Does Moore’s Law Apply to Congressional Scandals?

I have a theory that people were as corrupt in the previous decades, it just was easier to get away with it. Technology is becoming the enemy of many crooks in congress.

As long as Murphy’s law doesn’t apply to this final push for HCR…

Sloan not Sloane.

If the old saw is true “it’s not the crime it’s the cover-up” then the (relative ) dispatch with which these are handled will make a difference.

Rangel leaving the Chair is an example.

Of course Vitter just sent out his wife to scold the press and that worked so well his name didn’t even come up so maybe that’s the way to go.

I would also argue that post Woodward and Bernstein, there has been a focus on “scandal” in the press corps that didn’t exist prior to that. Hey, I want Robert Redford to play me in a movie too! This is a good and a bad thing. There is a gotcha mentality in the media that while on one hand keep politicians accountable, also delves into the silly and leaving us without any context. So voters get frustrated and want to throw the bums out. Clinton and Whitewater, Gore and did he inspire the internet and the movie love story or was he a big fat liar, really were not exactly Watergate. Reporters ran hard on those stories and elevated them in ways that they didn’t deserve.
.
Charlie Rangel is a big deal. He should have been a big deal for the last few months to be honest. I just wish that there was more room for genuine investigative reporting of things that matter. I enjoy the sex scandals as much as the next person. I just wish that the various crimes of Dick Cheney would be attacked by journalists instead of them inviting him on the Sunday shows. Imagine that.

Seems like corruption is endemic to D.C. politicians–not all, certainly, but enough that it is destructive to good governance. Do you think this is due to the nature of politics in general and the kind of people it attracts–and promotes–or is it due to the specific culture of Washington?

Corruption is endemic to the human race.
.
Having spent my life in the private sector I can attest that people will dip their hands in the till, get cozy with suppliers, pad their hours, etc.
.
Is DC more corrupt than Wall Street?

Actually the lesson from the Prisoner’s dilemma still holds. What seems like the best course forward to an individual is often not the best course forward for the collective entity of which he is part.

In fact, almost ALL our troubles in politics can be traced to that simple principle.

Good point, but beyond the premise that we’re all flawed, what is it about DC? Does corruption there just get more press? (Although see Trifecta55′s points in 1.1 about Rangel and Cheney.) Is corruption a necessary though unintended byproduct of our political system? Are there ways to substantively address this other than holding politicians accountable and punishing rule-breakers? In other words, what, if anything, can be changed about our political system (or DC culture–separate entities, no?) to reduce corruption, not just stomp on it when it occurs?

Politicians lead very public lives and are subject to significantly more exacting standards than other sorts of public figures. There are certain things that qualify as career-enders for Congress members that would cause a mere hiccup if it were a sports figure or an actor. Of course theft and embezzlement are crimes wherever they appear.

By taking this theory to it’s logical conclusion, the republicans will do very well in 2010 and then get tossed out again in 2012, just in time to re-elect President Obama. You just earned your Nobel Prize in Mathematics KT.

I would have said the “Nobel Prize in Science”, but mixing science with the republicans is like bringing a pan of fudge to a Weight Watcher’s meeting.

sacredh, I’m teaching figures of speech to my ninth graders. I might have to steal this one.

Steal away. I’d be honored.

Excellent points! In addition, how much has been ginned up? How much that should be investigated has been ignored – we must look forward, not backward after all. Not to mention destroying evidence. Gee, all of John Yoo’s e-mail’s were destroyed. Oh well, guess we can’t say anything more than he used bad judgement. All of Karl Rove’s e-mails are gone. Oh well, guess we can never prove that he interfered with the operation of the Justice Department. Etc., etc.

Well, there IS one theory that the type of people we REALLY need in Washington are precisely the ones that wouldn’t touch the place with a “ten foot pole”.
.
So, are the people that place attracts “reverse-qualified”?

sacred: Would she be eligible for the prize in Math or Economics? Economics deals with game theory, and judging by the way the MSM treats political coverage…

trifecta: I believe you’re right and I would (sadly) add Drudge to the list of those whose careers have been “made” by scandal chasing.
.
And, as Ivy said, the “ginned up” factor plays into this as well – particularly as it relates to the defensive actions of the previous administration.
.
To take Ivy’s comment a step further, what we are seeing now is an MSM that has been repeatedly stiff-armed and denied the red meat of scandal throughout much of 2004-2008. It’s easier, now, to go after new targets than try to track down the older dreck.

I think the corruption will start to disappear when it is actually punished, NOT just discussed and rationalized based on which “tribe” is doing it until everyone forgets what the h*ll the question was in the first place.

That’s part of my question, afguy…I’d like to get involved in politics, but no way in hell I’d run for office. (For argument’s sake, let’s assume I have minimum qualifications for elected office, which is probably a stretch anyway.) For one, I don’t like conflict too much–I’m no pushover, but I’m not combative. Second, I wouldn’t want to put my family through that upheaval and scrutiny. Third, I’m not sure I’d want to work with some of the people up there. And fourth, I like my current job.
.
Trust me, I’m no great loss to the world of politics. But what kind of people want this life? You’ve got to be pretty committed to public service and both willing and able to undergo a pretty big change in your life. Or your desire for political power trumps those other issues.
.
So is that part of the issue? Corruption is more likely to “infect” the kinds of people who tend to want to become politicians? Or is that painting with too broad a brush?

Sorry–I was responding to 4.4. But you make a good point in 4.5.
.
Not trying to be naive with this line of questioning, but I’m curious about the issue. Is it egoism? An inherent flaw in us that politics exacerbates? Ideological blindness that leads to “the end justifies the means”? (Though that’s more about political corruption–paying off A so you can get his support, or doing a favor for X so you can get Y.)

afguy: I think that most people turn to politics for a career when they realize that they’re not qualified to get a real job.

Paul,
.
What I worry about is that, at some point, SOMEONE is going to get fed up enough with the perpetual “moving forward” to actually take the “punishment phase” into their own hands.
.
The “bomb throwers” in public life are liable to be the victims as much as they are the instigators. Some “responsible adults” somewhere need to try to dial all of this back.
.
In the past, the Justice Department (and the Media, for that matter) would be the ones to do it, but they’re too worried about “trampling on political free speech” to do anything. And the media is too interested in the conflict itself to see the danger.
.
They will simply report the events when they happen, without noting their role in the process.

kbang: Good point. game theory and one-upsmanship seems to be the order of the day.

sacredh: if you can lie with a straight face (and be TRULY convincing), you have a future in State or National Politics.
.
There are a few other fields I can name where accuracy in speech is NOT a requirement but an impediment to advancement.
.
I talked to a local (city) politician who got out of that field. He said that, in his opinion, people WANTED their politicians to lie to them.

afguy: It does seem that most people prefer to hear what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. When faced with the ugly truth, they’ll go for the beautiful lie every time.

The most damaging thing for Republicans about Foley was that the Republican leadership covered up the guy’s penchant for baby snake handling.

If it was just Foley, no biggie, run the guy out of town. But the evidence that Hastert et al were covering for the guy just added to the perception that Republicans had no beliefs except for keeping in power.

If you have some proof that Democrats are covering up scandals like Vitter covers up his junk with Huggies, in order to keep raw their raw power then we can make the Moore’s Law case.

However, the fact that Rangel was deposed and no one covered for Massa, e.g. tells me that the systemic scandal and corruption meme is simply nonsense.

First story on Weekend Edition this morning, “the latest political calculations on health care legislation.” Not substance, but political. Then, Juan Williams comes on to respond about the appointment of Scott Matheson as a judge. Much laughter from these two reporters about the timeing and how funny it looks and Obama buying votes.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124391799

Truth — Matheson has reportedly been in the running for the appointment since June 2009. The Salt Lake Tribune reported on June 9, 2009, that “Matheson already has let the White House and Utah’s senators know he would like to be considered” for the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals:
.
The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack started the rumor, writing, “Obama Now Selling Judgeships for Health Care Votes? Obama names brother of undecided House Dem to Appeals Court.” Without providing any evidence to support his allegation, McCormack asked if Scott Matheson’s judicial nomination was “used to buy off his brother’s vote.” The following day, during an appearance on Fox News’ Your World, McCormack said that “obviously” it is “hard to know” whether Matheson’s appointment was made to influence his brother’s vote. He went on to say, “I don’t know when the initial discussions took place” on Matheson’s appointment, adding, “Was there an explicit quid pro quo? Probably not.”
.
Salt Lake Tribune: [Orrin] Hatch “said he knew Scott Matheson was going to be the nominee more than a month ago and disputes any idea that Obama was trying to get a vote for the nomination.” A March 5 Salt Lake Tribune article noted that “pretty much everyone who knows the Mathesons” have “called the claim simply absurd” and cited several Utah Republicans who have disputed the claim that Matheson’s nomination was made to secure his brother’s vote.
.
Above quotes selected from http://mediamatters.org/research/201003050035

It is this sort of thing that adds to the sense that there is corruption and scandal everywhere. Some say any d@mn thing they want, it is repeated over and over, and voila! scandal. Truth, not so much.

It may be endemic, but it’s not inherent to anyone. It’s a product of fear that starts at birth. At birth a spiritual being comes to regard itself as a body when it feels pain from some event. Then the lifelong campaign to avoid suffering begins. With some it is more extreme than others. Even some are so abused, mentally, emotionally, and physically that they become serial killers. Mix this with a spoiling environment and you get mass killers in the form of leaders who have anger management problems with other leaders and they take us to war. Some suffer little and are spoiled and never know, or know little of suffering, so because they think everybody who cries in pain are leaches and tricksters. They become greedy and indifferent simply because they do not fathom the level of suffering humanity is enduring. This is were the tide goes back and forth in human political affairs and is also why there is a reckoning with Republicans over this health care issue. Corruption becomes the seductive by-product of a life of luxury after you have put your time in to make a big change in this world. Generally those who stand by principles of compassion will not forget everyone else, and so corruption does not become a part of their lifestyle. Those who allow themselves to become unconsciously polarized at an extreme in any direction, can forget the absolute law of the vacuum which requires balance. The open mind is the solution to the balance. The closed mind, stuck on a set of outdated traditions or misapplied principles, will invariably anchor themselves in a flow in time that will pull them backward, and self-destruction ensues in the form of harming other people. Corruption is not about whether you are paid for doing some kind of work, it’s about whether you are paid to do the work of greed in the three main illusion struggles of life that harm all. Money, Power, and Fame.

Nothing new here; it is the Human Condition; I learned it in grade school.

I read this post hours ago and have been pondering the issue of ethics and morals in politics (unsuccessfully in my mind) ever since. I am trying to sort the import of sexual peccadillos of politicians versus the puffed up self-righteousness we have been subjected to during the HC drill. Certainly, some, like Foley are especially egregious in revealing such inherent dishonesty and hypocrisy as to be completely discrediting. Others are not so clear. What is clear to me is that many accused of no wrong doing, those who have blocked HCR in defense of whatever ideology, are in my mind more unethical and immoral than the sex freaks. With the media pitching whatever will fly it all becomes pretty confused as to what really matters.

Randel is a 20 term congressman IIRC. The vast majority of the Democratic leadership was still around when they were tossed out of power the last time. Perhaps ACTUALLY cycling the faces of the Democratic party rather than having a revolving door of the same people within the two parties that got thrown out last time might actually help America.
.
In the case of the Republicans, they were compromised pretty early. It took only a few months for Newt to suggest that turf wars was more important than the operation of the Federal government, and let’s not forget that the family values party decided to impeach a President over an extramarital blow job (fine, it was far more expansive than that, but that was certainly the selling point) while the speaker got an extra extramarital base. Hypocracy has been the watchword of the Republicans since they came in. They were corrupt to begin with – and their hypocracy is about to bankrupt the country while forcing the Democrats to make the hard decisions because they refuse to (not that the Democrats have shown a great track record, just one that’s a lot better than their Republican counterparts).

H*ll of a campaign slogan, isn’t it?
.
“Vote for Us… OUR Sleazeballs are Less Corrupt an Amoral Than THEIR Sleazeballs…”
.
How’d we get in this mess, anyway??

Is DC more corrupt than Wall Street?
.
No, DC (including K-Street and Congress) is like the Minor Leagues… Wall Street and Big Business are the “Big Show”, where you go to really reap the fruits of your efforts with the other two.

Karen, I think you’re a little early in playing this card. We’re talking about two guys: Rangel, whose actions appear to have been going on for some time, even while the Democrats were in the minority; and Massa, who just got there and whose actions seem to fall more into the category of “inappropriate” than “unethical.” If you mentioned anyone else, I missed it.

I think you and the commenters have made good points about the “human condition” and the environment in DC causing (requiring?) people to trade in their ethics. But I’m not sure we have enough evidence yet of another epidemic.

Finally, I think formerlyjames made a great point: “What is clear to me is that many accused of no wrong doing, those who have blocked HCR in defense of whatever ideology, are in my mind more unethical and immoral than the sex freaks.” Except I think many who are blocking (or supporting) HCR aren’t doing so in defense of an ideology, they’re doing it in defense of their job.

Look at the Democrats who voted to give Bush the authority to go into Iraq and then tried to criticize him when he did it. Look at the Republicans now “appalled” at the use of reconciliation after they used it so often. Throw the media into this mix: giving mouthpieces for the previous administration free rein on the airwaves to criticize the current administration with no acknowledgement of what happened when their guy was in office, and then justifying it as something resembling fairness.

When you show no respect for the responsibilities that come with your job, the other lapses are sure to follow.

Your mistake, & it’s a serious mistake that journalists of your calibre should not be making, is equating the systemic, big-money Republican corruption with the small-time picayune corruption of Rangel (we in the public don’t know yet what Massa was supposed to have done, so I can’t speculate).

Moreover, you’re forgetting that it was the liberal press (the New York Times!) that outted Rangel, while the conservative press never went after Republican miscreants, & it was Democrats in the House that faulted Rangel — Republicans wanted to keep Tom DeLay in place even if he was convicted of a felony.

I’m not excusing Rangel & I don’t know what Massa did, but you’re pretty much comparing apples & pips. Get some perspective.

The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

Meh. No one has established that Massa violated ethics. And Rengel’s violations are pretty diffuse and technical.
.
Not to write these things off, but I sincerely doubt these things hold sway in voters’ minds like ‘sexually harassing minors on the internet.’ I just don’t see this stuff sticking to Democrats generally.
.
Furthermore, there was an ocean of issues Republicans got thrown out on in 2006, and ethics didn’t top the list. I believe that was about all the stupid wars.
.
Democrats are subject to the Human Condition, obviously, of wanting to be comfortable. It seems like Republicans are afflicted with the “Human” Condition of wanting to be powerful. They’re different moral universes.

afguy:

That’s easy. Voters of both parties actually voted that way. He is a crook but the other guy is just as bad and he will do (fill in your favorite) raise taxes, take my social security etc. So they vote for the scumball they most align with philosophically.If we give politiicans miinum wage, HMO and offices in trailers we owld not have nearly the problem.

If course we will hear the argument we will lose the experience. Given the result I am not sure that is a big risk.

Nicely put, vg.

Neither do I, free.

The GOP lost Congress in ’06 because of Teri Schiavo. People were repulsed that the theocons could have taken it so far.

I’m astonished that I’m agreeing with Freep and I’m even more horrified that I’m about to pull another move that’ll have Republicans crowing.
.
It is the Ivy League crap that’s going on. Ivy league universities cost an insane amount of money – so much that this Canadian cannot conceive how a society can function with such expensive Universities. This dissuades people from joining them and then the best and brightest are defined by those who achieve from those very universities. This generally funnels people from more upper class society into those Universities and less from across the broad spectrum – totally ignoring those that truly can’t afford it. My wife would never have made it – she graduated from a top 5 University in Canada with a 3.7 GPA and her parents have been on welfare for a decade – do you think she could’ve made it to a top 5 University in the US? The broader the spectrum of individuals feeding into the system, the wider the range of skills and opinions and ways of looking at problems are available to mix and discover the answers you need, and the less of an opinion of entitlement exists.
.
The ultimate elitism is the sense of entitlement that has gripped both Washington and Wall Street. Its affected the staffers, its affected the leaders, its affected such a large percentage and continues to cloud their judgement.
.
Not every Ivy league graduate is corrupt (I’m still hopping that Obama proves to not be one of them – especially since he didn’t come from a rich family prior to figuring out his way through University), and not every corrupt politician comes from them, but far too many of them do.

The corruption comes from K Street and Wall Street. Reporters need to spend more time tracing the fee for service that dominates our political life.
Sexual idiocy will always be around. It needs to be addressed when it hurts others. The press must stop reporting rumors and when the moral issue is resolved move on.
But, the money corruption is deep and requires making connections, constant reporting, and exposure.
Until we have campaign finance reform, our country will continue to decline.

Absolutely! This could not be more well put. When we start a cycle of justifying mean behavior, even when there is evidence and history to support corrective active, we start the downward cycle into corruption. Becoming like the enemy brings everybody down, and ensures that we will have a new set of leaders like the old set of leaders. That’s why it is crucial to keep compassion, respect, and open mindedness working.

Maybe it slipped passed my awareness, but would someone tell me WHO the donors are, Republican or Democrat, that gave Rangel these gifts, so to speak?

Another surprise, I agree with you. However I think it goes much deeper.I believe the sense of entitlement extends far beyond Ivy League and Wall St. My parents and grandparents never believed that they were entitled to a stock market, housing market or economic environment that would always go in one direction –up. We beleive we a re entitled to have anything we want. We can debate HC forever so let’s leave that aside.
==
Take for instance the idiocy of people keeping pythons or other exotic animals as domestic pets. Suits for filed and people now have alligator, pythons and assorted pets and won. Now the Florida everglades ecosystem is endangered as they “pets” which are now 8ft long ans 200 lb are let go in the wild. In addition they are a danger to humans. I am a huge fan of individual rights but common sense needs to have a hold as well.

Or now the massive protests over education cuts at the CA colleges. You have a state on the verge of economic collapse but they believe they are entitled to free education. Cost of college education has increased but it has not produced an increase in smarter graduates. A lot of the money is spent on “studies” and departments that offer nothing but a repository for political groups.

It has extended to our children who think they are always the best and brightest. It is nice to give them self esteem but handing out trophy to all kids at the local recreational soccer league for showing up only enables the entitlement process.

This thinking extends to businesses as well as individuals. Companies have a problem and they look to the government for laws, money et al because they feel entitled to the help.

Instead of helping each other, w enow expect the government to fix the woes, many which they have propagated.

“t seems like Republicans are afflicted with the “Human” Condition of wanting to be powerful. They’re different moral universes.”

And the moon is made of blue cheese!

Whoooaaaa…freeper is starting to make sense.

The subject of education is really a mote point now that the Internet is here. With the in-depth knowledge about every single subject under the sun freely available to all with access, except for probably the subject of high tech weaponry, the only infrastructure we lack is a comprehensive yet well defined satellite system of testing centers for the work done at home. This is, in my opinion, is the most efficient, investment wise and social wise (i.e. teacher, parent, and child conflict resolution), educational move ours, or any, Government can make for it’s citizenry.
.
All of the current Educational Institutions can simply be converted into these testing centers, and the oversized classrooms, and overburdened teacher problems can be summarily resolved once and for all. Teachers can now take on the role of testing coordinators, and tutors where students need them. Costs would be much lower, per capita, because testing institutions do not have to grow into costly huge structures requiring maintenance. The rotation of student testing will minimize the required space in the facilities.
.
Curriculum can be managed, en mass, over the Internet with hundreds of students per teacher, and special software can make the manageability even easier, possibly into the thousand. Software algorithms will be written to sort the progression of student studies, and different levels of teacher involvement in the sorting process can be employed to handle special situations and learning needs. The testing centers will simply verify a student’s knowledge of the subject matter, and that resolves the integrity of the students involvement in their own education.
.
While there may be different costs in setting up our educational system to do this, the cost of overhead and maintenance is very low compared to how we do it now, and efficiency in delivering a quality education to the student mind magnifies dramatically. Classroom distractions become very low. I have a learning disability, and my ability to focus on subject matter is much higher in my own home, than in an environment with unfamiliar stimuli and egos bouncing off of one another.
.
However, we do have one major problem! The jock ego. Where will all of the Sports Industry’s new hopefuls come from, and how will scouting take place? It almost appears that in order to maintain this industry, the Satellite schools will have to be re-engineered into gigantic sports playgrounds for the true enthusiasts. This will wreck havoc on school reputations, at least, in their minds initially. They will have one trump card to play, “sitting in front of a computer is sedentary and will lead to weight and health problems.” As if parents should be exempt from their children’s weight and health issues.
.
Problem solved! Simply improve the Parks and Recreation system with larger parks with lots of playground equipment, maybe a small park ticket fee per child 1$ or 2$, and police to roam the parks on bikes. City brings in revenue, parks are partially funded saving the tax payer money, and if done right, there would be room for special programs for needy families that may not have the few extra dollars. There would be city wavers that parents will have to sign if they opt out of attending with their children. This way the city can’t be sued for stupid things people do, especially when parents opt out of watching their children. Only poorly maintenanced areas of the parks will have liabilities.
.
The gym teachers, almost forgot about them. They could work the parks as assistants in areas where children play and exercise in the various activities the park affords them. Perhaps this is a good time for the exercise industry to start dreaming up cost effective play equipment that will provide children and adults the required workouts for minimal health standards as prescribed by the gym teachers.
.
I see a REAL workable system in all of this if we can just start investing in THE PEOPLE!
.
Isn’t that why we really institute governments anyway, and maybe more accurately, why we formed this one?

Sorry, I meant “moot” at the begining, not “mote.”

Freep: one thing I haven’t been able to figure out is why my Alma matter seems to be unable to achieve a tuition growth rate below 30% per year. This year is a bit different because they’re losing considerable amounts of government funding, but even during the good years its spending growth rate seemed to be whatever the maximum the government would let it.
.
I believe in Public Education and even a few of the studies that other people consider useless, but it is beyond me how Universities feel they can just keep jacking up the price at a wimb.
.
It’s just Parkinson’s law when you have no real accountability for your rates. You always want to have more and better – better equipment, better staff, better everything. However, unless there’s an oversight who’s entire role is to say “we want to save the students/government/etc money” to say “no you can’t have that”, costs are just going to bloat. Dammit, now I’m sounding like a Republican. Only problem is that it isn’t limited to government entities. Banks are doing the exact same thing, car companies went bankrupt last year because of the exact same problem. Unless you have proper oversight, they will gouge and gouge not because they need the money or really should use the extra money but because they can charge more and more until the consumer is unwilling to pay for it. It’s exactly what Adam Smith envisioned while at the same time being an absolute attrocity of what he envisioned. Competition is supposed to bring down the prices but the sense of entitlement creates a false sense of need which creates a ridiculous sense of “must have at any cost”.
.
Do we need University education? No, but we need more people to get a University education. Europe has done away with Undergraduate studies because, with a few exceptions, it is practically worthless these days. Skilled labor in tomorrows job market will depend on Post Secondary Education just as skilled labor 100 years ago required Primary Education (and, actually, a strong Primary Education sector was a large part of what made Germany so strong after the unification of the German states through WWI).
——————————————————
iamsource: while there may (big maybe) be a benefit to high school and post secondary education, I could not disagree with you more about Primary Education. Primary Education, the school serves three major purposes, only one of which is to teach. The other two: to develop the child and to protect. The latter is due in a large part to the reality of the working mothers – most children do not have parents who can take care of them. The development components I’ve got a bit of first hand knowledge about because my company sells education software to Canadian schoolboard.. Here in Canada, Primary schools generally use an assessment system. They evaluate various aspects of the student’s development – of which, only one part may be focused towards knowledge or perhaps components of various curriculum. For example, the Ontario K-6 standards are split across 4 main categories: Application, Knowledge and Understanding, Technique, and Communication. So…if I know that “2+2=4″, I am doing ok in knowledge but if I can’t explain that “2 oranges and 2 apples means 4 pieces of ruit”, my application skill is weaker. They’re then rated on a scale of competence rather than using marks and the teacher then gives a general opinion of the student’s overall competence for the report card. Here’s the weird part: there is no formula to calculate the competence. In fact, we’ve been asked by schoolboards to not calculate anything, basically force the teachers to use their own “professional judgment” to come up with the student’s marks. That can’t really be done using the satelite schools idea you have.
.
I do have a general issue though. Things like public speaking, working with classmates, etc, would be severely hindered by your idea.

one thing I haven’t been able to figure out is why my Alma matter seems to be unable to achieve a tuition growth rate below 30% per year.
.
forgotten,
.
It’s the classic “you get what you pay for” syndrome with a smidgin of reverse logic thrown in for good measure.
.
If I accept the belief that a good product is more expensive to produce than a substandard one, how hard would it be to convince me that, based on price, a more expensive product is BY DEFINITION better? If college A costs more than college B, it’s just gotta be better, right?
.
We’ve been handed a similar argument for years when we said that we had to pay banking/corporate CEOs more to attract the BEST. (How’s THAT worked out? Is this present crop the best available? Are they better than the ones that came before? If so, we’re screwed…)
.
The Ivy League schools are supposed to be better, so they have to insure that their tuition is higher to maintain that logic. The fact that a number of studies have found they aren’t any better than any number of public universities isn’t the issue. By tradition, they are. They have the “support network” that says they are.
.
Therefore, they are EXECTED to cost more. Because they always have.

Likely there is an acceleration of corruption, if only because there has been an acceleration of money (and thanks to the Roberts Court, that pedal will now be right down to the metal.)

But a couple of stories about Dems do not make a trend – especially since the GOP manages to continue generating little scandals of its own.

On the contrary, we can predict with confidence that Republicans in power will always gravitate to corruption faster than Democrats will. Why? Democrats believe that government is capable of doing good things for the general public. Post-Reagan Republicans believe on principle that government cannot possibly benefit the general public. Therefore, once in power, the Democrats will at least begin by concentrating their energies on doing what they believe government can do – improve the lot of citizens. The Republicans, having nothing they believe they can do to help anyone else, will immediately draw the natural inference that they might as well help themselves, to whatever pot of gravy is on the table.

afguy: Actually, for Canada, that’s not true. While Tuition may play a small role for some people when choosing their University, there is minimal (if any) belief that better = more expensive. Quebec Universities are generally far cheaper than, say, Ontario or Alberta Universities (because Quebec “invests” more heavily in education….. don’t ask about the quotes), but the Top 5 generally includes McGill University in Quebec.

forgotten,
.
Good for Canada. I wish we could get over the obsession that cost = quality here.
.
What I described does seem to permeate our outlook here. The Ivy League schools have always had that cache; it’s just always been a given that they are better, because the children of the rich and powerful attend there.
.
Their “Achilles Heel” has been over-use of the legacy admissions process. Not how good you are but who you’re related to.

It is NOT the job of the school to “develop the child and to protect”, that is solely the parents, and all efforts made thus far have raped the families and the values of civilization. We have a very insane and violent generation thanks to our wonderful social services and education environment.

Iamsource: you are absolutely 100% dead wrong on that. First of all, WHO SUPERVISES THE KIDS DURING THE DAY. I’m not talking about the teenagers, I’m talking about the 5-12 year olds whose mother is working all day. That’s the safety element and I’ve had more than a few teachers point out that this was their primary role. In fact, the school is normally considered liable for the safety of your child from the moment your child steps out the front door to the moment the child returns through your front door. The mother not working is not an answer.
.
How do you get that this generation is particularly violent? Violent crime rates have dropped nearly every year over the last 2 decades. How do you get that? There is no impartial stat that confirms the claim you make. Perception, however, is incredibly different. There was a stat a while ago that over the course of a couple of years, violent crime decreased by 10% but at the same time, news coverage of violent crimes increased 600%. To the unaware news viewer, this might create a perception that there are more or perhaps worse crimes occuring than their were before. There is minimal evidence that this is true.

And who is going to protect the children in the womb?
.
Don’t talk to me about responsible Mothers while you leave Fathers out of the equation. You have just revealed your misandrist character.
.
The children supervise themselves with the exception of the police and the gym teachers, or weren’t paying attention.
.
Perhaps you haven’t been paying attention to the kinds of whole scale attacks that have been getting people killed at schools or shopping malls in the last couple decades. You are probably too young to have witnessed and realized these realities, which also accounts for your bias for women.

You think I’m biased against women? Dear lord – here I am indicating that it is unreasonable to expect women to become Housewives again and apparently that constitutes bias against women. Even more astonishing is the fact that you attribute that to my youth. Up is down, black is white and youths are more sexist than older people.
.
I ruled out that possibility because it was the only one that made sense and I presumed that you’d come back at me with the standard conservative counter attack of “women should get back into the kitchen”. Apparently I was mistaken but I was merely trying to cover my flank.
.
Expecting fathers to become Househusbands is even more unlikely than expecting women to become Housewives. Aside from the general social stigma and ego that drives far too many actions of men, the reality is that they have just as much pride in their career in women and have the exact same reasons as women to not want the other to be the breadwinner – equality within family decisions, right to deal with family finances, etc, all of which was directly attributed by women while the men were still the breadwinners as a creating a notably weakened position of authority for women.
.
Your system still doesn’t work for a lot of reasons, some of which I noted above (additional skills that you completely ignored) and a few more of which I’ll enumerate here:
.
(1) Satelite schools have been tried in many places and still run today. However, there is significant evidence that they are not the correct choice for all students. Some students, such as yourself, perform much better in the comfort of their own home. Some students (particularly A-Type personalities who tend thrive on competition and B-Type personalities who tend to thrive through interaction) perform much better with direct interaction with other students. This ability is limited by having satelite schools.
.
(2) Interaction with other individuals for a lot of introverts is often more forced and helps them develop further because of the forced conditions to meet with other students. This greatly helps the development of their interpersonal skills and for many of them (such as myself) will make them far more able to be leaders and deal with others when they enter the workforce. I can assure you that under your plan, I would not be nearly as well adjusted to the world as I am now.
.
(3) It is absolutely unreasonable for a single-parent to be expected to both work full time and either take care of their kid during the day or sign a waiver saying that their kid can go around without some degree of supervision.
.
(4) Go ahead, spend some time trying to deal with 30 5 year olds while you’re the only person taking care of them. I volunteered at a bible camp one summer, my cousins and I were running the games room and with 4 parental supervisors, 2 of my cousins, 2 of their friends, my brother and myself (10 total), we were regularly driven to exhaustion over the course of the 1hr we had to deal with the 40 tykes.
.
(5) Yes, Parks will help mitigate the problem, but by putting the charge on the door, kids will often skip going to the park and instead wander the street. Crime rates regularly drop when greater restrictions are imposed upon youths. Gee, I wonder why.
.
(6) My most important point: everyone learns a different way. That’s the entire purpose of the assessment system I was talking about earlier – to evaluate students and how they are developing so that their education can be custom tailored to their particular needs. That’s why, today, the option of home schooling or satelite schools exist – so that you have that option available to you to try if it is the option that’s best suited for you. For the vast majority, your system would not be the best option. The satelite school that served my province had 57 students in its first year. In its second, it had 3. It’s possible that this was due to poor practices by the teacher or staff, but there was a suspicion that a significant factor was simply that it couldn’t serve the needs – particularly the social needs – of the involved students.
.
I think the option should continue to be available to those that can take advantage, but to suggest that it should be the primary form of education, no. I don’t believe it’ll work.