Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by mtowncyclone13, May 20, 2019.
So the economy did well during times in which teachers were required to get endorsements?
Because they aren't improving anything. So what is the point other than raising more money for the state?
What? No, those scores went up slightly during economic booms. 1999-2000, 2007, and then decline slightly as the economy goes down.
You making this up? Show the data and something REAL for the reason in the change.
So what you are saying is that when the state has the money to properly fund education things go better? And this relates to licensing how?
This is so much fun. Argent is great at creating false dilemmas, hasty generalizations, and red herrings! Of course everything so far is a major causal fallacy. (sorry...couldn't help springing some logical fallacy types here since Argent's dialog is so full of them!)
Nope, not at all. Education funding has gone up each and every year regardless of the economy. Pretty consistent straight line up.
Why don't you show something real as proof that these licenses actually do something good? It's fairly common knowledge to anyone over 40 that Iowa was very highly rated for education in the 80's and early 90's.
The greatest period of growth in American history (roughly between 1880 and 1910) occurred when roughly 5% of the population had a high school degree.
Underlying technology and productivity changes are ultimately much more influential. You do not need much book learning to go from an ox team to driving a tractor.
Then what was it? You seem to have all of the answers and your matter of fact tone on an individual that you've never met is very impressive.
Did you ever finish your thought on medical professionals not needing licensing, because the medical companies wouldn't try to cut corners? Or were you too busy complaining that large companies were ruining the appraisal business with computer algorithms, because they were cutting corners?
I'm against licensing in almost all instances. They are against the idea's of a free market and only cause quality to degrade and prices to increase.
Intelligence has been increasing with every generation. The fact that IA school rankings dropped from one generation to the next means we didn't increase as quickly as some others, not that things are getting worse.
James Flynn's TED Talk is one of the best of them...
Intelligence levels peaked several decades ago. We had this discussion in another thread as well.
Yes we know, your strict adherence to absolutism and heuristics makes you such a joy to talk to.
Kind of a less-likable Ed Tollett.
Saw this article on BBC. I thought it was relevant HIV outbreak in Pakistan caused in part by unqualified healthcare workers passing themselves off as doctors. Hundreds of children infected with HIV.
"I think the (Aids) virus was being carried by members of the high-risk group (transgender and female sex workers) and then lax practices by local quacks caused it to infect other patients," he told the BBC.
By "quack" he is referring to under-qualified people practising medicine, ranging from paramedics running a private clinic posing as doctors, to medical graduates who have been unable to find work in hospitals and have no exposure to standard medical practices.
I like it when you make arguments for Libertarian positions like this, because most will see them for the hooey they are.
The peak must have arrived about the time you came of age. It's no wonder you know so much about so many things.
What I'm getting at is I'm not seeing a correlation between teachers getting certifications and SAT scores, or the impact on the economy.