Affordable Health Care Law under review by SCOTUS

[baldgriff]

I'm not sure why trade school education fell by the wayside.

Starting in the late 70's early 80's there was a change in focus on how higher education was approached. We were to "work smarter not harder". This thought process has marginalized the hard working jobs as a 2nd class job or worse.

We placed more value on the 4 year degree, along with gov't funded education placing a focus on making sure everyone had lots of student loans.

This is the quick and dirty explanation.

[chancellor]

I'm not sure why trade school education fell by the wayside. Simply put, college is not for everyone. When I was in HS in Texas, our parents could choose the vocational track for us in HS and allow us to build our elective programs around a trade such as auto mechanics, wood working, electronics, and HVAC. Now, if you ended up maturing in your core studies and wanted to go to college, you could still do that AND have a trade. Or, you could enter the workforce early, start making some good money with a trade, and perhaps slowly pursue additional education.

In hindsight, I should have done this rather than taking electives such as lifeguarding, art, PE, family living, cooking, and the other electives I had in HS. My typing class was the only elective that truly stuck with me at that 75wpm rate has come in handy.

Given the absurd costs of college these days, I'd rather give people the option of a more realistic future than one burdened with insane debt where only a handful of careers allow you the opportunity to pay it back while living with a modicum of comfort. I had $20K of college debt as I had to borrow to complete my final year of my undergrad and my grad program and paying that back on a beginning teacher salary was a joke.

:good post:

[baldgriff]

Define 'fair share' and quantify it please.

I am curious about this also.....

[swampdragon]

As most of you know I teach middle school - I teach in an affluent suburban district
I teach pre-engineering - that class used to be call
shop in the 50s/60s/70s
industrial arts in the 80s/90s and
now pre-engineering

On parents night when someone asks (and they always do) Why do we have pre-engineering and not shop anymore? I answer because our kids are all going to be CEOs and presidents of companies then everyone nods appreciatively except for one or two parents. That parent approaches me privately after and says "my kid isnt going be the president of a company - please teach him that plumbing is a damn good career" and I sneak it in with that kid - while still praising trades jobs all of the time in all of my classes.
Then 95% and more go to college - and then 85% go back sophomore year leaving about 10% failing out of something that they shouldn't have been doing in the first place and feeling like a loser at 19 years old (we dont talk about this at our very highly ranked school - just the ones that start at college)

[Hornsby]

I am not advocating "classism" and I am all for providing education to provide opportunities. My comment about "trade schools" is that there are options for education other than 4 year college, which when completed provide anyone (including the poor) better chances to stop being poor. If you take my trade school suggestion as the only option that should be afforded - then you are being dense. I would advocate for good education for ALL people.

By the way - your apparent thought that "trade jobs" are bad jobs or less important jobs is a damned fallacy - and one that has been taught to us by those who own the education programs. Starting in the late 70's early 80's there was a change in focus on how higher education was approached. We were to "work smarter not harder". This thought process has marginalized the hard working jobs as a 2nd class job or worse.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]924[/ATTACH]

Trade jobs would be ONE OPTION available to people as a way of getting out of there poor economic situation.

LOL...read your own posts, every one of them is steeped in classism, and I agreed that trade schools are great, only that they shouldn't be only for the poor, as you suggested. They're ONE avenue out, not the only one. You can call me dense, but I just read what you write, and respond to it.

Then ADVOCATE for good education for all people, don't couch it like you've been doing.

And again, as I've already stated, Trade Jobs are great jobs, but they're not going to close the wealth gap. We have plenty of great tradesmen, electricians, carpenters, painters, plumbers, you name it. The world needs those folks, but the disadvantaged also need a leg up if they aspire to something larger. Read what I say, not what you imagine that I said...

And lets knock off the name calling, OK? I don't do it to you, and I'd appreciate it not being done in return...

[Hornsby]

Define 'fair share' and quantify it please.

Actually paying the taxes that they should pay, according to the tax codes, eliminate some of the loopholes that only the very wealthy can take advantage of. Stop hiding wealth offshore...these are all things that the poor and the middle class can't take advantage of. The flat tax is a non-starter, it's simply not fair to the lower income, they pay a disproportionate share compared to the wealthy. So are Vat taxes...but there are ways that the tax codes can be cleaned up to make things fairer.

[swampdragon]

Actually paying the taxes that they should pay, according to the tax codes, eliminate some of the loopholes that only the very wealthy can take advantage of. Stop hiding wealth offshore...these are all things that the poor and the middle class can't take advantage of. The flat tax is a non-starter, it's simply not fair to the lower income, they pay a disproportionate share compared to the wealthy. So are Vat taxes...but there are ways that the tax codes can be cleaned up to make things fairer.

"because I am smart"

[gcstomp]

A few quick points, as always just imo. One word most anyone who has spent a few minutes listening to him speak, would never use to describe Trump, is smart. He was born into advantages minus pesky ethics that allowed him to leverage wealth and connections from his 1st day to today, while ripping off many he had dealings with along the way.

Obama did not ruin healthcare, that is revisionist history. Pre Obama, uninsured could try to purchase private insurance, but were not covered by pre-existing conditions, and had lifetime caps. More important, when you tried to use the insurance for anything more than routine physical, you would have billing denied and would have absurd bills fill your mailbox as the MRI that doctor ordered, was simply dismissed as not critical by insurance after the fact.

Obama helped immensely in all kinds of ways for millions of people who prior did not have any kind of coverage, or had what was really junk coverage.

As for wealth distribution, I think some of us understand that upward mobility is for most part fiction. That old move Trading Places, with Akroyd and Murphy is pretty dead on. The circumstances you are born into, and the chances you are blessed with in school account for the vast majority of your success or failure. For those who insist that everything they have they worked for, I am not disputing that you worked hard and are now a cardiologist or comptroller or software engineer making 300k a year or whatever, and you worked for every bit of it, and deserve every bit of it. But believe it or not the working poor with children for make ends meet with their 2 or 3 jobs do not work any less hard than you, and in fact if you switched places with them you would be tied to your new socio economic rung and would be hard pressed to dig out.

Best predictor of wealth is coming from wealth, the advantages are built in from opportunities in school, and the friends you make, and the internship you secure in senior year, the car you got for graduating, the student loans you are not saddled with, and a million other ways you get one person with advantages that someone without will not be able to overcome.

My wife is a STEM teacher in middle school, teaches math, science, runs the after school robotics program and the CAP etc, and is saddled by student loans that will not be paid off for many years. I am confident in saying no one works harder than her. The correlation between hard work and wealth is for most part a fiction. Wealth comes from being born into it, and the structural advantages that bestows beyond money. Now if someone actually starts off with a nest egg, then wealth from flipping real estate, or trading in market, opportunities from having breathing room that will never exist for most people.

[Redbirds Fan]

I'm not sure why trade school education fell by the wayside. Simply put, college is not for everyone. When I was in HS in Texas, our parents could choose the vocational track for us in HS and allow us to build our elective programs around a trade such as auto mechanics, wood working, electronics, and HVAC. Now, if you ended up maturing in your core studies and wanted to go to college, you could still do that AND have a trade. Or, you could enter the workforce early, start making some good money with a trade, and perhaps slowly pursue additional education.

In hindsight, I should have done this rather than taking electives such as lifeguarding, art, PE, family living, cooking, and the other electives I had in HS. My typing class was the only elective that truly stuck with me at that 75wpm rate has come in handy.

Given the absurd costs of college these days, I'd rather give people the option of a more realistic future than one burdened with insane debt where only a handful of careers allow you the opportunity to pay it back while living with a modicum of comfort. I had $20K of college debt as I had to borrow to complete my final year of my undergrad and my grad program and paying that back on a beginning teacher salary was a joke.

I have actually looked into this question. I was a juvenile/drug court prosecutor for ten years, and wanted to know the answer, too.

There is a long history and a lot of factors. Up through the Viet Nam war, the Armed Forces provided tons of skilled workmen for the U.S., especially during WWII. Guys who had little or no skills learned valuable trades and took them back to civilian life. After Viet Nam, however, the military's contributions to our skilled work force lessened.

High schools have historically provided strong vocational training. They did so in conjunction with local companies who provided machinery, materials, and trained instructors. The vocational training was very selective. The high schools made it available only to those students who displayed the greatest aptitude. By the 70s, though, attitudes in education had changed, and the prevalent belief was that all kids who wanted to should have a chance to participate in the vocational programs. This was egalitarian, but not what the companies who participated were looking for. It diluted the talent pool and increased their costs, so they began to back out. The schools couldn't afford the replace the equipment as it broke down or wore out, so programs were eventually discontinued or reduced to the point of being relatively useless.

Many high schools still have programs where they let kids out to go and work jobs, but that isn't really a vocational program. Many have shop classes, but again...a mere shadow of that they had in the past.

There are basically two types of post-secondary type of vocational education...career colleges and vocational colleges. Career colleges are things like cosmetology school, which are often a year or so, usually private, and don't give you credits that can be transferred to other educational institutions. You can, however, get certain certifications from the State. The other is vocational college. These are usually state institutions, two years, give you a degree, and credits transfer. Forestry, welding, auto-diesel, a variety of skills. The problem is that these are declining rapidly, not necessarily from lack of interest, but from lack of funding. They are an easy thing to cut since there is not much of a lobby.

Unions get pretty heavy into the vocational training business through apprenticeship programs, but unions have been in a precipitous decline for the last 50 years or so. Unions also used to partner with schools in vocational programs before they became enemies of the state.

(A point about college not being for everyone...of course it isn't, but now more than ever it is important. The work force demands more and more in terms of cognitive and other skills one should learn in college. Statistics prove that college graduates make more than non-graduates and have a much higher employment rate, just as skilled workers make more than unskilled workers. So, more people are going to go, even thought it isn't necessary to succeed in life.)

It is interesting to note that many other countries (like Japan) who kick our ass in all measures of productivity spend huge amounts of time, money and energy on vocational education for their citizens, especially their young. Japan is a good example. We don't have to do that because, well...'Murica.

[cardboardbox]

you've essentially been arguing in post after post, that classism is OK, the rich are rich, and they deserve it.

they dont deserve their own money? Who deserves their money?

The distribution in wealth was far more equitable in the 50's than it is now.

This is your preferred tax structure?

Actually paying the taxes that they should pay, according to the tax codes

so rich people are cheating on their taxes?

[senorsheep]

It is interesting to note that many other countries (like Japan) who kick our ass in all measures of productivity spend huge amounts of time, money and energy on vocational education for their citizens, especially their young. Japan is a good example. We don't have to do that because, well...'Murica.

More investment in vocational education is probably something Americans across the political spectrum could agree on in principle. We'd just never agree on how to fund it.

[nots]

they dont deserve their own money? Who deserves their money?


This is your preferred tax structure?

so rich people are cheating on their taxes?

Lots of opportunities to game that 1955 tax code as well. I have posted articles about it in the last. Nobody, and I mean nobody, was paying 90%

[Hornsby]

they dont deserve their own money? Who deserves their money?


This is your preferred tax structure?

so rich people are cheating on their taxes?

Reading comprehension problems again...nobody said that people other than the rich "deserve" their money, only that the distribution of said wealth is leading to the downslide of this country.

Is it structured to make tax brackets more equitable? Today we have 6 brackets, topping out at 35%, instead of 91%. And yeah, Nots may be correct in that nobody was paying 91%, but there were likely a lot more paying over 35%, which nobody pays today either.

Again, JFK, who was a rich man, and the son of a rich man, had the quote "A rising tide lifts ALL boats". He understood what was happening, and what needed to happen in the future...

[cardboardbox]

Reading comprehension problems again...nobody said that people other than the rich "deserve" their money, only that the distribution of said wealth is leading to the downslide of this country.

so when you said this, you agreed that the rich deserved their riches or that they didnt deserve it?

you've essentially been arguing in post after post, that classism is OK, the rich are rich, and they deserve it. And the poor should strive for no more than tradesman jobs. And unfortunately, wealth distribution may be the only way to even the playing board.

Is it structured to make tax brackets more equitable? Today we have 6 brackets, topping out at 35%, instead of 91%. And yeah, Nots may be correct in that nobody was paying 91%, but there were likely a lot more paying over 35%, which nobody pays today either.

did the top bracket change when I wasnt looking?

[Hornsby]

so when you said this, you agreed that the rich deserved their riches or that they didnt deserve it?




did the top bracket change when I wasnt looking?

I didn't say either thing...there are areas in the middle you know.

Well, if you stopped looking at the top bracket in the 50's, why yes, it changed...