US economists' research, saying that China's central bank, the People's Bank of China (PBOC), bought US$50 billion in US Treasury bonds from August to October.(2008) Treasury bonds held by PBC increased to US$750 billion. Of the total balance of Treasury bonds held by foreign central banks, China's share is 35.4 percent. "http://www.china.org.cn/business/highlights/2008-11/10/content_16740464.htm

The trade deficit that the US has with China continues to increase China's control over the US dollar. If we threaten to level a playing field, so to speak by, all China has to do is start selling Treasury Bonds and the dollar free falls against the global currencies. The bailouts have to be funded and they are funded by ....... Treasury Bonds, which in turn are gobbled up by foreign countries thus weakening our ability to "defend" ourselves on the economic front.

My point Virginia, is that we need to come to some realizations and we need to come to them rather sooner than later. There will be a point that both wrists and ankles of the US will be strapped to a barrel and no amount of bailout, negotiation, Hillary Clinton (Sec of State), pleading or begging will work.

As to the education discussion. The whole system needs to be redesigned. Four tracks after a basic 10 years;
Track one: trade
Track two: college prep
Track three: armed services
Track four: public service

Some see globilization as a natural evolution by the application of economic theory. If you evaluate the US position on the global economy, you find that we are an end user of manufactured products (imports) and a service economy with only US citizens as the consumer hence the continuing trade deficit. There is a point of no return as we continue to run a trade and budget deficit. The US can not just keep "printing more money". We have to realize that it has to end some how and some where. What I am saying the sooner we decide when that will be, the better it will be for us.

Why is this even an issue? Why is ANY issue an "issue" now? Did any of you not pay attention to the Presidential election? Did Obama not say"We will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth."
So..sit back....relax..Obama's got your back!!It's all good,yo!

The devaluation of the dollar may be a good thing. After all who in the world can afford to buy a shirt made in America that costs $40.00 when they can buy the same shirt made in Indonesia for $12.00. This difference is that the average American manufacturing employee makes $17.00 per hour vs maybe $2.00 and hour in Indonesia. In addition the American manufacturer must meet(and pay for) all EPA/OSHA requirements, workers comp., retirements, 401Ks, medical plans, state/Fed/local taxes, and probably some other things. These all add up to increase the cost of the manufactured product. The US may never again be able to compete in routine manufacturing with the rest of the world. Unless the value of the dollar drops significantly and the associated costs also drop.

"We have to reform public schools from the top down."-ibvirginia
I reject this term "public" school.The only correct description is "Government school" They are owned and operated by government. Every employee, from the superintendent to the dishwasher in the cafeteria, is a government employee. So, let's call them what they are. Government schools.

Please read: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article8031.html for a response to your comment.

JD,
I'm not exactly sure what you are asking, but let me go into a little more detail.

I do NOT think we need to sink significantly more money into education, but yes, we do need more money. Primarily what we need to do is stop funding such a large, useless bureaucracy in education. Of the total amount we spend per student per year, about half of it goes to administration salaries (not including teacher salaries). We can reduce, not eliminate, this expense.

To answer your specific question, bigger classes would not help. Students need BOTH reasonable class sizes AND appropriate materials. Even at 30 kids/1 teacher, there is significantly more "classroom management" being done than teaching. Add to this the fact that outside a few honors/special ed opportunities, you have a huge variety of skill levels. Also, you cannot assume that there are three teachers teaching those five classes. That example is of one teacher (my boy) and his budget to teach 5 classes himself.

I keep harping on one change because I truly believe that it is at the core, along with funding issues, of our problem. We have to eliminate the education major in colleges. Teachers who do not know their subject matter any more than what is in the textbook are useless even in smaller classes with infinite materials. There are a lot of teachers out there that you would be shocked to know how little they know of their subject matter. And then, sometimes you have an incredible English teacher who knows a lot about grammar and literature and yet, he or she might be forced to teach Math because of budget constraits. This person might have barely passed math themselves.

And yes, whomever said above that parents are ultimately the problem, and that is certainly true in many cases. But we are also failing to properly educate our more advanced students with supportive parents to the same degree that other countries are educating their advanced students with supportive parents. Put an honor student from Anderson County up against an honor student from Munchen or Berlin, and it would be absolutely no contest. In my experience, their average students are our honor students.

Ok JD, I think I got ya now. And I completely agree that it is shameful that Anderson County is divided up into 5 districts with 5 sets of administrations. Which one is better for students? Smaller classes by far would be the more important of the two. BUT, again, I say that none of it matters if your teacher does not understand the subject matter, which is an epidemic in public education right now. Better quality teachers, as far as I'm concerned, is the number one fix.

Why not can the whole "public school" system ? Give every family with school-age children an allowance to send the child to a private/corporate school?
No more teachers union, no more teachers retirement/benefits, no more tenure,
no more high payed administrators, no need to build new schools that are monuments to the superintendents. It would all be competitive.

Added bonus. All sports would be participant and observer supported. Players pay and fans pay. Admission cost would be for what it really cost to run a sports program, not some samll fee because taxpayers (who never go to games/events) are subsidizing the facilities. All playing fields, gyms and areans would be corporately owned and sponsored.

Best of all, NO HUGE REVENUE BOND DEALS the obligate home owners to years of higher and higher taxes.

What better teachers? When they have to compete for jobs like other corporate employees, they will have to be up to the job.

Corporations will turn out a good product of students and faculty because they will have to to compete for the business.

Want better schools? Can the entire "public schools" system and put education out to the free enterprise system. Let corporations run schools and compete for the business. The product will get better and the price will come down.

Because if you took the exact same amount of money that the state spends per child and gave it to them for private school, it still would not be enough to pay for a full years tuition at most private schools. So, you'd have the poorest students still unable to afford an education. Public schools have enough bulk that they can educate a child much cheaper than we can in private schools.

And I don't know that corporate America is in any better shape right now than public education.

A better public education system is possible. I've seen it in other places, but we've got to dig through the bureaucracy to change it.

Because if you took the exact same amount of money that the state spends per child and gave it to them for private school, it still would not be enough to pay for a full years tuition at most private schools. So, you'd have the poorest students still unable to afford an education. Public schools have enough bulk that they can educate a child much cheaper than we can in private schools.

And I don't know that corporate America is in any better shape right now than public education.

A better public education system is possible. I've seen it in other places, but we've got to dig through the bureaucracy to change it.

-ibvirginia

IBV: Folks around here don't like to be reminded about how things work in other places. They remind such suggestion that if it was so much better at where-ever, go back there and leave us folks to run our own place. I'm not suggesting that, I'm just say'n.

BTW, it wouldn't require the same amount per student because a well run corporation would take all the fat out of the system and get down to what's needed to produce a product that is competitive. True, some corporations are having troubles right now. Thats makes my point. When an entity doesn't function in the interest of its shareholders and customers it usually ends up in financial trouble. What better example than public education?