Suicide and Trumpism

firstly I think our kids are just fine, for the most part.

our low test scores are heavily weighed down by inner city failures in Democrat ruled districts. PERIOD

you look at our private school system and these kids are among the best and brightest.
And for no other reason besides they are separated from the no -discipline, politically correct gone amuck,
anything goes institutions simply passing kids through to get rid of them.
 
CFM said:
We used to actually teach. Now, much of what you call that is nothing more than a feel good curriculum where no one claims their feelings got hurt because they were told they didn't meet standards.

When people graduate today and get a diploma yet many can't do basic math, write a grammatically correct or coherent sentence, or understand even the most simple concepts of economics, spending more is throwing money at a problem where the lack of money isn't the cause of the problem.

There's a local tech school where students have to take remedial math. Sorry, but if you can't solve x + 2 = 5 for x, you have no business at any college and the taxpayers have no reason to pay for you to go to school.
Click to expand...

when you don't pay enough to live on you don't get the best employees huh dumb fuck


want the best teachers ?

PAY FOR THEM
 
Oneuli said:
I'm not understanding what point it is you imagine you've made here. Do you think that I said the data was collected after 2016? The correlation exists regardless of the two different time frames.
Click to expand...
There cannot be a correlation between Trump approval and suicide when there was no Trump around to make that correlation. It's metaphysically impossible.
Oneuli said:
Here, to smell your brain fart,
Click to expand...
You're normally far more civil than this, O. To paraphrase yourself
I can always tell when your defeat is so total that even YOU are able to recognize it, by your collapse into insults.
Click to expand...
Oneuli said:
picture if a study found a correlation between people who were born in the 1950s and a tendency to relocate for retirement. Now, if a person were deeply stupid, he might point out that the data about when the people were born predates the data about where they retired, making the correlation a "complete fail." But, as you can imagine, anyone with a brain would just have a good laugh at such an argument.
Click to expand...
One of the first things you learn in any statistics class is that correlation doesn't imply causation. But I must say, you have an active imagination.

You might enjoy considering these positive correlations all verifiable :

1. Ice cream consumption leads to murder.
2. A pirate shortage caused global warming.
3. Living in a poor country increases penis size.
4. Eating organic food causes autism.
5. Mexican lemon imports prevent highway deaths.
6. Facebook caused the Greek debt crisis.
7. Facebook also cancelled out the cholesterol-lowering effects of Justin Bieber.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kjh2110/the-10-most-bizarre-correlations
 
Last edited:
Does anyone else start feeling like you are talking to an insane asylum escapee when evince is in the thread

but on topic, there is no basis to the OP

but nice try
 
cawacko said:
There’s wealth here unlike anywhere else. There are some of the best and brightest from all over the world. Those are good things but it’s not like everywhere else. Not everyone in the country is a college educated high earner and that doesn’t make them bad people but you wouldn’t always know that living here. I’ve spent 35 years in the Bay Area and I wouldn’t live anywhere else. But having spent plenty of time away from here as well it is definitely a bubble.
Click to expand...

Since you brought up education and earnings, let's look at those things, in light of the "bubble" claim. Yes, San Francisco has high education levels relative to the nation as a whole. But is it a bubble where nearly everyone is highly educated? Absolutely not. According to the Census, 7.6% of the residents of San Francisco County over age 25 don't even have a 9th grade education. 12.3% haven't graduated high school. 14.5% have some college, but no degree. A third have a bachelor's degree, and 22.4% have a graduate or professional degree. So, moving through life in that area, you aren't in a bubble consisting entirely, or even mostly, of the highly educated. Most of the people you meet won't even have an undergrad degree.

In fact, you could argue that, in terms of education, San Francisco is much LESS of a bubble than most communities, since in most communities, a much higher percentage of people would fit within just a single broad educational category (a high school diploma but no college degree). In plenty of small towns, finding an adult without a high school diploma or with a college degree isn't easy -- they're educationally fairly homogeneous bubble societies where nearly everyone graduates high school and then stops before getting an undergrad degree. Isn't that a "bubble."

The same is true when it comes to income. In San Francisco, you'll find large groups throughout the income distribution. That includes 10% below the poverty line, plenty of lower-class working people just over the poverty line, as well as the middle-class, lower-upper class professionals, and the super rich as well. If you want to find a "bubble," you'd do better looking to small town America, where it's not uncommon to find relatively little economic diversity (few if any very poor or very rich people). Consider somewhere like Lincoln County, SD, with a 3.5% poverty rate, but also a modest median household income of $48,000. You could live somewhere like that without regularly encountering either rich or poor people, high school dropouts or people with doctorates. It's also 97.55% white. It's a bubble of sameness, compared to big cities.
 
evince said:
when you don't pay enough to live on you don't get the best employees huh dumb fuck


want the best teachers ?

PAY FOR THEM
Click to expand...

How many of those teachers didn't know what they were going to make BEFORE they started? The answer is NONE. Everyone of them knew the pay scale before they started. Fussing about it after the fact is called whining. Since they knew their pay and now you agree they aren't doing their jobs because they don't like it, those that refuse to do so should be fired.
 
CFM said:
How many of those teachers didn't know what they were going to make BEFORE they started? The answer is NONE. Everyone of them knew the pay scale before they started. Fussing about it after the fact is called whining. Since they knew their pay and now you agree they aren't doing their jobs because they don't like it, those that refuse to do so should be fired.
Click to expand...

no shit weasel brain


If you want the BEST pay more for a teaching position
 
Oneuli said:
Since you brought up education and earnings, let's look at those things, in light of the "bubble" claim. Yes, San Francisco has high education levels relative to the nation as a whole. But is it a bubble where nearly everyone is highly educated? Absolutely not. According to the Census, 7.6% of the residents of San Francisco County over age 25 don't even have a 9th grade education. 12.3% haven't graduated high school. 14.5% have some college, but no degree. A third have a bachelor's degree, and 22.4% have a graduate or professional degree. So, moving through life in that area, you aren't in a bubble consisting entirely, or even mostly, of the highly educated. Most of the people you meet won't even have an undergrad degree.

In fact, you could argue that, in terms of education, San Francisco is much LESS of a bubble than most communities, since in most communities, a much higher percentage of people would fit within just a single broad educational category (a high school diploma but no college degree). In plenty of small towns, finding an adult without a high school diploma or with a college degree isn't easy -- they're educationally fairly homogeneous bubble societies where nearly everyone graduates high school and then stops before getting an undergrad degree. Isn't that a "bubble."

The same is true when it comes to income. In San Francisco, you'll find large groups throughout the income distribution. That includes 10% below the poverty line, plenty of lower-class working people just over the poverty line, as well as the middle-class, lower-upper class professionals, and the super rich as well. If you want to find a "bubble," you'd do better looking to small town America, where it's not uncommon to find relatively little economic diversity (few if any very poor or very rich people). Consider somewhere like Lincoln County, SD, with a 3.5% poverty rate, but also a modest median household income of $48,000. You could live somewhere like that without regularly encountering either rich or poor people, high school dropouts or people with doctorates. It's also 97.55% white. It's a bubble of sameness, compared to big cities.
Click to expand...

San Francisco is mostly rich and poor with a small middle. We also have a fair size population of those here illegally. So for those in the more upper crust you aren’t hanging out with the poor folks. We may live near each other but they are separate worlds.

Like I said, I’ve lived here 35 years. We live in a bubble. If you think otherwise come visit and express a non liberal political perspective on any topic and watch the response you get. We don’t have diversity of thought. That is the definition of a bubble.
 
evince said:
no shit weasel brain


If you want the BEST pay more for a teaching position
Click to expand...

Are you saying those that don't like their pay now would be better teachers if they were paid more? That's not what makes someone a better teacher. If their complaint, knowing what their pay was going to be before they started, make such a claim, they aren't worth hiring. They're not in it to do the job but to draw a check.
 
Oneuli said:
Take a look at these two blocks of statistics:

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/population-health/us-states-ranked-by-suicide-rate.html
https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump/

What's remarkable is how strongly correlated suicide rates are with Trump approval rates, at the state level. Specifically, there's a 58.4% positive correlation. Basically, the more suicidally depressed people are in a state, the more likely people in the state are to approve of Trump.

This is particularly interesting because it flies in the face of the normal trend for higher-latitude populations to have higher suicide rates (likely owing to circadian rhythm problems in places where there are huge imbalances between night and day in the Summer and Winter months, resulting in sleep irregularities and depression). Other things being equal, you'd expect lower suicide rates in the Deep South than in New England, just as you find lower suicide rates in southern European countries (Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal) than northern ones (Norway, Finland, Sweden, Iceland).

So, what's the reason for this correlation? Is there something about conservative politics that makes people suicidal (e.g., skimping on public assistance for mental health care)? Or something about being suicidal that makes people conservative (e.g., the attraction of hateful rhetoric to those who are emotionally frayed)? Or something separate that drives both things (e.g., a sense of being left behind, economically)? Why is it that there's such an enormous gap in suicide rates between places like NJ, NY, and MA (around 8/100k), and places like Montana, Alaska, and Wyoming (around 25/100k)?
Click to expand...

Sad the effect he has on them. It's downright Rev Jim Jonsey.
 
LV426 said:
Not really, but OK...believe that fairy tale if you want.




I hear the chorus of "vocational training as the silver bullet" all the time, but the fact is that you are limiting your earning potential by doing that.
Click to expand...

The problem with vocational training is that it tends to train specialists rather than generalists. That's fine if your specialty is something that remains economically viable. But it can be bad news if your specialty goes away. If you'd trained up to be the finest telephone switchboard operator of television repair person in the world, that's not going to do you a bit of good when those jobs effectively vanish. The advantage of more generalized education is that you're learning to learn -- learning to read for comprehension and to communicate clearly, learning to reason abstractly, etc. That makes it easier to pivot from career to career as the economic landscape changes.
 
being nice to sociopathic liars like these doesn't work


publicly shaming them for their evil dishonesty is a public service
 
Oneuli said:
Take a look at these two blocks of statistics:

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/population-health/us-states-ranked-by-suicide-rate.html
https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump/

What's remarkable is how strongly correlated suicide rates are with Trump approval rates, at the state level. Specifically, there's a 58.4% positive correlation. Basically, the more suicidally depressed people are in a state, the more likely people in the state are to approve of Trump.

This is particularly interesting because it flies in the face of the normal trend for higher-latitude populations to have higher suicide rates (likely owing to circadian rhythm problems in places where there are huge imbalances between night and day in the Summer and Winter months, resulting in sleep irregularities and depression). Other things being equal, you'd expect lower suicide rates in the Deep South than in New England, just as you find lower suicide rates in southern European countries (Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal) than northern ones (Norway, Finland, Sweden, Iceland).

So, what's the reason for this correlation? Is there something about conservative politics that makes people suicidal (e.g., skimping on public assistance for mental health care)? Or something about being suicidal that makes people conservative (e.g., the attraction of hateful rhetoric to those who are emotionally frayed)? Or something separate that drives both things (e.g., a sense of being left behind, economically)? Why is it that there's such an enormous gap in suicide rates between places like NJ, NY, and MA (around 8/100k), and places like Montana, Alaska, and Wyoming (around 25/100k)?
Click to expand...

see how much I care about preventing them from killing them selves

I try to shatter that death grip Fox has on their brains before they off themselves

Fox brain snooze can be a deadly disease
 
Oneuli said:
The problem with vocational training is that it tends to train specialists rather than generalists. That's fine if your specialty is something that remains economically viable. But it can be bad news if your specialty goes away. If you'd trained up to be the finest telephone switchboard operator of television repair person in the world, that's not going to do you a bit of good when those jobs effectively vanish. The advantage of more generalized education is that you're learning to learn -- learning to read for comprehension and to communicate clearly, learning to reason abstractly, etc. That makes it easier to pivot from career to career as the economic landscape changes.
Click to expand...

The bad side is the expectation they will be learning to learn means they all think they will be doctors lawyers accountants bankers and others who don't "toil." I believe they should use IQ tests
and temperament tests and shove the middle into well paying jobs derived from vocational training. We need more technocrats top to bottom and ditch diggers middle to bottom.

Green jobs jobs jobs, all well paying caused by govt jobs programs, training and tax incentives throughout the economy. No student loans for BS degrees like history and art.
unless you can afford to be idle or are MASSIVELY talented at it. Those degree should be a minor to a major in a technocrat wage earning job, and upon getting
that degree in computer science and you don't want a masters or PhD in artificial intelligence, THEN you can get a masters in history.

Nobody should be paying back loans on jobless degrees, and that includes the government default program. Jobs!!!! Well paying jobs. Education that leads to well paying jobs,
not a glut or empty Trump U type shit.
 
Getin the ring said:
firstly I think our kids are just fine, for the most part.

our low test scores are heavily weighed down by inner city failures in Democrat ruled districts. PERIOD
Click to expand...

If you look at our test scores, you'll see that many liberal areas do quite well. For example, Massachusetts has the best NAEP scores of any state pretty much every year, and on the international PISA test, they put up numbers that would be among the international elite:

https://www.boston25news.com/news/massachusetts-students-score-among-worlds-best/473550882

Unfortunately, the national numbers get weighed down a lot by terrible systems in conservative-led states like West Virginia and Mississippi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top