Do you support President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program?
Just because it clearly failed you, doesn't mean everyone else was as unfortunate...
Not to mention the obvious disparities with women and non-whites at the time as well, right? Clearly not "everyone" was reading it...
Secondly, on your question of "Has anything improved?": yes, absolutely. Education has become a nationally-accessible service (at least k-12 education), where ALL children have guaranteed access to an education. Girls have guaranteed education, non-white children have guaranteed education, poor children have guaranteed education, etc...which was not guaranteed even a century ago.
Lastly, this claim: "We've got nothing to lose and everything to gain by privatizing education." is completely the opposite. We have everything to lose and nothing to gain by privatizing education. Privatizing education means turning education into a for-profit service for those that can afford the private services. K-12 education would become nearly inaccessible to poor people, even worse than how inaccessible higher education is today. A superior quality of public services is it's universal accessibility to everyone, which private services fundamentally fall behind at (especially in your world, where you admitted to believing that private establishments should have the right to discriminate if they choose so, thus our society's education system would further degenerate into it's pre-Civil Rights era of segregation and sexism). Another reason public education/services are superior is that they are structurally more accountable to the communities they provide for, whereas private services are definitionally private and accountable only to themselves. Private education establishments are able to choose their own curriculum, and can include or exclude anything they wish, without any real obligation for the students, parents, or community. Private schools can teach things that are blatantly false, like creationism, and exclude real science, like evolutionary biology, without any accountability. Society would become dumber and more discriminatory, as well as further wealth inequality...there is no benefit to such a society.
@TruthHurts10110mos10MO
I'm getting satisfaction over how much I'm bothering you that you'd spend 15 minutes typing this up. I'm really pissing you off and that makes me happy.
@VulcanMan6 10mos10MO
lol you're not pissing anyone off, I'm literally trying to help you craft a better argument for yourself because you are struggling. Anyone here, even the right-wing party's AI bots, have been repeatedly proving you wrong and fact-checking your claims. All you've done is embarrassed yourself, which is why I keep trying to help you not constantly attack strawman arguments.
You should know that I'm literally at work right now lol. I work with self-driving vehicles and I'm at a computer all day anyway, so I'm not going out of my way at all to respond to you...
@TruthHurts10110mos10MO
Wonder what your boss thinks about your anti-rich hysteria...
@VulcanMan6 10mos10MO
As I already explained to you, "being rich" is not the issue. The issue is HOW someone makes money, because stealing the profits that other people worked to produce is wrong, whether you are rich or not.
Again, address what I actually say instead of your own postulated strawmen...
@TruthHurts10110mos10MO
Girls were taught to read. The literacy rate was well above 90 percent. And the quality of what they read was better to. And creationism is not blatantly false, present one shred of evidence that it is.
In short I don't care about anything you said, because I am politically incorrect. I say Merry Christmas and God Bless America. I stand for the flag, kneel for the cross, thank our veterans and eat bacon. If this offends you, I don't care.
@VulcanMan6 10mos10MO
lol the literacy rate was not even close to 90%. The figure you're citing is from a book in 1974 that postulated that, by the end of the 18th century, around 90% of white New England men were literate. Which is exactly my point, that education and literacy was incredibly discriminatory and of significant disparity.
Secondly, creationism (at least as transcribed in the bible) is proven false by every piece of science discovered that explains the beginnings of life and the universe without the existence of a god. As even a simple example: the nearest galaxy to earth is the Andromeda galaxy,… Read more
@TruthHurts10110mos10MO
The 2.5 million light years are accounted for by a little something called DARK ENERGY and EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE, which perfectly fits the Biblical time frame. You use dark energy to argue for evolution 1 minute than ignore it the next
@VulcanMan6 10mos10MO
lol dark energy is not expanding the universe at the rate you would need to fit a biblical timeline of creation. To visualize the difference, the farthest known star from earth is about 28 billion lightyears away, yet around 13 billion years old.
Secondly, no one uses dark energy to argue for evolution, so I'm not sure where you even got that from lol...
@TruthHurts10110mos10MO
Give me evidence to support your position. I just went to a conference where Dr. Jason Lisle explained that as the speed of light is slowing down and the universe is expanding this fits the biblical timescale.
