Originally posted by Robtard
It's evident that you scrape the botton of barrel to find things to b-tch and moan about. Just like the Woman's march which you griped about, the Science march was peaceful yet here you are complaining because people like science and marched over it. Did this march affect anyone negatively? No. So why does it bother you.See above, both the Woman's march and Science march were peaceful, yet you had/have a problem with both.
See above what? Violence at these things wasn't my only issue.
Query: pro life women were welcome at the womens march, correct? No convicted terrorists helped organize it either? George Soros also had no connection to it?
It shows you selectively ignore things.
Originally posted by Silent Master
YouTube video
Did anyone provide you the evidence you asked for? Lol.
Originally posted by Silent Masterhttps://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/current_tables.asp
Of course not.
That's the link for the National Center for Education Statistics
In it you'll find a long list of data tables collected over a long period of time. Among these data are 2 tables which prove a point -
The 1st table shows correlations between contemporary state spending per child in average daily attendance and educational attainment. The 2nd table shows correlations between state spending per child in average daily attendance20 years earlier and educational attainment.
If you compare each table, you'll notice that the correlation between government spending from 20 years earlier and current educational attainment is much stronger than the correlation between contemporary government spending and educational attainment.
This means that when government spends money on education, it takes around 20 years for the effects to be seen in our data.
So the education metrics under Obama are largely a byproduct of the Bush/Clinton policies. And soon, the education metrics under Trump will be a byproduct of Obama/Bush policies.
Originally posted by Silent MasterObama's policies have been in place for the last 8 or so years, which means a whole generation of children grew up reaping the benefits/drawbacks of his policies and the system culture has been changed.
If it takes 20 years, how will the stats under Trump be the result of Obama's polices?
Think of these 8 years as the seed having been planted and now we have to wait and see what kind of plant flourishes from the ground. Will it be a beautiful college educated, employed, crime-reduced, poverty-reduced plant? Or will it be an ugly unemployed, high poverty, incarcerated plant? Either way, that plant will largely grow during Trump's term.
Of course Trump will discontinue Obama's seeds and plant his own regardless of how things turn out. Then with whoever comes after Trump, we will see the ramifications of Trump's policies play out. Will the next President have to clean up a mess? Considering how shitty Betsy DeVos is I'm guessing yes.
Originally posted by Firefly218
Obama's policies have been in place for the last 8 or so years, which means a whole generation of children grew up reaping the benefits/drawbacks of his policies and the system culture has been changed.Think of these 8 years as the seed having been planted and now we have to wait and see what kind of plant flourishes from the ground. Will it be a beautiful college educated, employed, crime-reduced, poverty-reduced plant? Or will it be an ugly unemployed, high poverty, incarcerated plant? Either way, that plant will largely grow during Trump's term.
Of course Trump will discontinue Obama's seeds and plant his own regardless of how things turn out. Then with whoever comes after Trump, we will see the ramifications of Trump's policies play out. Will the next President have to clean up a mess? Considering how shitty Betsy DeVos is I'm guessing yes.
Originally posted by Silent MasterThe 20 years window refers to the cumulative effect of government spending 20 years ago on current levels of educational attainment. The only thing that was supposed to prove is that education policies don't usually have an immediate effect, they take time. That doesn't mean you can't also isolate the 8 years under Obama and chart the effect of his policies into the Trump years.
You said 20 years, now you change it to 8. It's things like this that make me request peer-reviewed studies.
Originally posted by Silent MasterThe stronger positive correlation between government education policies 20 years ago and current educational attainment speak for themselves. I don't need to show you some scholar's interpretation of the data.
Show me the peer-reviewed studies that back up your claim.
Nice try to dodge the facts though
Originally posted by Silent Master***** it's not my opinion. It's data from a .gov study. In 2008 the correlation is .25 between contemporary spending and educational attainment. Conversely the correlation is .40 between spending from 20 years ago and educational attainments. Which correlation is stronger? I'll leave it to you now
Your opinion is not a peer reviewed study.
Originally posted by Firefly218
***** it's not my opinion. It's data from a .gov study. In 2008 the correlation is .25 between contemporary spending and educational attainment. Conversely the correlation is .40 between spending from 20 years ago and educational attainments. Which correlation is stronger? I'll leave it to you now
There's a saying: "You can lead a cuck to water but you can't make him drink."