News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Decades of stripping education funding is taking its toll
It’s worse than that. Everyone has been brought up to be a narcissistic consumer and they approach public policy the same way.
The amount of times I've heard "why should I pay taxes for school, my kids are grown" is way too damn high
I became so disappointed in my grandmother when I was in high school when she expressed this attitude. I couldn’t understand why it mattered as children still needed school.
You say that like some of the most educated people in the country don't consistently vote Republican.
This idea that earning a MBA or a JD or an MD makes your politics good is completely wrong. The idea that failing to earn a HS Diploma makes you unqualified to vote is equally dogshit.
Politics is a consequence of your social affinity and your material conditions. You don't just take a class and become a liberal Democrat if your grade is high enough.
Yes, but ceteris paribus, an educated electorate is going to make better decisions. Or rather, the number of obviously bad decisions rejected is increased as knowledge of history and concepts deems them unworkable. Society exists.
I have seen no evidence to this effect. Consider South Africa under Apartheid. Once an individual realized how they benefited from systematic oppression of those below them, more and more fell in line. It is the "uneducated" underclass that made the revolution possible. And it was only possible through a strong social network that defied the "educated" understanding of micro-ethnicities that the Apartheid government sought to entrench.
Same with Israel. You've got tons of educated professionals in that country who are explicitly and knowingly there to participate in a genocide. The Palestinian opposition has no education infrastructure. They can only resist through social cohesion and trust networks predicated on faith.
The UK, another excellent example. A massive university system that largely exists to reproduce neoliberal ideological beliefs in a population that manages a predatory financial system and an arms export industry.
Yes, if you cut off those two proceeding words then hyper focus on a few examples (which have become examples of bad when once they were the norm- sort of making my point for me) without global or historic context, you've really made a strong case. Meanwhile, more people living in more places today have a better standard of life in more just nations than at any point in history and it correlates to increases in education.
Well, on average.. it does.
No, but being intelligent is correlated with both of these things. Dumb people are more easily tricked by right wing talking points. Dumb people also don't get good grades. Smart people are, for whatever reason, more likely to agree with liberal or leftist talking points. Smart people are also more likely to get high grades.
The Republican majority in Congress, the SCOTUS, and the White House all have advanced degrees.
Average. On average, people with degrees are more liberal/leftist. As a group. Separate the degrees from the non-degrees, and measure their liberalism/leftism, and find which group has the higher average. Average.
Average.
On average, liberal neighborhoods and counties have more educated people.
Go into a red neighborhood, and the math changes. Mormons break 70 R / 22 D / 8 I for candidates while enjoying a 36% bachelor completion rate - 3pts higher than the national average.
Hindus break 46 D / 49 R and have a staggering 70pt college competition rate.
Meanwhile, historically black Protestants have a meager 24pt college rate, but regularly vote 80/20 Democrat.
No, it actually doesn't. Within a Mormon community, I would wager we would still see that the most educated Mormons are also, ON AVERAGE, the most liberal/leftist Mormons.
Sure, if this is the only thing you knew, there could be a Simpson's paradox situation, but we already know what the data looks like when we count everyone as one big group. Your "exceptions" can be true, and at the same time, are not evidence against the original claim. Even IF you found that, within EVERY group, education correlates with conservatism... it would just be Simpson's paradox, because we already know that, on the whole, education is correlated to liberal/leftist attitudes.
You're welcome to check. But we can see very definitively that a higher-than-average rate of education does nothing to increase the partisan character of the voting block.
We know that we have an overall liberal voting demographic that is unevenly distributed across the country.
But we also know that age, industry, ethnicity/culture, and region play bigger factors in your voting habits than degree of education. We can even see shifts in voting trends over time within the same voter cohort. The trend you're looking for is temporary at best, and highly contingent on the state, the school, and the field of study.
When you take broad averages like this, you very often lose useful information. In this case, just being "educated" in the abstract carries a weak correlation to political beliefs.
Mormons have more bachelor degrees than average: Yes.
Mormons are more conservative than average: Yes.
We can see very definitively that a higher-than-average rate of education does nothing to increase the partisan character of the voting block: No.
That's not what this shows. The two facts, together, are not enough to show a correlation between education and conservatism or to show a lack of correlation between education and liberal/leftist attitudes. To make a claim about correlation, as you are trying to do, you have two options:
I have a perfect analogy:
I claim that smoking will decrease your life expectancy.
You claim that the smoking rate in the United States is 9.6%. The smoking rate in Japan is 16.4%. Life Expectancy in the United States is 79.8. Life Expectancy in Japan is 85.2. Therefore "we can see very definitively that a higher rate of smoking does nothing to decrease the life expectancy of the country".
No. That doesn't show that. Because if you look at data within Japan, you will still see a lower life expectancy among the people who smoke, and if you look at data globally, using countries as data points, you will also see lower life expectancy among the countries that smoke the most.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/smoking-rates-by-country https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/life-expectancy-by-country
That's true, but unfortunately, once you started trying to create a more complex model, you started making mistakes. And you aren't even an idiot. Imagine your dumbest neighbors trying to make sense of this conversation.
No. I start off by giving you one variable correlated with one other variable. Once someone understands that, THEN we can start talking about nuance.
What does Japan have that America lacks, which might give them better long term health outcomes and a higher life expectancy?
Not relative to a public universal health care system, no.
If your diagnosis is "we need to cut cigarette use to save lives", but we're ignoring the very successful early medical interventions against cancer that save lives, then we've traded actual useful policy for This One Neat Trick that clearly doesn't deliver the intended results.
Idiocracy was the game plan all along.
It was idiocy all along.
Signed - a native whose ancestors talked at length and wrote down (or had someone else write down) how dumb they were in the very beginning, before there was even a nation
That's not the issue at all. It's the curriculum, the no child left behind act implementation, and the overall indoctrination and corruption of a system of government that rewards the rich.
Most schools get plenty of money and just blow it on things they don't need. Buildings way too fancy and overpriced educational subscriptions to crap, instead of spending it on more teachers and teacher salary. The money is plenty there. None of the rich fucks get a cut from cheaper buildings and teacher payrolls.
Stripping education doesn't necessarily mean money. The GOP has waged an all out war on knowledge over the last few decades. Hell Fox News was recently saying "colleges make liberals" despite the fact that all the people saying it had college degrees.
No Child Left Behind gas been terrible. And I agree that money needs to go to teachers, not admins
I'm in my mid 30s and Fox News was saying that colleges make liberals when I was in middle school.
Probably even before that, I was just too young to notice
Wait, Jesse Waters has a college degree?
A liberal arts major, no less. From an East Coast private school in one of the bluest states in the country.
They use their money on the sports stuff because they can sell it.
well trump like strippers.
You'd rather have uneducated strippers?
When the economy goes to shit, the practical trades are the great bastion of the working person. Strippers will thrive.
.../s? 🤔
That's the best kind