I am sick of these "government bad" takes. They lack constructive suggestions, like your "sink it" nugget, they lack decent problem descriptions, as if anything after the sinking (likely private governance, aka feudalism) is immune to the ills of big-gov, and on top perpetuate reductivist arguments as if any kind of restrictions of freedom is by definition bad.

This broad rejection without good reasons is borderline sociopathic. ... and parental control is not the gov raising anyone.

▲

iugtmkbdfil834 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Friend, we have a fair amount of suggestions ( including constructive ones! ). Do you know why? Because we mostly know how to make education decent for individual students like:

- keeping class sizes small - keeping class within similar development range ( AP with AP. short bus with short bus )

None of it is a secret, but government can't (edit:or won't) make it happen. Hence regular people just doing the best they can within the system at their disposal.

▲

zdragnar 23 minutes ago | parent [-]

I know people who will adamantly insist that keeping classes within similar development ranges is harmful and will vociferously reject any such proposal, up to and including things such as "gifted" schools and the like.

It's why some schools in (iirc) California did away with higher maths like calculus entirely.

Sadly, it seems there's nothing actually common about common wisdom.

	▲	iugtmkbdfil834 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I will admit that I never heard a serious argument from anyone that did not rely on issues not related to individual student's education. If you have any materials on those, I would love to read some of it.

▲

Aerroon an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And I am sick of people constantly wanting every single aspect of life regulated by the government. You guys need to understand that government isn't static and society changes. The rules you come up with today are going to get in the way in unexpected ways tomorrow. Regulations should only happen if you can demonstrate that it substantially improves things in a measurable way.

Eg "if you ban cellphones in schools then average test scores (on tests like PISA) will substantially improve". Or something else like that.

>This broad rejection without good reasons is borderline sociopathic.

It's sociopathic to not want the people in control to constantly make up new arbitrary rules? I guess we just need a few more Patriot Acts and Snoopers Charters.

	▲	forgetfreeman an hour ago \| parent [-]
		"And I am sick of people constantly wanting every single aspect of life regulated by the government." We're carting that strawman out again? What folks mostly want is for private industry to collectively display something approximating business ethics and maybe self-regulate away from objectively harmful/predatory behavior. The last few decades have very clearly demonstrated that there is literally no bottom to private industry depravity unless one is literally forced in place by legislation.

▲

forgetfreeman an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What's really wild is 9 times out of 10 when you back a crypto-libertarian into a rhetorical corner far enough to get them to drop their pretenses what you're left with is "OMG YOU ARENT MY DAD" is, at least in their mind, a cogent political philosophy.