Johnny can't read

[johnsmith]

3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2023/03/why-johnny-cant-read-now-an-elegy.html

Kids can't read novels, long books etc.

3 Quarks Daily is a pretty amazing site and I'd highly recommend it.

[johnsmith]

The Cost of Austerity

www.defenddemocracy.press/the-austerity-train-wreck/

By James K. Galbraith (economist par excellence!)

[chang]

“3quarks” … good name (physics joke). Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw recently: “The universe is made of protons, neutrons, electrons, and morons.”

[yakers]

Mar 16, 2023 14:11:14 GMT chang said:

“3quarks” … good name (physics joke). Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw recently: “The universe is made of protons, neutrons, electrons, and morons.”

Have that on a T shirt, of course, lke Dilbert, everyone laughs at it and thinks it applies to 'other guys' and not to them.

[johntaylor]

Kindergarten was not available, but mother was a teacher and first long book I read was Bounty Trilogy by Nordhoff and Hall

[racqueteer]

Young reading, for me, consisted of reading science-related articles; particularly about dinosaurs and astronomy. It was never about the process of reading, per se, but was instead a byproduct of assimilating information about topics of interest. I'm not sure that kids are able to appreciate reading for its own sake. We're now more of a verbal society as opposed to being a literate one. I know that, as a teacher, I often found myself goggling at how much talking a student could do without seeming to breathe!

[steelpony10]

johnsmith ,

       Well I have a good one. Recently I worked with an 8 year old grandchild who can program and is a whiz (compared to this geezer) with computers. We have a common aquarium hobby and he asked me a question and I said google it and lets see. He got no results. He typed in something like this “akwhereum supliees” That seems like a major problem until it’s all voice commands.

        All our grands do read mounds of books and have cooking skills because of their parents and grandparents. They all know various tracking skills, how to clean a fish and can play some poker games, so more practical stuff like that, from me. 👍

[Norbert]

Mar 16, 2023 13:48:22 GMT johnsmith said:

The Cost of Austerity

www.defenddemocracy.press/the-austerity-train-wreck/

By James K. Galbraith (economist par excellence!)

This is another blatantly political post, but if chang doesn't care, I'll play along.

From Galbraith's missive:

What about those who imposed the terms of austerity, deregulation, and privatization on the Greeks? The International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank, and the European Commission – the infamous troika – took effective control of the Greek government in 2010 and again in 2015 and still run the show to this day. They also made no errors. They simply applied the dogma that had been prescribed by economists in the service of creditors. Theirs was victor’s justice, executed precisely as intended. The human error therefore lies elsewhere. It lies with those who devised, defended, and promoted the economic doctrines that have ravaged Greece, and with the rest of us who went along. We did so stupidly but with self-assurance, smugly accepting that free-market economics is the only option (“there is no alternative”), that regulation is an avoidable burden, and that private ownership is always better than public. Those in positions of power were complacent – if not cheerful – as these doctrines took hold in Greece and around the world. Ergo omnes in culpa.

Galbraith blames the recent Greek head-on train collision on free market economics.   As if socialist or communist nations never have train wrecks ... or build nuclear reactors like the one in Chernobyl.

I spend several months per year in Greece.  Greece is notoriously casual about safety: little enforcement of traffic rules, lots of drunk driving, motorcyclists rarely wear helmets, etc.  You want to pass another car on a blind curve?  No problem, the oncoming traffic will likely pull over.  (Seriously!)

I'm not sure which is more dangerous: swimming with the sharks in Australia or driving in Greece.  Your "economist par excellence" never misses an opportunity to bash free-market capitalism, no matter how stretched the logic.

[chang]

The problem with purely OT "political" posts is that they often (always?) generate a lot of heat and little light. I try to err on the side of NOT moderating / removing any material here. If things get ugly, I'll lock the post. Hopefully, "self policing" will continue to work here and keep the forum civil and productive.

[johnsmith]

Mar 17, 2023 8:55:40 GMT Norbert said:

Mar 16, 2023 13:48:22 GMT johnsmith said:

The Cost of Austerity

www.defenddemocracy.press/the-austerity-train-wreck/

By James K. Galbraith (economist par excellence!)

This is another blatantly political post, but if chang doesn't care, I'll play along.

From Galbraith's missive:

What about those who imposed the terms of austerity, deregulation, and privatization on the Greeks? The International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank, and the European Commission – the infamous troika – took effective control of the Greek government in 2010 and again in 2015 and still run the show to this day. They also made no errors. They simply applied the dogma that had been prescribed by economists in the service of creditors. Theirs was victor’s justice, executed precisely as intended. The human error therefore lies elsewhere. It lies with those who devised, defended, and promoted the economic doctrines that have ravaged Greece, and with the rest of us who went along. We did so stupidly but with self-assurance, smugly accepting that free-market economics is the only option (“there is no alternative”), that regulation is an avoidable burden, and that private ownership is always better than public. Those in positions of power were complacent – if not cheerful – as these doctrines took hold in Greece and around the world. Ergo omnes in culpa.

Galbraith blames the recent Greek head-on train collision on free market economics.   As if socialist or communist nations never have train wrecks ... or build nuclear reactors like the one in Chernobyl.

I spend several months per year in Greece.  Greece is notoriously casual about safety: little enforcement of traffic rules, lots of drunk driving, motorcyclists rarely wear helmets, etc.  You want to pass another car on a blind curve?  No problem, the oncoming traffic will likely pull over.  (Seriously!)

I'm not sure which is more dangerous: swimming with the sharks in Australia or driving in Greece.  Your "economist par excellence" never misses an opportunity to bash free-market capitalism, no matter how stretched the logic.

You think that economic policy doesn't flow from politics.

The US govt. (from political motives) gives large subsidies to sugarcane in Florida, Corn farmers in Iowa, Cotton Farmers elsewhere.

All bad policies, because if we had a "free Markets capitalism" - Brazil would provide cheaper Sugar, Africa would provide cheaper Cotton, and instead of corn mountains, we would be promoting farms providing more vegetables and fruit (I am going to assume that everyone will agree that better nutrition for people is good policy, if you disagree, you don't have to post.)

Nothing James K Galbraith said seems wrong. This is a failure of "free market capitalism".

Free Market Capitalism - automatically doesn't mean good economics or good outcomes.
The example above shows that.

[chang]

“Free Market Capitalism - automatically doesn't mean good economics or good outcomes.”

I’m not sure about that. Over the last century, free market capitalism has generated almost inconceivable amounts of prosperity and improvements in the well being and living conditions of every economic stratum of society. Socialism has been proven time and time again to do just the opposite: destroy wealth and productivity and create increasing amounts of misery.

Statistically speaking, you’re much better off betting on free market capitalism than any alternative.

[richardsok]

Oh, that's a GOOD one, Johnny !

"I'm going to assume XYZ -- and if you disagree, you don't have to post."


For about five minutes there I was useless for the laughter. Must remember to use that one in the future.

[Mustang]

johnsmith , You seem to think that the US still has laissez-faire capitalism. "Simply put, laissez-faire translates to “leave us alone” meaning that the government should remain out of the economy and instead allow individuals to freely carry out their own economic affairs." www.historycrunch.com/laissez-faire-capitalism.html#/

We haven't had that since the 1930s. If we still had it the two troubled banks would have been allowed to fail. Our government doesn't control our economy but it does monitor it and steps in when necessary. The Federal Reserve intervenes all the time. Through permits and licenses our government controls and limits activities. And, if a company gets big enough to stifle competition it can break the company into smaller pieces like it did with Standard Oil.

Edit: Johnny can't read because our schools have gotten away from teaching the basics such as reading, writing and arithmetic.

[Chahta]

Mar 16, 2023 14:11:14 GMT chang said:

“3quarks” … good name (physics joke). Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw recently: “The universe is made of protons, neutrons, electrons, and morons.”

Interesting. You saw that bumper sticker in Spain/France?

[johnsmith]

Mar 17, 2023 12:57:03 GMT Mustang said:

johnsmith , You seem to think that the US still has laissez-faire capitalism. "Simply put, laissez-faire translates to “leave us alone” meaning that the government should remain out of the economy and instead allow individuals to freely carry out their own economic affairs." www.historycrunch.com/laissez-faire-capitalism.html#/

We haven't had that since the 1930s. If we still had it the two troubled banks would have been allowed to fail. Our government doesn't control our economy but it does monitor it and steps in when necessary. The Federal Reserve intervenes all the time. Through permits and licenses our government controls and limits activities. And, if a company gets big enough to stifle competition it can break the company into smaller pieces like it did with Standard Oil.

Edit: Johnny can't read because our schools have gotten away from teaching the basics such as reading, writing and arithmetic.

I agree with you entirely.

[Chahta]

Mar 17, 2023 12:57:03 GMT Mustang said:

johnsmith , You seem to think that the US still has laissez-faire capitalism. "Simply put, laissez-faire translates to “leave us alone” meaning that the government should remain out of the economy and instead allow individuals to freely carry out their own economic affairs." www.historycrunch.com/laissez-faire-capitalism.html#/

We haven't had that since the 1930s. If we still had it the two troubled banks would have been allowed to fail. Our government doesn't control our economy but it does monitor it and steps in when necessary. The Federal Reserve intervenes all the time. Through permits and licenses our government controls and limits activities. And, if a company gets big enough to stifle competition it can break the company into smaller pieces like it did with Standard Oil.

Edit: Johnny can't read because our schools have gotten away from teaching the basics such as reading, writing and arithmetic.

I would say it started before, like at least when income tax was started. Maybe before.

[johnsmith]

Mar 17, 2023 12:13:18 GMT chang said:

“Free Market Capitalism - automatically doesn't mean good economics or good outcomes.”

I’m not sure about that. Over the last century, free market capitalism has generated almost inconceivable amounts of prosperity and improvements in the well being and living conditions of every economic stratum of society. Socialism has been proven time and time again to do just the opposite: destroy wealth and productivity and create increasing amounts of misery.

Statistically speaking, you’re much better off betting on free market capitalism than any alternative.

Generally yes.

[johntaylor]

In the 1860s, Brits passed a bakery law establishing standards (no animals in the shop, workers couldn't sleep there).    In 1895, NY passed a Bakeshop Act which, inter alia, limited bakers to 60 hours a week.

The Supreme Court, in Lochner (1905), ruled the Bakeshop Act infringed on freedom of contract (employees selling labor).   In dissent, Holmes said the 14th Amendment did not enact the laissez faire argument in Herbert Spencer's Social Statics.

[johnsmith]

Mar 17, 2023 13:42:18 GMT johntaylor said:

In the 1860s, Brits passed a bakery law establishing standards (no animals in the shop, workers couldn't sleep there).    In 1895, NY passed a Bakeshop Act which, inter alia, limited bakers to 60 hours a week.

The Supreme Court, in Lochner (1905), ruled the Bakeshop Act infringed on freedom of contract (employees selling labor).   In dissent, Holmes said the 14th Amendment did not enact the laissez faire argument in Herbert Spencer's Social Statics.

That's some fun stuff! So much info in such a short post, I likey!

[Norbert]

Mar 17, 2023 12:01:15 GMT johnsmith said:

Mar 17, 2023 8:55:40 GMT Norbert said:

This is another blatantly political post, but if chang doesn't care, I'll play along.

From Galbraith's missive:

What about those who imposed the terms of austerity, deregulation, and privatization on the Greeks? The International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank, and the European Commission – the infamous troika – took effective control of the Greek government in 2010 and again in 2015 and still run the show to this day. They also made no errors. They simply applied the dogma that had been prescribed by economists in the service of creditors. Theirs was victor’s justice, executed precisely as intended. The human error therefore lies elsewhere. It lies with those who devised, defended, and promoted the economic doctrines that have ravaged Greece, and with the rest of us who went along. We did so stupidly but with self-assurance, smugly accepting that free-market economics is the only option (“there is no alternative”), that regulation is an avoidable burden, and that private ownership is always better than public. Those in positions of power were complacent – if not cheerful – as these doctrines took hold in Greece and around the world. Ergo omnes in culpa.

Galbraith blames the recent Greek head-on train collision on free market economics.   As if socialist or communist nations never have train wrecks ... or build nuclear reactors like the one in Chernobyl.

I spend several months per year in Greece.  Greece is notoriously casual about safety: little enforcement of traffic rules, lots of drunk driving, motorcyclists rarely wear helmets, etc.  You want to pass another car on a blind curve?  No problem, the oncoming traffic will likely pull over.  (Seriously!)

I'm not sure which is more dangerous: swimming with the sharks in Australia or driving in Greece.  Your "economist par excellence" never misses an opportunity to bash free-market capitalism, no matter how stretched the logic.

You think that economic policy doesn't flow from politics.

The US govt. (from political motives) gives large subsidies to sugarcane in Florida, Corn farmers in Iowa, Cotton Farmers elsewhere.

All bad policies, because if we had a "free Markets capitalism" - Brazil would provide cheaper Sugar, Africa would provide cheaper Cotton, and instead of corn mountains, we would be promoting farms providing more vegetables and fruit (I am going to assume that everyone will agree that better nutrition for people is good policy, if you disagree, you don't have to post.)

Nothing James K Galbraith said seems wrong. This is a failure of "free market capitalism".

Free Market Capitalism - automatically doesn't mean good economics or good outcomes.
The example above shows that.

My point was that Galbraith blaming a Greek train collision on free market capitalism is ridiculous, as shown above. 

Of course, free market capitalism doesn't always guarantee perfect outcomes.  Obviously.  And smart regulation is part of the game, as both Smith and Hayek emphasized. It's challenging to find the right balance.  All we know is that the socialist alternative (centralized control) has led to inferior outcomes.

[johnsmith]

Mar 17, 2023 12:38:19 GMT richardsok said:

Oh, that's a GOOD one, Johnny !

"I'm going to assume XYZ -- and if you disagree, you don't have to post."


For about five minutes there I was useless for the laughter. Must remember to use that one in the future.

I recommend - not reading or commenting.

You can choose to ignore, it's your choice.

I don't control you, your reading, your comments.

you do! own it!

Don't behave like a Snowflake!

[johnsmith]

Norbert,

I can agree to disagree about the cause.

[racqueteer]

Getting back to the theme of education…

Nowhere is the maxim, “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions“ more true than in education.  Firstly, everything is top down, and the ’top’ doesn’t care about teacher’s opinions.  Secondly, everything that is attempted is likely to be motivated by those aforementioned good intentions…but…. Ime, many people are lazy, venal, and self-centered; so there are, inevitably, unforeseen consequences.  

They need good notes?  Let’s ‘help’ them out by giving them the notes.  Result: Kids do not learn HOW to take notes, and no longer interact with them at all (plus less writing practice).  Many have home situations which make homework problematic?  Give no homework and do everything IN school.  Result: Less new instruction.  Kids need more help?  Review sessions, makeup tests.  Result: Less time for instruction.  Kids not doing well?  Standardized testing.  Result: A week lost to ‘preparing’, additional days lost to the test, teaching to the test, loss of innovation, and loss of spontaneity. The “good kids“?  They needed none of this; so THEY’RE bored to death.  Worse, since they are the best in the class, they rapidly discover that they can do just fine with 50% effort (but since ‘homework’ is often graded to pull up test scores - helping- we end up penalizing the kids who didn’t NEED to do it to be successful on the test.  Result: We have to give a kid 80s instead of the 90s they got on their tests.  Every time we try to do something to ‘help’, people being who they are, we end up making things worse. 

[Chahta]

Mar 17, 2023 14:49:33 GMT johnsmith said:

Mar 17, 2023 12:38:19 GMT richardsok said:

Oh, that's a GOOD one, Johnny !

"I'm going to assume XYZ -- and if you disagree, you don't have to post."


For about five minutes there I was useless for the laughter. Must remember to use that one in the future.

I recommend - not reading or commenting.

You can choose to ignore, it's your choice.

I don't control you, your reading, your comments.

you do! own it!

Don't behave like a Snowflake!

I recommend stopping this crap posting. People are free to state opinions without argument.

[chang]

Mar 17, 2023 12:13:18 GMT chang said:

“Free Market Capitalism - automatically doesn't mean good economics or good outcomes.”

I’m not sure about that. Over the last century, free market capitalism has generated almost inconceivable amounts of prosperity and improvements in the well being and living conditions of every economic stratum of society. Socialism has been proven time and time again to do just the opposite: destroy wealth and productivity and create increasing amounts of misery.

Statistically speaking, you’re much better off betting on free market capitalism than any alternative.

Regarding the banking industry:

“Some observers believe that credit risks will be managed more effectively by banks because they generally are more heavily regulated than the entities to which they are transferring credit risk.

”But those unregulated and less heavily regulated entities generally are subject to more-effective market discipline than banks. Market participants usually have strong incentives to monitor and control the risks they assume in choosing to deal with particular counterparties.

”In essence, prudential regulation is supplied by the market through counterparty evaluation and monitoring rather than by authorities. Such private prudential regulation can be impaired--indeed, even displaced--if some counterparties assume that government regulations obviate private prudence. We regulators are often perceived as constraining excessive risk-taking more effectively than is demonstrably possible in practice. Except where market discipline is undermined by moral hazard, for example, because of federal guarantees of private debt, private regulation generally has proved far better at constraining excessive risk-taking than has government regulation.”

~ Alan Greenspan, May 5, 2005

[catdog]

I can remember reading in first and second grade as such a labor.  Later in third and fourth grade some short books caught my attention.  They were American frontier history type story's for mostly young boys.  I was hooked.

The next year we had a textbook that was a beginning to geography.  Each chapter was about the life of a family in a different area of the world.  While it taught geography it read like a novel and gave a combination of reading/geography.  I remember the title of one chapter "Courage Cove".  It centered around a young boy who lived on the coast of Maine and his father was a lobsterman I think.

Catdog

[newtecher]

Mar 17, 2023 19:06:21 GMT chang said:

“Some observers believe that credit risks will be managed more effectively by banks because they generally are more heavily regulated than the entities to which they are transferring credit risk.

”But those unregulated and less heavily regulated entities generally are subject to more-effective market discipline than banks. Market participants usually have strong incentives to monitor and control the risks they assume in choosing to deal with particular counterparties.

”In essence, prudential regulation is supplied by the market through counterparty evaluation and monitoring rather than by authorities. Such private prudential regulation can be impaired--indeed, even displaced--if some counterparties assume that government regulations obviate private prudence. We regulators are often perceived as constraining excessive risk-taking more effectively than is demonstrably possible in practice. Except where market discipline is undermined by moral hazard, for example, because of federal guarantees of private debt, private regulation generally has proved far better at constraining excessive risk-taking than has government regulation.”

~ Alan Greenspan, May 5, 2005

1929-1933 was a lovely time for market discipline, including for banks, which were largely unregulated at the time and experienced wave after wave of bank runs. You'd think that after 1929, the depositors would wise up, do due diligence, and put money into "good banks" only. Nope, bank runs continued until 1933, when FDIC was established.