Red Mosquito

Bi_3 wrote:come at me bro!

Bi_3 wrote:Education:

simple schoolboy wrote:

4/5 wrote:

Rob wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:I've noticed lately that the narrative in rose emoji circles has shifted from "minimum wage hikes won't effect small businesses" to "fuck small businesses, they pay their employees less than giant corporations anyway".

There is a certain strategy there. The more people you force onto government benefits, the more likely they are to support increasing government benefits.

The strategy is pretty well detailed in a book called “1984” maybe you guys have heard of it?

It’s a great, great book, but I am always struck by the fact that the people who live in (basically) the only country that doesn’t even provide health insurance are the ones most afraid of this.

I love the book and am worried about a tendency towards actual socialism, but I don't see much of a connection between 1984 and social welfare programs. I think the book is much more relevant in contemporary discussions about the power of controlling language, thought, and history, though.

BurtReynolds wrote:

Green Habit wrote:Neither are really excellent comparisons, but if we're considering mid-20th century dystopian novels I'd take Brave New World over 1984.

I think BNW is probably the more likely scenario. We're kinda there already.

4/5 wrote:Hooray Hallelujah for the return of prayer in Florida public schools!

Simple Torture wrote:

4/5 wrote:Hooray Hallelujah for the return of prayer in Florida public schools!

4/5 wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:

4/5 wrote:Hooray Hallelujah for the return of prayer in Florida public schools!

This is why they gave you a PhD.

4/5 wrote:Hooray for the return of prayer in Florida public schools!

Green Habit wrote:

4/5 wrote:Hooray for the return of prayer in Florida public schools!

Do you think there's five votes on SCOTUS to overturn Wallace v. Jaffree?

4/5 wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

4/5 wrote:Hooray for the return of prayer in Florida public schools!

Do you think there's five votes on SCOTUS to overturn Wallace v. Jaffree?

You're a lot better at this sort of thing than me, but I'll play. Thomas and Alito are really good bets to do so. Based on what I know about her Barrett seems like an obvious vote as well, though we haven't really seen how she operates as a Justice yet. So I'll say there's 3 definite yes votes. I think Gorsuch could vote against this from a more libertarian-type position. Kavanaugh--I really don't know. I can make arguments both ways for him. He's Trumpier than Gorsuch so idk. Roberts...Idk. I still think he likes to save his nakedly conservative votes for things that matter and can shape policy in significant areas and he likes to vote more neutrally/liberally on stuff like this that don't really matter much in a broader way. In a way too early prediction I'd say that Roberts would uphold the law if the majority is striking it down and that he'd vote to strike down if the majority is upholding.

5-4 to strike down the Florida law/uphold Jaffree.

Green Habit wrote: Your guess is as good as mine, and I think this sounds about right to me. My only quibble would be that I think Gorsuch will be more of a slam dunk to overrule Jaffree, with his state's rights libertarianism overriding his freedom of expression libertarianism here. I agree that Kavanaugh is the likely deciding vote here, and Roberts will go whatever way he does, something that I think he's going to do a lot to try to play the Warren Burger role of controlling who gets to write the opinion.

Anyway, it's pretty scary that we're seeing right wing governments passing laws that so blatantly and obviously violate existing Supreme Court precedent. But I'd certainly expect them to do so, no better time for them to strike than now.

4/5 wrote:More broadly, the bolded is one of the toughest things for me to figure out about Justices sometimes since it often depends on the specific right in question or the setting. Clarence Thomas dissents in Gonzales v. Raich (good for him!) and Scalia votes to uphold. (Talking this out rn I guess Thomas is probably pretty consistent in the states' rights camp. In this case it might be me whose inconsistent since I like his opinion in Gonzales but think his establishment and school free speech opinions are absurd. He's consistently in favor of deferring to the state in each of those, I guess. Oh well.)

Bi_3 wrote:

I guess in about 3-5 years we will be able to better answer some of the question wrt education funding after this. When this was done in KC in the 90s the results were a massive failure but the advances in EdTech might help

elliseamos wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

I guess in about 3-5 years we will be able to better answer some of the question wrt education funding after this. When this was done in KC in the 90s the results were a massive failure but the advances in EdTech might help

Looks like it's mostly driven by an increase in mental health staff. Not the worst approach given everything going on these days, but with any education budget it's not just about how much is spent but where the money goes.

Bi_3 wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

I guess in about 3-5 years we will be able to better answer some of the question wrt education funding after this. When this was done in KC in the 90s the results were a massive failure but the advances in EdTech might help

Looks like it's mostly driven by an increase in mental health staff. Not the worst approach given everything going on these days, but with any education budget it's not just about how much is spent but where the money goes.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Having councilors that can aid in customizing a students plan, like having IEPs for everyone, could really help kids