OT: OT: Leafs Forum OT Thread

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

I don't think you can have extremes. All government or all capitalism.

Capitalism might help boost the economy but without regulation, environment and other factors can suffer. Even without that, scandals abound from crooks and crooked deals that have left many without.

Some services, like Healthcare should never be treated like a business. They need to be better run then they are now absolutely with a focus on outcomes but someone's life is not a simple profit ratio.

I agree. I believe, as always, that the best approach is the bipartisan approach. The two ends of the spectrum, at an extreme, do not work.

Free market, yes, with appropriate controls. Small government, with appropriate social programs. Emphasis on education, as an educated population is less likely to have issues that ultimately lead to needing social welfare programs (i.e. drug addiction, poverty, unskilled workforce, teenage pregnancy, etc.).

 

[thewave]

I don't think you can have extremes. All government or all capitalism.

Capitalism might help boost the economy but without regulation, environment and other factors can suffer. Even without that, scandals abound from crooks and crooked deals that have left many without.

Some services, like Healthcare should never be treated like a business. They need to be better run then they are now absolutely with a focus on outcomes but someone's life is not a simple profit ratio.

You need controls and regulations but at the end of the day the less gov't needs, the less they waste. Lower taxes, more money in our pockets to spend on better schools etc. I am not talking about the wild west here, but as is... Ontario 300b debt? Some of the highest electricity prices? Prescription drugs through the roof, crappy healthcare outside of any major urban centre.

I trust people that are educated in WISELY putting their money to good use. If they are taught young fiscal responsibility it would go a long way. Instead, through TV etc we are taught the joys and pleasures of instant gratification and how to accumulate debt and live beyond our means.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I don't think you can have extremes. All government or all capitalism.

Capitalism might help boost the economy but without regulation, environment and other factors can suffer. Even without that, scandals abound from crooks and crooked deals that have left many without.

Some services, like Healthcare should never be treated like a business. They need to be better run then they are now absolutely with a focus on outcomes but someone's life is not a simple profit ratio.

Well said. I agree completely!

I agree. I believe, as always, that the best approach is the bipartisan approach. The two ends of the spectrum, at an extreme, do not work.

Free market, yes, with appropriate controls. Small government, with appropriate social programs. Emphasis on education, as an educated population is less likely to have issues that ultimately lead to needing social welfare programs (i.e. drug addiction, poverty, unskilled workforce, teenage pregnancy, etc.).

Well said. I agree completely!

For some reason I'm reminded of something I read recently that Confucius said (at least I think it was him):

If your timeline is 2 years, plant rice. If your timeline is 10 years, plant trees. If your timeline is 100 years, educate your children. Yes!

You need controls and regulations but at the end of the day the less gov't needs, the less they waste. Lower taxes, more money in our pockets to spend on better schools etc. I am not talking about the wild west here, but as is... Ontario 300b debt? Some of the highest electricity prices? Prescription drugs through the roof, crappy healthcare outside of any major urban centre.

I trust people that are educated in WISELY putting their money to good use. If they are taught young fiscal responsibility it would go a long way. Instead, through TV etc we are taught the joys and pleasures of instant gratification and how to accumulate debt and live beyond our means.

I agree with all this too. Our original disagreement started when you said "Schools should be private". That I disagree with quite strongly.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

Well said. I agree completely!



Well said. I agree completely!

For some reason I'm reminded of something I read recently that Confucius said (at least I think it was him):

If your timeline is 2 years, plant rice. If your timeline is 10 years, plant trees. If your timeline is 100 years, educate your children. Yes!



I agree with all this too. Our original disagreement started when you said "Schools should be private". That I disagree with quite strongly.

Yep, Education is fundamental. Private schools are great, but public schools should be reinforced and supported appropriately. I would also cease with the law that allows 16 year olds to drop out of school. Its nonsense in 2017. I understand that school is not for everyone, but every young person should be required to complete high school. Not everyone will move on to post-secondary education, but everyone, at a minimum will damn well learn a trade.

I understand the libertarian argument regarding public schools (i.e. why should I, who has no kids, or 1 kid, or kids enrolled in Private School, be forced to pay the same or higher percentage of taxes for public school funding as a person with three\four\five kids enrolled in Public school?), however if the goal is to limit government and social programs, its illogical to believe you can achieve so without educating the masses.

 

[Hurt]

Blade Runner 2049 was AWESOME.

 

[Eb]

Anyone have a digital calendar of the Leafs schedule for this year?

 

[Daisy Jane]

Yep, Education is fundamental. Private schools are great, but public schools should be reinforced and supported appropriately. I would also cease with the law that allows 16 year olds to drop out of school. Its nonsense in 2017. I understand that school is not for everyone, but every young person should be required to complete high school. Not everyone will move on to post-secondary education, but everyone, at a minimum will damn well learn a trade.

I understand the libertarian argument regarding public schools (i.e. why should I, who has no kids, or 1 kid, or kids enrolled in Private School, be forced to pay the same or higher percentage of taxes for public school funding as a person with three\four\five kids enrolled in Public school?), however if the goal is to limit government and social programs, its illogical to believe you can achieve so without educating the masses.

I think the problem is - I don't think they teach trades in school anymore. I remember taking home ec (cooking and sewing) and shop (metal and wood),

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

I think the problem is - I don't think they teach trades in school anymore. I remember taking home ec (cooking and sewing) and shop (metal and wood),

IIRC, certain high schools used to in Mississauga (Streetsville and Westcredit, namely). They most certainly should do a better job of it as not everyone is academically inclined, and could benefit from trades programs in secondary education. That way, if they do not choose to pursue a post-secondary education, they can be ready to hit the ground running with an apprenticeship or something valuable to put on a resume upon graduation.

 

[Daisy Jane]

IIRC, certain high schools used to in Mississauga (Streetsville and Westcredit, namely). They most certainly should do a better job of it as not everyone is academically inclined, and could benefit from trades programs in secondary education. That way, if they do not choose to pursue a post-secondary education, they can be ready to hit the ground running with an apprenticeship or something valuable to put on a resume upon graduation.

i totally agree with you.
i don't get the point of dropping out of 16. you need to be viable.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

i totally agree with you.
i don't get the point of dropping out of 16. you need to be viable.

I don't understand it whatsoever. The only individual who would think its a good idea is a sixteen year old themself. Who, quite frankly, should not be making that type of decision.

If they can't vote or purchase alcohol, how can they make an informed decision that will effect the next fifty years of their life? Its utter nonsense.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

I work in the public school system somewhat directly, but indirectly (I'm not a teacher, but was once enrolled in T.C.). It has taken all of my inner strength to not unleash a tirade in this thread

 

[Gary Nylund]

I work in the public school system somewhat directly, but indirectly (I'm not a teacher, but was once enrolled in T.C.). It has taken all of my inner strength to not unleash a tirade in this thread

Tirades can make for interesting discussion, I say go for it.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

Tirades can make for interesting discussion, I say go for it.

I'm havin a spotta breakfast, but I'll let'er fly later whilst between assignments at work... lol

 

[Daisy Jane]

I'm havin a spotta breakfast, but I'll let'er fly later whilst between assignments at work... lol

tirades, hurrah!

 

[ErnieLeafs]

Among many problems, one of the biggest is that we're TOO inclusive. That may sound strange without context, but it's true.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I'm havin a spotta breakfast, but I'll let'er fly later whilst between assignments at work... lol

Awesome. I'm gonna be really busy very soon but I'll get to it tomorrow if not before. If you've seen the system close up, my guess you're gonna tell us the system is broken and speculate on how private schools might be the way to go? If so, then I agree with the first part but not the second. It's a tough situation though, I would again encourage people to look into the way they do things in Finland.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Among many problems, one of the biggest is that we're TOO inclusive. That may sound strange without context, but it's true.

I can guess what you mean by that and if I'm right then I agree completely!

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

Among many problems, one of the biggest is that we're TOO inclusive. That may sound strange without context, but it's true.

Well now I'm intrigued.

Its been declared a national holiday here in Panama, so I have all the time in the world.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

Ok... so... Sorry to put this off a day, but work has been bananas.

When I say that schools are too inclusive, I kinda feel bad, but it's kinda true. We have what we call "behavioural students". These are kids that often have zero control of themselves and their emotions. They're disruptive, they don't allow teachers to do their jobs, they're violent, and they act out. Now, in my youth, these kids would have their parents at the school after an incident or two, and it would be made clear that any more nonsense, and you would be expelled. Parents used to take this seriously. We used to expel kids, and for good reason, when they earned it. Now, parents aren't the same. Many are disengaged, and disinterested. Blame everything on the teachers and administration.

Fast forward to today. These kids aren't dealt with properly. They throw tantrums, throw punches at teachers/EA's/other kids, get on their desks and throw things..... and they get sent to a classroom where they go to play on an Ipad to calm down. It's essentially rewarding their behaviour. They know if they just pitch a fit, they can leave class and spend time playing games.

We have a school here (traditionally been a high school) that catered to kids who didn't want to apply themselves academically. This school was/is EXCELLENT for trades programs. They have top notch auto/metal/wood shops, an award winning culinary program, and a masonry program that really pumps out great workers. They've been talking for years about shutting this place down. The way I see it, instead of lobbying for all the funding to build these awful K-12 schools we've begun building, why don't we fund renovation in this school, amd build a junior-12 school for our behavioural students? It would allow for more jobs for teachers/EA's/support workers, and these kids would get the psychological and educational support that they really need, instead of having them disrupting the value of education of the kids in their classes that are there to actually learn.

Now, the bleeding hearts will cry foul that we're making them feel left out, and excluding them, but in harsh, realistic terms, should we sacrifice the value of education for a large number of students, for the feelings of these kids' parents? I'm a hard NO guy on that. They will have plenty of kids to make friends with, the school can still have sports, the kids are properly councilled and managed, and it gets a lot of these students (who will be well served) learning practical trades to build a future with.

That's just my take on one piece of the pie, really.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

As if my week wasn't exciting enough, I got bit by a 75lb bulldog tonight. ****in' sweet.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

Ok... so... Sorry to put this off a day, but work has been bananas.

When I say that schools are too inclusive, I kinda feel bad, but it's kinda true. We have what we call "behavioural students". These are kids that often have zero control of themselves and their emotions. They're disruptive, they don't allow teachers to do their jobs, they're violent, and they act out. Now, in my youth, these kids would have their parents at the school after an incident or two, and it would be made clear that any more nonsense, and you would be expelled. Parents used to take this seriously. We used to expel kids, and for good reason, when they earned it. Now, parents aren't the same. Many are disengaged, and disinterested. Blame everything on the teachers and administration.

That is an issue, and speaks to education of the Parents in the past, IMO. Its also a bit of a culture thing. Many blame the millenials themselves, but I blame the echo boomers\generation-X'ers that are the parents of the kids. Far too much enabling, and far too little responsibility being taken.

Fast forward to today. These kids aren't dealt with properly. They throw tantrums, throw punches at teachers/EA's/other kids, get on their desks and throw things..... and they get sent to a classroom where they go to play on an Ipad to calm down. It's essentially rewarding their behaviour. They know if they just pitch a fit, they can leave class and spend time playing games.

We have a school here (traditionally been a high school) that catered to kids who didn't want to apply themselves academically. This school was/is EXCELLENT for trades programs. They have top notch auto/metal/wood shops, an award winning culinary program, and a masonry program that really pumps out great workers. They've been talking for years about shutting this place down. The way I see it, instead of lobbying for all the funding to build these awful K-12 schools we've begun building, why don't we fund renovation in this school, amd build a junior-12 school for our behavioural students? It would allow for more jobs for teachers/EA's/support workers, and these kids would get the psychological and educational support that they really need, instead of having them disrupting the value of education of the kids in their classes that are there to actually learn.

Agreed 100%. I had an ex-GF in Washington, DC who was a special-ed teacher for 10-11 year olds. They would be in a specialized classroom because they weren't able to function in a regular environment. Much of their behavior was brought on by past trauma in the home (drug\alcohol use, abuse of different varieties by the parents, or BF\GF of the parents). Essentially they were the second or third generation of abuse (as abused individuals often repeat the behavior, and abuse others later in life). Huge issue.

In Canada, I'm certain there's other reasons that cause the behavioral issues, some as simple as a one size fits all curriculum not suiting certain kids. Which is why I support the separate vocational high school structure. Like you said, more jobs for teachers, etc., likely a higher graduation rate, and a lower rate of late teens\early-20's unskilled labor force.

Now, the bleeding hearts will cry foul that we're making them feel left out, and excluding them, but in harsh, realistic terms, should we sacrifice the value of education for a large number of students, for the feelings of these kids' parents? I'm a hard NO guy on that. They will have plenty of kids to make friends with, the school can still have sports, the kids are properly councilled and managed, and it gets a lot of these students (who will be well served) learning practical trades to build a future with.

The bleeding hearts, unfortunately, aren't thinking critically, and are often in support of a nanny state (which is ultimately proven to be unstable). Give the people the tools to hunt and feed themselves, and they will be less likely to have their hand out asking you for food; and that starts in the classroom.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Ok... so... Sorry to put this off a day, but work has been bananas.

When I say that schools are too inclusive, I kinda feel bad, but it's kinda true. We have what we call "behavioural students". These are kids that often have zero control of themselves and their emotions. They're disruptive, they don't allow teachers to do their jobs, they're violent, and they act out. Now, in my youth, these kids would have their parents at the school after an incident or two, and it would be made clear that any more nonsense, and you would be expelled. Parents used to take this seriously. We used to expel kids, and for good reason, when they earned it. Now, parents aren't the same. Many are disengaged, and disinterested. Blame everything on the teachers and administration.

Fast forward to today. These kids aren't dealt with properly. They throw tantrums, throw punches at teachers/EA's/other kids, get on their desks and throw things..... and they get sent to a classroom where they go to play on an Ipad to calm down. It's essentially rewarding their behaviour. They know if they just pitch a fit, they can leave class and spend time playing games.

We have a school here (traditionally been a high school) that catered to kids who didn't want to apply themselves academically. This school was/is EXCELLENT for trades programs. They have top notch auto/metal/wood shops, an award winning culinary program, and a masonry program that really pumps out great workers. They've been talking for years about shutting this place down. The way I see it, instead of lobbying for all the funding to build these awful K-12 schools we've begun building, why don't we fund renovation in this school, amd build a junior-12 school for our behavioural students? It would allow for more jobs for teachers/EA's/support workers, and these kids would get the psychological and educational support that they really need, instead of having them disrupting the value of education of the kids in their classes that are there to actually learn.

Now, the bleeding hearts will cry foul that we're making them feel left out, and excluding them, but in harsh, realistic terms, should we sacrifice the value of education for a large number of students, for the feelings of these kids' parents? I'm a hard NO guy on that. They will have plenty of kids to make friends with, the school can still have sports, the kids are properly councilled and managed, and it gets a lot of these students (who will be well served) learning practical trades to build a future with.

That's just my take on one piece of the pie, really.

I agree with all this. There is so much wrong with out education system that this unfortunately only gets the conversation started.

 

[ACC1224]

I want to do a Montreal Smoked Meat. I know to do it properly it takes a few days, anyone done one?

 

[Daisy Jane]

As if my week wasn't exciting enough, I got bit by a 75lb bulldog tonight. ****in' sweet.

poor thing

I have a high ankle sprain AND broke my foot. woo.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

poor thing

I have a high ankle sprain AND broke my foot. woo.

Yikes, how'd you manage that?