sorry, Ed Dolan

"Christopher Jordan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am sorry I complained about your posts. I was wrong saying you were
"off the wall" busting up the 'bent group. I can only feel sadness
and pity at this time.

Yo do not hold a candle to jonny-no-brain. Talk about out of line!

Racing is for losers in my opinion, as other people think I am a loser
hating competition.

Chris Jordan
Santa Cruz, CA.

I hope the monkeys realize it's not an
impossibility to set up their own Usenet group if that's what they want.

Usenet needs an alt.rec.monkey.bicycle.racing.

"skip" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Christopher Jordan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am sorry I complained about your posts. I was wrong saying you were
"off the wall" busting up the 'bent group. I can only feel sadness
and pity at this time.

Yo do not hold a candle to jonny-no-brain. Talk about out of line!

Racing is for losers in my opinion, as other people think I am a loser
hating competition.

Chris Jordan
Santa Cruz, CA.

I hope the monkeys realize it's not an
impossibility to set up their own Usenet group if that's what they want.

Usenet needs an alt.rec.monkey.bicycle.racing.

I thought there was an alt.rec.bicycles.racing. Would not this be a suitable
group for those who think going fast and racing is what life is all about.

I have always been very careful not to monopolize subject threads by doing
any original posting since I will admit I am mostly off topic all the time.
The Google page is now a mess because of someone who posts nothing but the
purest nonsense. I do not use the Google page anymore myself since I have
discovered my Outlook Express newsreader, but I did use it for at least a
year when I first came on this group. I admit I would be turned off by that
page the way it looks now.

I think an original post must be more careful than a response type of post.
I will not normally even do a response until I figure the thread has been
ruined or it was an off topic thread to begin with. I have always tried to
be responsible and to be considerate of everyone else here on ARBR. My posts
are mostly buried deep within a thread and you have to look to find me. That
is the way I want it so that I am not interfering with on topic posts. Mr.
Sherman is considerate that way too as are most others.

I want to treat others the way I would want to be treated. That is what is
known as civilized behavior and it is just good manners. Furthermore, I
always try to say something intelligent, though I don't always succeed. I
want to entertain and enlighten those who read me, not just create a lot of
ruckus for no purpose. And finally, I am not a one note Johnny. I do not
believe in beating a horse to death. One or two blows should be sufficient
for anyone.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

PS. Chris is right about competition. It is the biggest bore ever invented
by the mind of man and is essentially for childish and juvenile mentalities.
All accomplishment is the result of cooperation, not competition. Any adult
who does not know this is retarded.

"Edward Dolan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"skip" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Christopher Jordan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am sorry I complained about your posts. I was wrong saying you were
"off the wall" busting up the 'bent group. I can only feel sadness
and pity at this time.

Yo do not hold a candle to jonny-no-brain. Talk about out of line!

Racing is for losers in my opinion, as other people think I am a loser
hating competition.

Chris Jordan
Santa Cruz, CA.

I hope the monkeys realize it's not an
impossibility to set up their own Usenet group if that's what they want.

Usenet needs an alt.rec.monkey.bicycle.racing.

I thought there was an alt.rec.bicycles.racing. Would not this be a
suitable group for those who think going fast and racing is what life is
all about.

<snip>

I don't know Ed. It's a pretty rough crowd over in alt.rec.bicycles.racing.
I'm not sure monkeys could survive for long in that kind of hostile
environment. I think monkeys would be happier on an island of their own.

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:10:39 -0600, "Edward Dolan" <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

I thought there was an alt.rec.bicycles.racing. Would not this be a suitable
group for those who think going fast and racing is what life is all about.

The mostly ride upwrongs, poor benighted souls that they are.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:10:39 -0600 "Edward Dolan"
used 63 lines of text to write in newsgroup: alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent

Quoted message said:

All accomplishment is the result of cooperation, not competition.

Not true.

I'm thinking of the recent X-prize (the 10 million dollar competition to get a
private spaceship aloft 100KM twice, no governments allowed)

Orteig Prize - (1919) $25,000 to the team who could fly non-stop between New
York and Paris (Charles Lindbergh won)

The space race between USA and USSR 1950's-1970's

The rivalries of aeronautic companies to produce the next generation fighter
planes.

The list is endless. Healthy competition is what gives rise to true innovation.

I'm sometimes dis-gruntled but I can't say I've ever felt "gruntled"

"G. Morgan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:10:39 -0600 "Edward Dolan"
used 63 lines of text to write in newsgroup: alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent

Quoted message said:

All accomplishment is the result of cooperation, not competition.

Not true.

I'm thinking of the recent X-prize (the 10 million dollar competition to
get a
private spaceship aloft 100KM twice, no governments allowed)

Orteig Prize - (1919) $25,000 to the team who could fly non-stop between
New
York and Paris (Charles Lindbergh won)

The space race between USA and USSR 1950's-1970's

The rivalries of aeronautic companies to produce the next generation
fighter
planes.

The list is endless. Healthy competition is what gives rise to true
innovation.

You are talking about group competition, not individual competition. That is
what I am talking about too.

Before you get to the actual competition (almost a sporting event and not
much more) an enormous amount of cooperation has first taken place among men
working in groups. The competition is normally just splitting hairs and not
significant. Cooperation is at the basis of all man's activities. Even you
mention the word "team". That just about says it all. Show me a lone
individual competing for much of anything and I will show you a forlorn
enterprise.

It might be argued that great artists are lone individuals competing with
one another for the approval of the musical public, but even here these lone
individuals are enmeshed in what has come before them and they are standing
on the shoulders of giants. In short, they are working in a social milieu
which determines how they are going to behave and what they are going to
produce. I am not much for the importance of the individual in the
interpretation of history.

I will say with respect to science and technological innovations, it does
not matter a whit whether any individual ever lived or not. Those advances
are going to take place irrespective of individuals. Science and technology
are essentially a cooperative enterprise of a society as a whole. A man like
Edison could not have even existed in a society like that of Afghanistan. He
was not a lone genius and if he had never existed every invention of his
would have been invented anyhow.

Science is a bit different than art in this respect, but not altogether
different. Even if Beethoven had never lived, the chances are very good that
we would have had some music that sounded very much like his did in the
mid-nineteenth century. There is an inevitability about things once they
get launched and things get launched by society as a whole, not by
individuals. Competition is just passing out prizes and patting ourselves on
the back. All the real work is done by men working in groups. It is always a
team effort and cooperation is at the basis of it all.

This is also why I do not subscribe to the theory of the great man of
history, whether it be [censored], Napoleon or whoever. The times will create
it's own figures to represent what is to happen based on societal and
historical considerations, not on whether a lone individual ever lived or
not. As you might imagine from this, I would not be accepted into any
society of historians. My view is too sociological for them.

Show me a competitive society based on the individual and I will show you
complete savagery.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Ed said:

Before you get to the actual competition (almost a sporting event and not
much more) an enormous amount of cooperation has first taken place among men
working in groups. The competition is normally just splitting hairs and not
significant. Cooperation is at the basis of all man's activities. Even you
mention the word "team". That just about says it all. Show me a lone
individual competing for much of anything and I will show you a forlorn
enterprise.

There are sports that are individual competitions (golf, tennis, track
and field, marathon running, etc) but I have observed that the people
who engage in these sports are highly driven and often rather unhappy.
When was the last time that you met any serious runner on the path who
had the big grin that a bent rider often has on his face?

Ed said:

I am not much for the importance of the individual in the
interpretation of history.

I actually agree with you on this, of course there are a few exception
to this where a single individual acting on his or her own committed
an act that changed the course of history. But, most individuals that
committed actions they thought would alter history (such as Tim McVey
or Osama Bin Ladin -- who planned and paid for the 9/11 attacks and
was the driving spiritual force behind them) often had a success at
first only to find that their actions weakened or destroyed the cause
that they advocated.

Quoted message said:

Ed wrote:
I will say with respect to science and technological innovations, it does
not matter a whit whether any individual ever lived or not.

While it is true that the society where they live strongly influences
their lives. But, they still need that special ability to "think out
side the box" and come up with the insight to make the technological
innovations. But, here agian, most modern technological innovations
today are made by a group of scientists rather than a single
individual.

Quoted message said:

Ed wrote:
Science is a bit different than art in this respect, but not altogether
different. . . . There is an inevitability about things once they
get launched and things get launched by society as a whole, not by
individuals.

No I cannot agree with this because in the liberal arts most people
work alone and that is why individuals have stood out in the arts
throughout history. This is why we know of Myron and Praxiteles who
were sculptors who worked in the 4th century B.C.E. (I still prefer
just B.C.) Most great works of art are the work of a single indivual
who worked alone or with an assistant or two to do the rough work.

Quoted message said:

Ed wrote:
Show me a competitive society based on the individual and I will show you
complete savagery.

That may explain why the American society, now so obsessed with sports
and other mindless competitive diversions, seems to becoming more
savage. Our armies were viewed a liberators during WWII, even by the
Germans and the Japanese, but are now viewed as enemy occupiers in
Iraq and other areas around the world.

"Ken_in_Michgan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ed said:

Before you get to the actual competition (almost a sporting event and not
much more) an enormous amount of cooperation has first taken place among
men
working in groups. The competition is normally just splitting hairs and
not
significant. Cooperation is at the basis of all man's activities. Even
you
mention the word "team". That just about says it all. Show me a lone
individual competing for much of anything and I will show you a forlorn
enterprise.

There are sports that are individual competitions (golf, tennis, track
and field, marathon running, etc) but I have observed that the people
who engage in these sports are highly driven and often rather unhappy.
When was the last time that you met any serious runner on the path who
had the big grin that a bent rider often has on his face?

I do not regard sporting events as in any way contributing to the good of
society, other than keeping morons amused.

Quoted message said:

Ed said:

I am not much for the importance of the individual in the
interpretation of history.

I actually agree with you on this, of course there are a few exception
to this where a single individual acting on his or her own committed
an act that changed the course of history. But, most individuals that
committed actions they thought would alter history (such as Tim McVey
or Osama Bin Ladin -- who planned and paid for the 9/11 attacks and
was the driving spiritual force behind them) often had a success at
first only to find that their actions weakened or destroyed the cause
that they advocated.

McVey is a good example of an individual acting alone. He falls into the
category of a criminal and I think we can both agree that criminals do not
accomplish anything good for society. OBL is different than McVey and
represents a group enterprise. It is based on cooperation among it's
members. Group enterprises are all that society ever has to concern itself
with in a serious way.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ed wrote:
I will say with respect to science and technological innovations, it does
not matter a whit whether any individual ever lived or not.

While it is true that the society where they live strongly influences
their lives. But, they still need that special ability to "think out
side the box" and come up with the insight to make the technological
innovations. But, here agian, most modern technological innovations
today are made by a group of scientists rather than a single
individual.

Think for one moment about any scientific discovery or technological
invention. They would all have happened regardless of any individual. That
is because they are group enterprises of the society and do not depend on
any particular individual. Even Einstein was not necessary. That is the
beauty of science and technology. Once launched, they carry on regardless of
individuals.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ed wrote:
Science is a bit different than art in this respect, but not altogether
different. . . . There is an inevitability about things once they
get launched and things get launched by society as a whole, not by
individuals.

No I cannot agree with this because in the liberal arts most people
work alone and that is why individuals have stood out in the arts
throughout history. This is why we know of Myron and Praxiteles who
were sculptors who worked in the 4th century B.C.E. (I still prefer
just B.C.) Most great works of art are the work of a single indivual
who worked alone or with an assistant or two to do the rough work.

I will admit that the arts are a harder nut to crack for my theory of the
importance of the group and the unimportance of the individual in history. I
do believe that individuals in the arts can imprint their singular
personalities on a society, but only with respect to minor details. The arts
actually evolve much like the sciences, but it is much harder to demonstrate
this. That is why I chose Beethoven whom I regard as the greatest genius who
ever lived. But even so, music would have progressed pretty much as it did
even if Beethoven had never lived. The really critical thing to keep in mind
about artists is that they are always working in a particular social milieu
which they themselves did not create, but are merely receiving by virtue of
living in the society. But it is hard to prove these things with respect to
artists I will admit.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ed wrote:
Show me a competitive society based on the individual and I will show you
complete savagery.

That may explain why the American society, now so obsessed with sports
and other mindless competitive diversions, seems to becoming more
savage. Our armies were viewed a liberators during WWII, even by the
Germans and the Japanese, but are now viewed as enemy occupiers in
Iraq and other areas around the world.

Yes, the American emphasis on the importance of the individual is quite
wrongheaded. Most interpretations of history that emphasize the importance
of individuals are in my opinion quite mistaken. The group is everything,
the individual is nothing.

Many thanks for the thoughtful post.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Ed,

Having taught in both a public middle school (7-8) and a public high
school (9-12) for 37 years before retiring, I too have a very dim view
organized sports and especially those louts who are idealized as being
the school's heroes. I have seen enough 15 to 18 year-olds parading
around and acting like the sun rises and sets on their posteriors and
expecting me and other teachers to give their poor performance in
class a pass "for the sake of the team!"

I am a member of the Calvinist Reformed Church in America and I
believe that the idol that America worships is the god of sport. What
really appalls me is the number of churches (mine included) who are
building gyms either connected to their church or on their campus to
further this idolic behavior. What really irked me was when our old
minister, who accepted a call to another congragation last spring,
didn't seem to be able to deliver one sermon that didn't reference
sports. He would cancel church activities to watch major sporting
events.

Needless to say, I don't watch many athletic events. I prefer to spend
the time outside riding our V-Rexes. What is really surprises me is
when I used to tell those sports louts how many miles we rode after
work (usually 15 to 30 miles) they would react with shock and say that
they couldn't ride their bikes for five miles, "it would kill me!"
What a bunch of wimps!

American organized sports are the modern equivalent of ancient Rome's
"Bread and Circuses."

Ken the Troll

"Ken_in_Michgan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
[...]

Quoted message said:

Needless to say, I don't watch many athletic events. I prefer to spend
the time outside riding our V-Rexes. What is really surprises me is
when I used to tell those sports louts how many miles we rode after
work (usually 15 to 30 miles) they would react with shock and say that
they couldn't ride their bikes for five miles, "it would kill me!"
What a bunch of wimps!

American organized sports are the modern equivalent of ancient Rome's
"Bread and Circuses."

The main problem with all school team sports is that you can't continue them
once you are through with school. It would be better by far if the schools
would emphasize those physical activities that you can continue through out
your life.

I have never been interested in sports of any kind. I most especially have
never been interested in watching others play a game. It is one thing to
play yourself I suppose, but to merely watch others play ... ? No thanks!

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

On 5 Dec 2004 21:31:02 -0800, [email hidden] (Ken_in_Michgan)

Quoted message said:

I am a member of the Calvinist Reformed Church in America and I
believe that the idol that America worships is the god of sport. What
really appalls me is the number of churches (mine included) who are
building gyms either connected to their church or on their campus to
further this idolic behavior.

And scheduling services around "big games"...

http://www.startribune.com/stories/510/5117513.html

"Zippy the Pinhead" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 5 Dec 2004 21:31:02 -0800, [email hidden] (Ken_in_Michgan)

Quoted message said:

I am a member of the Calvinist Reformed Church in America and I
believe that the idol that America worships is the god of sport. What
really appalls me is the number of churches (mine included) who are
building gyms either connected to their church or on their campus to
further this idolic behavior.

And scheduling services around "big games"...

http://www.startribune.com/stories/510/5117513.html

Well everybody has to get their priorities straight.

skip

skip said:

Well everybody has to get their priorities straight.

Getting your priorities straight would be getting the congregation
outside to enjoy the wonderful world that God gave us. Get them out
riding their bikes, hiking, swiming, sailing, what ever. Anything is
better than being a couch potato watching some overpaid self-centered
seroid pumped athlete run around showing off. If you want to find out
the root cause of the problems in American public education all you
need to realize is that the vast majority of school admistrators are
failed coaches.

What is particularly offensive to me, a professional history teacher
(with an MA in history) is that untrained coaches are often assigned to
teach social studies, because the adminstrator thinks it is an easy
subject, and that administrator is a failed coach! In my experience
these individuals couldn't teach their way out of a wet poke sack! I
cannot understand this worship of the god of sport! One God is enough
for me.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

skip said:

Well everybody has to get their priorities straight.

Getting your priorities straight would be getting the congregation
outside to enjoy the wonderful world that God gave us. Get them out
riding their bikes, hiking, swiming, sailing, what ever. Anything is
better than being a couch potato watching some overpaid self-centered
steroid pumped athlete run around showing off. If you want to find out
the root cause of the problems in American public education all you
need to realize is that the vast majority of school admistrators are
failed coaches.

What is particularly offensive to me, a professional history teacher
(with an MA in history) is that untrained coaches are often assigned to
teach social studies, because the adminstrator thinks it is an easy
subject, and that administrator is a failed coach! In my experience
these individuals couldn't teach their way out of a wet poke sack! I
cannot understand this worship of the god of sport! One God is enough
for me.

That is the way it was for me all through high school. My social studies
teachers were all failed coaches. God, how awful! It was only when I got to
the University of Minnesota that I realized that the social studies were the
essence of what I wanted to study. I then embarked on sociology,
anthropology, political science and of course history to my heart's content.
I sometimes think my high school years were totally wasted. I would have
been better off if I had gone straight from 8th grades social studies
directly to the University.

Sports are a tremendous distraction to the average teenager, but that I
never was. But I could have used a few good teachers in high school to help
me along my way. The fact is that public school education in this country is
vastly over rated. It is not nearly as good as most of us imagine it to be.
I am very much in favor of private schools just in order to keep the public
schools honest if nothing else.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

I have nothing against the private schools as long as they use
certified and qualified teachers. The ones that bother me are the
extreme right-wing fundamentalist ran schools that use volunteers from
their congregation who "feel called to teach" but who have not had
formal training and then maintain that the church ran school can choose
who ever is in their classrooms because of the "separation of church
and state" built into the Constitution. [They hate it when teacher led
Bible readings and prayer are illegal but love it when it allows them
to put unqualified people in a classroom and thus possibly injure their
own children!] We have some fine Christian Schools here in Western
Michigan which employ fully certified and qualified teachers, and they
do an excellent job. On the other hand we now have a number of "Charter
Academies" that are state funded but do not have to follow the state's
rules. These schools generally hire first and second year teachers, who
lack the experience to teach well. However, since these schools are ran
by the brother of the guy who owns the Orlando NBA team and he is
primarily interested in maximum profit, so there are no experienced
teachers to help them learn the ropes. These schools are being sold to
the parents by the Republicans as a better alternative to the standard
public schools. Yet, their scores on the state assessment tests are
lower than the public schools they drew their students from, and are
actually falling year after year. I hate to think of the long term
damage they are doing to students whose parents believe the propaganda
the right-wing is pumping out to try to make a profit for their rich
friends.

When schools are rated based on the tests that the No Child Left Behind
Law requires they don't take the children's attendence records and
transferal records into account. Kids who are constantly absent or who
are constantly moving from school to school pay the price in the level
of education that they absorb. The interesting thing that the "best"
schools in Western Michigan, which have made a habit of suggesting to
parents of low performing students not have their kids take the state
assessment tests in the past now have to have all students take the
tests and now they are not making the necessary progress! Cheaters
sometimes find that what they did in the past comes back to bite them
in the a**.

Nice talking to you

Here is the complete posting on this issue so that others may follow what is
being said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

skip said:

Well everybody has to get their priorities straight.

Edward Dolan said:

Getting your priorities straight would be getting the congregation
outside to enjoy the wonderful world that God gave us. Get them out
riding their bikes, hiking, swiming, sailing, what ever. Anything is
better than being a couch potato watching some overpaid self-centered
steroid pumped athlete run around showing off. If you want to find out
the root cause of the problems in American public education all you
need to realize is that the vast majority of school admistrators are
failed coaches.

What is particularly offensive to me, a professional history teacher
(with an MA in history) is that untrained coaches are often assigned to
teach social studies, because the adminstrator thinks it is an easy
subject, and that administrator is a failed coach! In my experience
these individuals couldn't teach their way out of a wet poke sack! I
cannot understand this worship of the god of sport! One God is enough
for me.

That is the way it was for me all through high school. My social studies
teachers were all failed coaches. God, how awful! It was only when I got to
the University of Minnesota that I realized that the social studies were the
essence of what I wanted to study. I then embarked on sociology,
anthropology, political science and of course history to my heart's content.
I sometimes think my high school years were totally wasted. I would have
been better off if I had gone straight from 8th grades social studies
directly to the University.

Sports are a tremendous distraction to the average teenager, but that I
never was. But I could have used a few good teachers in high school to help
me along my way. The fact is that public school education in this country is
vastly over rated. It is not nearly as good as most of us imagine it to be.
I am very much in favor of private schools just in order to keep the public
schools honest if nothing else.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I have nothing against the private schools as long as they use
certified and qualified teachers. The ones that bother me are the
extreme right-wing fundamentalist ran schools that use volunteers from
their congregation who "feel called to teach" but who have not had
formal training and then maintain that the church ran school can choose
who ever is in their classrooms because of the "separation of church
and state" built into the Constitution. [They hate it when teacher led
Bible readings and prayer are illegal but love it when it allows them
to put unqualified people in a classroom and thus possibly injure their
own children!] We have some fine Christian Schools here in Western
Michigan which employ fully certified and qualified teachers, and they
do an excellent job. On the other hand we now have a number of "Charter
Academies" that are state funded but do not have to follow the state's
rules. These schools generally hire first and second year teachers, who
lack the experience to teach well. However, since these schools are ran
by the brother of the guy who owns the Orlando NBA team and he is
primarily interested in maximum profit, so there are no experienced
teachers to help them learn the ropes. These schools are being sold to
the parents by the Republicans as a better alternative to the standard
public schools. Yet, their scores on the state assessment tests are
lower than the public schools they drew their students from, and are
actually falling year after year. I hate to think of the long term
damage they are doing to students whose parents believe the propaganda
the right-wing is pumping out to try to make a profit for their rich
friends.

When schools are rated based on the tests that the No Child Left Behind
Law requires they don't take the children's attendence records and
transferal records into account. Kids who are constantly absent or who
are constantly moving from school to school pay the price in the level
of education that they absorb. The interesting thing that the "best"
schools in Western Michigan, which have made a habit of suggesting to
parents of low performing students not have their kids take the state
assessment tests in the past now have to have all students take the
tests and now they are not making the necessary progress! Cheaters
sometimes find that what they did in the past comes back to bite them
in the a**.

I can agree with most everything you say, but I do want some competition for
the public schools. The public schools (government schools really - a form
of socialism) will function best if they have to compete with the private
sector. Some of the very best schools in the known universe are private
schools. That is also the glory of this nation with respect to higher
education. I do not want the public schools to have a monopoly on K -12
education in this country.

If I were a rich man and I had children, I would want to send them to the
best schools I could find. That would most likely not be a public school. It
in fact would be a private school. But it takes money to do that I must
admit and only the children of the rich would get a first class education
under my values. It may be working out that way anyway on the East Coast and
certain other favored areas of the country which value education above all
else and are able and willing to pay for it.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

You can have competition within the public schools of a given area.
Here in Michigan we have state laws that allow local schools to opt for
what is called being "schools of choice" by allowing open enrollment
for students from outside the school district on a "space available"
basis. Every spring the schools that are participating publish how many
slots they have available in each grade by individual buildings.
Parents who want their child to go to a school, either within the
district or outside of their home district, then apply for those open
seats. The children are generally given out on a first come first serve
basis as long as there are fewer applicants than the number of slots
available. If the number of applicants out number the slots available
then all the applicants' names are put into a hat and then those who
will get the slots are selected by lot. If a student from outside the
district attended attended the previous grade the year before they are
automatically enrolled in the next grade, as long as there is room.

Most of the suburban schools, except for those that serve the very
wealthy students (one is where Altcor -- read Amway -- is located and
the executives live), are part of the schools of choice system. All the
schools test their students in the lower elementary, upper elementary,
middle, and high schools. These scores are reported in the local
papers. This allows parents who are searching for the best public
schools for their kids to see which is most likely able to get the
highest percentage of their students to pass the state's minimum
standards and then enroll their kids in these schools. The funny thing
is most of the kids who are attending schools outside their districts
(except for high school students) are not doing it for program or the
quality of education available, but for the convienence for the parents
(close to day care, on the way to or from work, etc). I think that that
is a real commentary on what many parents actually value.

BTW, I was once the treasurer of the Republican Party for my
congressional district. But after John Engler's unendingng attacks on
public school teachers, his underfunding and cheapening of the pension
and benefits for retired teachers (who had actually paid for them out
of their paychecks over the years) because he stopped paying the
state's share so he could give big tax breaks for his wealth friends,
and the take over by the religious right of the Republican Party, I
will only vote for those Republicans who are personal friends and who I
trust. I now vote Libertarian or Democratic. I don't view the public
schools as a socialist institution. I believe that there are certain
services that can best be done only by the government -- police, fire
protection, food inspection, drug safety, stock market regulations,
banking regulations, and education -- that can be efficiently delivered
only by the government and funded by taxes. These services could be
delivered by a private entity, but that would cost us all a whole lot
more money.

Yours,
Ken the Troll

You can have competition within the public schools of a given area.
Here in Michigan we have state laws that allow local schools to opt for
what is called being "schools of choice" by allowing open enrollment
for students from outside the school district on a "space available"
basis. Every spring the schools that are participating publish how many
slots they have available in each grade by individual buildings.
Parents who want their child to go to a school, either within the
district or outside of their home district, then apply for those open
seats. The children are generally given out on a first come first serve
basis as long as there are fewer applicants than the number of slots
available. If the number of applicants out number the slots available
then all the applicants' names are put into a hat and then those who
will get the slots are selected by lot. If a student from outside the
district attended attended the previous grade the year before they are
automatically enrolled in the next grade, as long as there is room.

Most of the suburban schools, except for those that serve the very
wealthy students (one is where Altcor -- read Amway -- is located and
the executives live), are part of the schools of choice system. All the
schools test their students in the lower elementary, upper elementary,
middle, and high schools. These scores are reported in the local
papers. This allows parents who are searching for the best public
schools for their kids to see which is most likely able to get the
highest percentage of their students to pass the state's minimum
standards and then enroll their kids in these schools. The funny thing
is most of the kids who are attending schools outside their districts
(except for high school students) are not doing it for program or the
quality of education available, but for the convienence for the parents
(close to day care, on the way to or from work, etc). I think that that
is a real commentary on what many parents actually value.

BTW, I was once the treasurer of the Republican Party for my
congressional district. But after John Engler's unendingng attacks on
public school teachers, his underfunding and cheapening of the pension
and benefits for retired teachers (who had actually paid for them out
of their paychecks over the years) because he stopped paying the
state's share so he could give big tax breaks for his wealth friends,
and the take over by the religious right of the Republican Party, I
will only vote for those Republicans who are personal friends and who I
trust. I now vote Libertarian or Democratic. I don't view the public
schools as a socialist institution. I believe that there are certain
services that can best be done only by the government -- police, fire
protection, food inspection, drug safety, stock market regulations,
banking regulations, and education -- that can be efficiently delivered
only by the government and funded by taxes. These services could be
delivered by a private entity, but that would cost us all a whole lot
more money.

Yours,
Ken the Troll

I do not understand why you are top posting, especially knowing the way I
feel about it. Are you not following up on something I have said in a
previous post. Then why not include what I have said previously so that
others can get in on it. Note how I include all of your post.

"Ken the Troll" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You can have competition within the public schools of a given area.
Here in Michigan we have state laws that allow local schools to opt for
what is called being "schools of choice" by allowing open enrollment
for students from outside the school district on a "space available"
basis. Every spring the schools that are participating publish how many
slots they have available in each grade by individual buildings.
Parents who want their child to go to a school, either within the
district or outside of their home district, then apply for those open
seats. The children are generally given out on a first come first serve
basis as long as there are fewer applicants than the number of slots
available. If the number of applicants out number the slots available
then all the applicants' names are put into a hat and then those who
will get the slots are selected by lot. If a student from outside the
district attended attended the previous grade the year before they are
automatically enrolled in the next grade, as long as there is room.

Most of the suburban schools, except for those that serve the very
wealthy students (one is where Altcor -- read Amway -- is located and
the executives live), are part of the schools of choice system. All the
schools test their students in the lower elementary, upper elementary,
middle, and high schools. These scores are reported in the local
papers. This allows parents who are searching for the best public
schools for their kids to see which is most likely able to get the
highest percentage of their students to pass the state's minimum
standards and then enroll their kids in these schools. The funny thing
is most of the kids who are attending schools outside their districts
(except for high school students) are not doing it for program or the
quality of education available, but for the convienence for the parents
(close to day care, on the way to or from work, etc). I think that that
is a real commentary on what many parents actually value.

The only competition in education K-12 here in the boondocks are the
parochial schools, mainly Christian and Catholic. That is not good enough
for me. I want real competition, not alternate education based on religion.
Also, I do not believe public schools can very well compete among
themselves. But the more testing, the better.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I was once the treasurer of the Republican Party for my
congressional district. But after John Engler's unendingng attacks on
public school teachers, his underfunding and cheapening of the pension
and benefits for retired teachers (who had actually paid for them out
of their paychecks over the years) because he stopped paying the
state's share so he could give big tax breaks for his wealth friends,
and the take over by the religious right of the Republican Party, I
will only vote for those Republicans who are personal friends and who I
trust. I now vote Libertarian or Democratic. I don't view the public
schools as a socialist institution. I believe that there are certain
services that can best be done only by the government -- police, fire
protection, food inspection, drug safety, stock market regulations,
banking regulations, and education -- that can be efficiently delivered
only by the government and funded by taxes. These services could be
delivered by a private entity, but that would cost us all a whole lot
more money.

Thorough going socialism has to do with the means of production, not
distribution of essential services. I for one think health services ought to
be government run as it would be more efficient and give better value for
the buck. I regard health services as essential and it should be the right
of everyone to have it regardless of ability to pay. Kind of like education
K-12 that way. But even so, many would regard these government services such
as you list above as a form of socialism in as much as there is not a one to
one relationship between what someone is giving and what someone is
receiving.

Education (like health care) is especially tricky. We Americans do regard it
as essential for children K-12 and so we fund it as a society. We do not
regard higher education as essential and so you will only get what you can
pay for.

I do not see how you can be a libertarian and still see education as a
government run enterprise. I know libertarians who would not fund any of
those things via taxes that you list above. By the way, Republicans and
conservatives also subscribe to every one of those concerns of yours.

Public school teachers (and academics in general) are notorious for voting
liberal and Democratic. Just another reason why I want private schools. The
public schools can be for the poor and others who like things the way they
presently are.

I believe Reagan also had to take down public education in California when
he was governor. It was out of control and was costing the taxpayer too
dearly. Education, just like health care, is only worth so much. The sky is
not the limit. All the poor ever need is a garden variety education and a
garden variety health care. More than that, then strive for it on your own.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota