You can't use telephone wire to wire up you outlets anymore in Iowa.

[arrabil]

I spend extra time with my son to compensate for what I think should be taught but isn't. His one sports team is half home-schoolers and mostly they do that not for religious reasons. There are all kinds of charter schools around here where they teach in a different manner and don't cost anything extra to attend. You could move to a different school district with better schools. You could send your kids to private, religious, or montessori schools.

Or we could pay teachers more to attract more highly accredited people. But then you'd have to pay higher taxes and that would be a problem too, yes? And it gets back to the whole certification thing.... are more highly accredited people worth more in the first place?

Have you talked to the teacher personally? I've had really good results talking to the teacher to get a customized solution to my kid's needs. I thought she was a horrible teacher until I realized she just doesn't have the time in a day to address every single problem presented to her. But when I showed interest in my kid, we became a higher priority to her.

Sounds like all kinds of solutions to the problem to me. So you could take it upon yourself to add to their education instead of complaining that others aren't doing enough for you. That is the American Way you want to see more of, right?

 

[sweettractors]

I spend extra time with my son to compensate for what I think should be taught but isn't. His one sports team is half home-schoolers and mostly they do that not for religious reasons. There are all kinds of charter schools around here where they teach in a different manner and don't cost anything extra to attend. You could move to a different school district with better schools. You could send your kids to private, religious, or montessori schools.

Or we could pay teachers more to attract more highly accredited people. But then you'd have to pay higher taxes and that would be a problem too, yes? And it gets back to the whole certification thing.... are more highly accredited people worth more in the first place?

Have you talked to the teacher personally? I've had really good results talking to the teacher to get a customized solution to my kid's needs. I thought she was a horrible teacher until I realized she just doesn't have the time in a day to address every single problem presented to her. But when I showed interest in my kid, we became a higher priority to her.

Sounds like all kinds of solutions to the problem to me. So you could take it upon yourself to add to their education instead of complaining that others aren't doing enough for you. That is the American Way you want to see more of, right?

I am just a Grandparent, however, we do educationally interact with the Children very well. The oldest has a weighted GPA of 4.7 and the Kinder gardener got moved up to the first grade the second week of school this year and the 3rd grader got asked to participate on the Academic team for the 5 grade level. My point is that most parents don't have the time or knowledge to do what we do with the kids to supplement a teachers shortfall. If a teacher is getting a lot of complaints from the parents here, They just get moved to another school and start messing up other kids. You can't fire them once they get tenure. The really bad deal is that the good to excellent teachers get paid the same as the lousy ones. This is not right! Ken Sweet

 

[arrabil]

My point is that most parents don't have the time or knowledge to do what we do with the kids to supplement a teachers shortfall.

Thats their problem, isn't it? If we do everything for everybody because they can't, you'll call that socialism, won't you? Don't we all believe that we can only provide opportunity, and that if parents and/or kids can't take advantage of it, thats nobody's fault but their own?

If a teacher is getting a lot of complaints from the parents here, They just get moved to another school and start messing up other kids.

No teacher could "mess up" my kid in this manner. [And it doesn't sound like yours either.] As an involved parent the teacher can teach what ever they want and I can teach what I believe. In fact I very much like that push-pull scenario. Nothing better than my kid learning at a young age that we don't all agree and that there are multiple sides to all kinds of issues and that he should learn how to debate it for himself.

The really bad deal is that the good to excellent teachers get paid the same as the lousy ones. This is not right!

This is true in all kinds of industries. How about doctors? They get paid regardless of whether they even diagnosed something right. The only solution is to create more government oversight with rules on grading teachers and basing compensation off of it. That would require either 50 such departments or making it a federal department. And it would take lots of taxes. And more people on the government payroll. Going out on a limb.... I'm guessing more government control and taxes is not something you want to see? In fact No Child Left Behind has all kinds of provisions for this. And I've never heard anything but complaints about it because it allows teachers less flexibility in stimulating their children, not more.

As for tenure.... my neighbor and I were just discussing that. If the teachers didn't have a union, we the people would take advantage of them as much as we can. Since they have a union, they can take advantage of us as much as they can. Its a vicious cycle but its a capitalistic one. The union and the people negotiate a contract that serves everyone's needs as best as it can. The alternative way to do this is to stipulate what teachers get and what is expected of them. Since that is determined by a power greater than the teachers, they have no way to fight what is fair or not. That is how its done under fascist or communist regimes. So in reality, the union's needs vs the people's needs via negotiation is as fair a system as we've ever come up with.

 

[sweettractors]

Thats their problem, isn't it? If we do everything for everybody because they can't, you'll call that socialism, won't you? Don't we all believe that we can only provide opportunity, and that if parents and/or kids can't take advantage of it, thats nobody's fault but their own?


No teacher could "mess up" my kid in this manner. [And it doesn't sound like yours either.] As an involved parent the teacher can teach what ever they want and I can teach what I believe. In fact I very much like that push-pull scenario. Nothing better than my kid learning at a young age that we don't all agree and that there are multiple sides to all kinds of issues and that he should learn how to debate it for himself.


This is true in all kinds of industries. How about doctors? They get paid regardless of whether they even diagnosed something right. The only solution is to create more government oversight with rules on grading teachers and basing compensation off of it. That would require either 50 such departments or making it a federal department. And it would take lots of taxes. And more people on the government payroll. Going out on a limb.... I'm guessing more government control and taxes is not something you want to see? In fact No Child Left Behind has all kinds of provisions for this. And I've never heard anything but complaints about it because it allows teachers less flexibility in stimulating their children, not more.

As for tenure.... my neighbor and I were just discussing that. If the teachers didn't have a union, we the people would take advantage of them as much as we can. Since they have a union, they can take advantage of us as much as they can. Its a vicious cycle but its a capitalistic one. The union and the people negotiate a contract that serves everyone's needs as best as it can. The alternative way to do this is to stipulate what teachers get and what is expected of them. Since that is determined by a power greater than the teachers, they have no way to fight what is fair or not. That is how its done under fascist or communist regimes. So in reality, the union's needs vs the people's needs via negotiation is as fair a system as we've ever come up with.

Lets just settle this at the ballot box this November :thumbsup: Ken Sweet

 

[eepete]

I think DIY is fine with a thorough inspection. That's the case in many areas.

What a lot of people don't know is that fire sprinklers will soon be mandatory on new construction in many states. Couple that with the rule that they must be installed by a licensed fire sprinkler installer, NOT just a plumber. They push the idea that you will save on your insurance, but the insurance companies aren't discounting because of the possibility of water damage from a relatively minor fire. Pretty soon, you won't have to make any decisions; your 'nanny' will make them for you.

I really like the idea of fire sprinklers in houses. My house has them. I really hate the idea that it has to be installed by a licensed fire sprinkler installer. A plumber can do it just fine, and the type of sprinklers put in a house use the existing domestic cold water lines. I've volunteered and put in sprinklers at a lot of habitat houses. The cold water lines are run in the ceiling, the heads come off of those pipes, and there are drops down to the sinks and toilets. The installation is not rocket science, it's plumbing.

So the problem here is that in the passing of a law, a trade group has got themselves written in as a monopoly. If firefighters can volunteer to put in sprinklers on habitat houses, and if the plumbing can be done by a plumber, why write this into the law? The plumbing already has to be inspected, so there is no new inspector needed, no new forms or paperwork.

My 2nd beef with requiring sprinklers in houses points back to the fire community. They have taken an "all or none" approach. From what I've seen (and somewhere there is lots of data on this) a lot of fires start in the kitchen and laundry. If there is a furnace (something that burns fuel) that that's the 3rd location. Given that a sprinkler head cost about $10, I see value in putting a head in the kitchen, in the laundry, and by the furnace. That would get about half of where fires start. I'm at odds with a lot of my fellow firefighters here, but the way I see it an "all or none" posture is worse than an extra $100-150 installed cost that would have good results. It would let the plumbers learn how to install them, and with time they would become more pervasive. It lets the private sector have competition and do it's thing.
I have sprinklers in my insulated garage. I do not have sprinklers in my electronics work area where the price of failure or accident would exceed $100K. Requiring the entire house to be sprinklered removed thought, discretion and choice from the consumer. Combining that with giving a monopoly to a trade that has shown reluctance to price the jobs at a rate that is commensurate with other residential trades compounds the concerns I have with this path.

One more "Stick my neck out" comment. As people get dumber about everyday things, then the need to have those things inspected by those in the know increases. People buying or renovating a house today typically don't have the skills to know if the wiring, plumbing, framing, HVAC and the like are correctly and safely done. The problem is the best way to do this. A totally private sector approach says that when you buy or do something you hire a private inspector. This is getting more common place when people by a house. The government approach involves a mix of licensing and inspections. So all these things come back to the same of arguments that grow here like weeds in a field.
How ignorant are people, and to what degree should the Government try to protect them and to what degree would private sector protect them. And how do you make sure those protection mechanisms actually work. I'm sorry, but I don't have an answer to that.

Pete

 

[arrabil]

Lets just settle this at the ballot box this November

What a copout.

How ignorant are people, and to what degree should the Government try to protect them and to what degree would private sector protect them. And how do you make sure those protection mechanisms actually work. I'm sorry, but I don't have an answer to that.

Well said, Pete. Good post.

 

[sweettractors]

I just had my "First" ever brilliant thought. Lets fully fund OSHA, EPA and all the other Government entities that just shuffle papers and waste money. The second step would be to move all those entities to China. Man, They would have plenty of work to do there and in the deal, with government off our backs, all able bodied US citizens can begin to get our jobs back and become fully employed. China gets their massive safety and pollution problems solved for free. We can again be so competitive in the marketplace that we can wipe out the national debt in no time flat Ken Sweet

 

[Travelover]

Time to move this thread to the Front Porch :confused2:

 

[soulasphil]

Lots of states here in the USA, we can do all that you do without a permit. The catch is: It has to be on a Farmhouse where you live and a specified minimum acres on the farm. Ken Sweet

Same here, very lax rules for farmers. Unfortunately, I'm not one of them.

The problem of successive owners is slightly different here as in the normal course of events, we keep a house for one or several generations. In the US you can buy or sell a house quickly, here it takes at least several months. You can go to a dealer and drive away with a car, here the minimum if the car is on the lot is a couple of weeks. You can be confident you'll find more or less the same services in your new home, here it's a big jump into the unknown.

If you nevertheless happen to sell your house, you're just a member of the public and not a professional, so you cannot be held responsible for what might not be in conformity with codes.

 

[soulasphil]

I just had my "First" ever brilliant thought. Lets fully fund OSHA, EPA and all the other Government entities that just shuffle papers and waste money. The second step would be to move all those entities to China. Man, They would have plenty of work to do there and in the deal, with government off our backs, all able bodied US citizens can begin to get our jobs back and become fully employed. China gets their massive safety and pollution problems solved for free. We can again be so competitive in the marketplace that we can wipe out the national debt in no time flat Ken Sweet

Don't be too shure. The Chinese invented bureaucracy and know much more about it than we ever will. China has probably already surpassed the US as world's 1st economic power and it's only the beginning.
I have just been in Shanghai for two weeks. They have higher skyscrapers than you or us. They have wonderful high speed trains riding at 400 km/hour without a vibration (perhaps imported from Japan) and they are dirt cheap. Their trains leave and arrive at the exact time, which is not the case of yours or ours. Their underground train system is state of the art. Of course there still are a few unsafe bamboo scaffoldings and ill paid workers (the cost of living is very low), but I guess that will soon disappear. Everywhere you see bustling activity, buildings under construction, roads being opened ...