Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Abolish education

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page 1, 2  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Tannin Capricorn

Can't remember


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:07 pm
Post subject: Abolish educationReply with quote

Former leader of the Liberal Party John Hewson says Abbot should take advantage of his impending cabinet reshuffle and abolish the federal Education Department. Hewson is one of the few remaining honest and decent Liberals, but he got this one wrong. The correct action in this circumstance is not to abolish the Education Department. It is to abolish Christopher Pyne.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:26 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm assuming his reasoning is that education is a state issue and the feds should butt out?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:33 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Dave The Man Scorpio



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:53 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Why are all Liberals complete and utter Idiots
_________________
I am Da Man
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Warnings : 1 
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:23 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile


http://theconversation.com/is-education-better-off-in-state-or-federal-hands-27369

Personally I think a model of federal funding, state administration and school board curriculum decisions with little or no influence from the Federal Government is the way to go. I'm a bit tired of constant 'culture wars' in education as well, but when academia, from primary to tertiary level is overwhelmingly leftist I can understand why conservatives try and move the needle back a few notches. Interesting that it's a conservative who is advocating removing most of the federal influence as it's how they've fought those culture wars in the past (national curriculum and funding decisions).
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Tannin Capricorn

Can't remember


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:37 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Dave The Man wrote:
Why are all Liberals complete and utter Idiots


Not all Liberals, Dave, not nearly all Liberals. There are in fact eight sorts of Liberals.


  • (A) Complete and utter idiots.
  • (B) Corrupt self-righteous bastards feeding at the public trough.
  • (C) Ones who look like complete and utter idiots but are in fact devious bastards using idiocy as camouflage.
  • (D) Ones who look like devious bastards but are in fact devious bastards.
  • (E) Decent, honest people who accidentally ended up in the wrong party.
  • (F) People who were once more-or-less decent and more-or-less honest, but have learned a very great deal about both bastardry and idiocy 'coz without at least one of those two qualities they wouldn't have got past the next pre-selection meeting.
  • (G) People who joined the Liberal Party back in the days when it was decent and honest and are now horrified at the way the Tea Party weirdos and the lunatic bigots like Senator Bestiality and George Christensen have taken over the asylum.


Recent studies have demonstrated that some of these sorts are more common than others. At last count, we had:

  • (A) 44%
  • (B) 79%
  • (C) 13%
  • (D) 34%
  • (E) 3%
  • (F) 17%
  • (G) 8%


As you can see from these figures, the Liberal Party is not 100% dishonest and stupid. It is in fact 11% honest but stupid, and 186% dishonest and/or stupid. But do not despair! With George Christensen to show them the way, they have a plan to achieve full 200% stupidity before Easter, and are hopeful or going for 300% later in 2015.

_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
John Wren Virgo

"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."


Joined: 15 Jul 2007


PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 5:06 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Wokko wrote:
David wrote:
If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile


http://theconversation.com/is-education-better-off-in-state-or-federal-hands-27369

Personally I think a model of federal funding, state administration and school board curriculum decisions with little or no influence from the Federal Government is the way to go. I'm a bit tired of constant 'culture wars' in education as well, but when academia, from primary to tertiary level is overwhelmingly leftist I can understand why conservatives try and move the needle back a few notches. Interesting that it's a conservative who is advocating removing most of the federal influence as it's how they've fought those culture wars in the past (national curriculum and funding decisions).


how could you achieve federal funding AND little to no influence from federal government?

_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 5:23 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

John Wren wrote:
Wokko wrote:
David wrote:
If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile


http://theconversation.com/is-education-better-off-in-state-or-federal-hands-27369

Personally I think a model of federal funding, state administration and school board curriculum decisions with little or no influence from the Federal Government is the way to go. I'm a bit tired of constant 'culture wars' in education as well, but when academia, from primary to tertiary level is overwhelmingly leftist I can understand why conservatives try and move the needle back a few notches. Interesting that it's a conservative who is advocating removing most of the federal influence as it's how they've fought those culture wars in the past (national curriculum and funding decisions).


how could you achieve federal funding AND little to no influence from federal government?


Have politicians with the interests of the people and not their own power at heart. Laughing
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Dave The Man Scorpio



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 5:55 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Wokko wrote:
John Wren wrote:
Wokko wrote:
David wrote:
If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile


http://theconversation.com/is-education-better-off-in-state-or-federal-hands-27369

Personally I think a model of federal funding, state administration and school board curriculum decisions with little or no influence from the Federal Government is the way to go. I'm a bit tired of constant 'culture wars' in education as well, but when academia, from primary to tertiary level is overwhelmingly leftist I can understand why conservatives try and move the needle back a few notches. Interesting that it's a conservative who is advocating removing most of the federal influence as it's how they've fought those culture wars in the past (national curriculum and funding decisions).


how could you achieve federal funding AND little to no influence from federal government?


Have politicians with the interests of the people and not their own power at heart. Laughing


Very Well said.

They are only there to look after themselves and there mates and Companies that Pay them off

_________________
I am Da Man
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Warnings : 1 
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 6:40 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

John Wren wrote:
Wokko wrote:
David wrote:
If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile


http://theconversation.com/is-education-better-off-in-state-or-federal-hands-27369

Personally I think a model of federal funding, state administration and school board curriculum decisions with little or no influence from the Federal Government is the way to go. I'm a bit tired of constant 'culture wars' in education as well, but when academia, from primary to tertiary level is overwhelmingly leftist I can understand why conservatives try and move the needle back a few notches. Interesting that it's a conservative who is advocating removing most of the federal influence as it's how they've fought those culture wars in the past (national curriculum and funding decisions).


how could you achieve federal funding AND little to no influence from federal government?


Disconnect Federal funding from specific portfolios.

The Federal government collects the GST and hands it over to the states. It should be portfolio neutral.

The only Federal funding that should have strings is if a state applies specifically for a grant. Otherwise, too many cooks.

I'm personally of the believe that between Federal, State and Local we have seriously way to many bureaucrats. Cut back on the duplication of effort and you can divert the savings to where it's needed.

Does Health need more bureaucrats or more clinicians?
Does Education need more bureaucrats or more and better teachers?

Personally I'd be happy for things like Health, Education and Criminal Law to all be federal issues and the states take a step back and absorb councils. But I fear that the constitution would be a problem.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Tannin Capricorn

Can't remember


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 9:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

John Wren wrote:
how could you achieve federal funding AND little to no influence from federal government?


Why would you want to? The Feds are consistently less worse at education than the states generally are. (Not just education, by the bye, but education is our current topic.)


stui magpie wrote:
Personally I'd be happy for things like Health, Education and Criminal Law to all be federal issues and the states take a step back and absorb councils. But I fear that the constitution would be a problem.


On that platform, I'll vote 1 Stui Magpie!

_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
John Wren Virgo

"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."


Joined: 15 Jul 2007


PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 11:04 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
John Wren wrote:
Wokko wrote:
David wrote:
If so, I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea. For anyone more up on this, what are the arguments for and against decentralisation?

My intuition is that centralisation and streamlining are better, but I don't have a strong opinion on this. Convince me. Smile


http://theconversation.com/is-education-better-off-in-state-or-federal-hands-27369

Personally I think a model of federal funding, state administration and school board curriculum decisions with little or no influence from the Federal Government is the way to go. I'm a bit tired of constant 'culture wars' in education as well, but when academia, from primary to tertiary level is overwhelmingly leftist I can understand why conservatives try and move the needle back a few notches. Interesting that it's a conservative who is advocating removing most of the federal influence as it's how they've fought those culture wars in the past (national curriculum and funding decisions).


how could you achieve federal funding AND little to no influence from federal government?


Disconnect Federal funding from specific portfolios.

The Federal government collects the GST and hands it over to the states. It should be portfolio neutral.

The only Federal funding that should have strings is if a state applies specifically for a grant. Otherwise, too many cooks.

I'm personally of the believe that between Federal, State and Local we have seriously way to many bureaucrats. Cut back on the duplication of effort and you can divert the savings to where it's needed.

Does Health need more bureaucrats or more clinicians?
Does Education need more bureaucrats or more and better teachers?

Personally I'd be happy for things like Health, Education and Criminal Law to all be federal issues and the states take a step back and absorb councils. But I fear that the constitution would be a problem.


it looks like i might be joining the bureaucracy shortly, the deecd no less.

_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 4:04 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

What's the delusional love affair some people have with the states? As if state and local politics are that much more superior lol; on the contrary, less attention means even more unchecked fruitcakes.

The states are always on the edge of becoming divide and conquer chips for deranged capital and nut bags. All that gets you is impoverished slums like the poor US conservative states, which in turn are used to hold back progress and drive down broad-based social investment across the nation, stunting federal productivity and national progress.

No thanks. All "local" thinking does is make even less competent and less worldly people feel more in control of the big bad world. No wonder the far left and far right both love the idea.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 4:37 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

pietillidie wrote:
No wonder the far left and far right both love the idea.


Do they? I would have thought the far left would tend to advocate centralisation (well, not the anarchist left, but do they even exist any more?).

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:00 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
pietillidie wrote:
No wonder the far left and far right both love the idea.


Do they? I would have thought the far left would tend to advocate centralisation (well, not the anarchist left, but do they even exist any more?).

The complete opposite. Note I used the term "far left" rather than "centre-left". Virtually the entire thinking left is dominated by localisation, with the Marxian theory I first studied at uni but an anachronism confined to a tiny number of dusty, quaint journals.

This is likely one of the reasons why unions haven't been able to recover; it's not that anyone with unpurchased neurons believes conservative rubbish, it's that the poststructuralist left won the intellectual left debate in a canter, leaving behind a politics without a will to power and control (mercifully, they would say, though I personally allow for "necessary political force" as a form of self and Other defense).

The problem is that in the case of your earlier post, devolution to the states does not represent the decrease in power you imagine; it merely represents a decrease in transparency and accountability. Do you really have time to track state bozos as they arrange corrupt deals with union officials and corporate lawyers in the car park of local KFCs? It's hard enough tracking the likes of Hockey, Pyne and Morrison and their debacles.

This sort of error actually comes from the old essentialist thought of religion, imperialist positivism, defunct Marxianism, and fanatical Libertarianism: "larger is less representative and more corrupt"; "free speech must never be constrained"; "the market knows best; "debt is bad"; "inflation is evil", etc.

Instead, independent thought takes into account the many exceptions which exist in a world of competing forces: "larger is often less representative and more corrupt, but..."; "free speech should not be constrained except when..."; "the market usually knows best under conditions of..."; debt is bad when..."; "inflation in certain circumstances is...", etc.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group