The Shrine

So...sitting here listening to "Lil' Ghetto Boy" by Death Row Records, it occurs to me that there are thousands if not millions of kids growing up around the U.S. who have no real chance at education and have to resort to hustling (drugs, women, whatever) just to have a chance at survival. And we have an administration that's more or less corrupt - I mean, what with Halliburton and all, one may as call a spade a spade. Instead of trying to work with the Arabs, improve their society through mutual respect and non-invasive strategies, and work out fair deals for oil in the short term and work on sustainable and renewable energy resources in the long term, we're going in and blasting first and setting up new (possibly puppet?) governments later, at a tremendous cost in terms of both money and human resources. Were we not at war, we could focus those resources on education and infrastructure, and possibly eliminate the ghetto altogether...

I mean, seriously, what the hell are we doing anyway? With all due respect to the Republicans on this board, it really seems that your leaders are corrupt as all hell right now.

No offense to the spirit of your rant, but are you getting this from a rap song? (I'll post my thoughts later.)

What came from the rap song is the nature of the struggle for young men and women growing up in the poorer neighborhoods of the U.S. The rest is me.

Idealists amuse me.

Is this where I get to pry your sarcasm from your cold, dead fingers?

Seriously, don't take things I feel very passionately about and then go "Idealists amuse me." I encourage you to say what's on your mind.

Because you assume that were we not involved in the Middle East, all that money would be in these other areas.

It's quite a leap of logic.

Your cynicism is noted and pretty much ignored, Tort. I don't have access to the federal government's exact budget figures, but I believe it is definitely possible to reallocate defense funds to education and infrastructure. What makes you think this is an unlikely scenario?

I dont really believe in excessive government interference in relation to anything. I dont like the war, but i also wont cry myself to sleep for the drug addict hooker who cant afford to go to school. The people who are serious about education find a way to do it no matter where they are from. You can only force education onto people so much, money wont fix whatever problem you think there is in this instance.

Because this country always has a large military budget, regardless of what it's doing abroad.

Might more money be going to other areas? Sure. Any guarantees? No. Any idea if that extra money would help? Who knows? It's base level conjecture.

And no, I don't buy into the "If we weren't in Iraq our domestic situation would be better than ever!" train of thought, either.

But, hey, those jabs at Republicans always elevate the discussion, so have at it.

Bullshit, Tort. Someone (or rather, a collection of someones) makes the federal budget. The numbers for military spending are not locked in stone. It's not as easy as "If we weren't in Iraq, our domestic situation would be better", but I do believe that this war does remove resources that could be used on domestic areas!

And Flip: Yes, it's hard to cry for the drug addict hooker who can't afford to go to school. However, some drug addicts were not given the childhood resources to allow them to grow up as much of anything, and at that point, drugs begin to look like a better and better alternative to a dead-end life, as faulty as that logic may be.

Some were, and some people will just throw their lives away no matter what; it's hard to help them. But it's also hard for someone who's gotten to that point to turn their life around even if they want to - if you don't have a place to live, and don't have a mailing address, you can't get much of anything.

Quite frankly, as out of vogue as compassion seems to be when one gets to our age, I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to make that particular step of the process a little easier.

And I'm not trying to force anything on anyone, but I believe that a society which makes a higher quality of education more readily available for those who want it will reap the benefits from it in the long run.

You're not exactly disproving my point here. Could military money go towards domestic social programs? Yes. Assuming that would fix the problem is conjecture.

It's not like ghettoes suddenly sprang up because the country's military went off to do something.

Flip wrote:I dont really believe in excessive government interference in relation to anything. I dont like the war, but i also wont cry myself to sleep for the drug addict hooker who cant afford to go to school. The people who are serious about education find a way to do it no matter where they are from. You can only force education onto people so much, money wont fix whatever problem you think there is in this instance.

The NY Times is running a series on class. They've already had articles on how class effects health, marriage, and religion. Today's is on education. It's an interesting series of articles. I can find no-reg links later if you want:

http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2005/05/ ... nal/class/

Tortolia wrote:You're not exactly disproving my point here. Could military money go towards domestic social programs? Yes. Assuming that would fix the problem is conjecture.

It's not like ghettoes suddenly sprang up because the country's military went off to do something.

It's the kind of conjecture I'd like to entertain. And yes, I know there have been ghettoes for thousands upon thousands of years. There have been rich and poor since the dawn of human history. However, I think that saying "Ghettoes have been around forever and working to change that might not solve the problem" doesn't take into account that, you know what, it also might have a chance on solving it.

I don't exactly consider myself a bleeding-heart liberal when it comes to social programs. I went to school for two years in L.A. Unified School District and saw a ton of money go down the drain on ill-advised social liberal democratic experiments - busing comes to mind. However, I think the goal of making education affordable to THOSE WHO WANT IT is not a bad one, and to that end I would be in favor of programs for which quantifiable metrics can be made (read: we can measure the progress somehow and judge it against the cost.)

Anyway, I'm hella tired right now, but I'll check in around this tomorrow. And Kup, reg-free links would be awesome, I'd love to check that out.

I got these links from Google News, so I think they don't require registration, but I'm not sure.

Day 1, Overview: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/natio ... html>Class in America: Shadowy Lines That Still Divide</a> (Normal link, the Google News link is too old and goes to the archives)
Day 2, Health: <a href=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/health/art ... C8B63>Life at the Top in America Isn't Just Better, It's Longer</a>
Day 3, Marriage: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/19/natio ... lar_5>When Richer Weds Poorer, Money Isn't the Only Difference</a>
Day 3, Marriage: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/19/natio ... pular_4>Up From the Holler: Living in Two Worlds, at Home in Neither</a>
Day 4, Religion: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/natio ... pular_5>On a Christian Mission to the Top</a>
Day 4, Military: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/natio ... .html>Blue Collars in Olive Drab</a>
Day 5, Education: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/natio ... tml?hp>The College Dropout Boom</a>
Day 5, Education: <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/natio ... AL.html>No Degree, and No Way Back to the Middle</a> (Normal link, Google News didn't have a hit for this)

Flip wrote:I dont really believe in excessive government interference in relation to anything. I dont like the war, but i also wont cry myself to sleep for the drug addict hooker who cant afford to go to school. The people who are serious about education find a way to do it no matter where they are from. You can only force education onto people so much, money wont fix whatever problem you think there is in this instance.

Nice way of taking an extreme example and putting a demonizing face on it, one that you think would never apply to you. That's the fault of most of these arguments, the lack of a POV. The total and complete seperation between you and the people that may use these programs. What if that drug addict hooker wanted to go to school to turn her life around? She may be your future secretary, and you would probably never know of her dark part.

What makes you think that nothing bad could happen to you? You think, "Well, I'm certainly not going to resort to prostitution, and I hate drugs, so this would never apply to me." Then, what's your vice? Everybody has a vice, big or small. Unemployment is rather high, and you could be fired or laid-off at any time. Given enough bad luck, you could actually end up like that drug addict hooker. Not addicted to drugs or whoring yourself, but still in the same state of depression and poverty.

Who's going to help you up? Sometimes you don't have a rich uncle/parents to keep you from drowning. What about those government programs that you keep thinking are a waste of taxpayers' hard earned money? You disagreed with them because they didn't affect you in any way, nor did you think that you'd ever need them. Now that you're poor, you think that they may be a good idea, but it's too late. If you spoke up and supported these things as a person that isn't directly affected by the programs, you would sound like somebody who not speaking for his own selfish reasons, and somebody that might actually have a good idea. Now speaking up would make it sound like you're just trying to get your free welfare check and living off-the-hook on the taxpayers' coin, arguments that you implied when you were living better, arguments that people (who were once like you) repeat in your face.

This is the ultimate problem with a lack of POV. Do not stare inwardly at yourself all of your life. Just because something falls outside of your Monkeysphere doesn't mean that it doesn't affect you or won't affect you in the future. Maybe the above couldn't happen to you, but maybe it could happen to your kids. Even if it doesn't happen to anybody close to you, why is it unimportant? Isn't that just a selfish train of thought?

It's really astonishing how so very close we are to selfish apes throwing poo at each other. It's depressing, really.

SineSwiper wrote:It's really astonishing how so very close we are to selfish apes throwing poo at each other. It's depressing, really.

But you're above it all.

You made good points, but your final statement is self-serving and likely to put Flip on the defensive, not encourage him to think about his perspective.

(applause for Sine)

It is times like these that i wish i did grow up poor just so i could talk with proof. You're right, lack of percpetive makes people not care, but whos to say we should?

I've read that monkeysphere article before and he is absolutely right that it exists, but does that mean it is wrong for it to exist? If someone is truly selfless and constantly thinks about others in this world whom they have never met, then i pity THEIR life. How rediculous it would be to have that much stress, "Well" you would say "we could atleast broaden our monkeyspheres to as many people as you can." Well, what if i said i feel as if i can only be comfortable broadening it to the people i care for and are close to me. Does that make you a better person then me because i would rather slip 50 bucks into my nephews birthday card rather than fund a drunken hooker goes to college program?

Back to POV, I'm not about to make myself poor on purpose to prove my point, but i can say that i have overcome enormous other challenges in the past and have full confidence that if faced with the situation you provided i would find a way. People who want to get to their goal find a way.

Flip wrote:It is times like these that i wish i did grow up poor just so i could talk with proof. You're right, lack of percpetive makes people not care, but whos to say we should?

If you grew up poor, you would probably have a very different attitude on the subject.

Flip wrote:Back to POV, I'm not about to make myself poor on purpose to prove my point, but i can say that i have overcome enormous challenges in the past and have full confidence that if faced with the situation you provided i would find a way. People who want to get to their goal find a way.

You're also solidly in the middle class, which means that you have a safety net in your parents and their income. I do too. I don't think it's coincidence that of all of the domestic graduate students I know, we are all from solidly middle class families. The fact that you have that sort of confidence in your own abilities is a result of your upbringing, which is necessarily a function of the environment in which you were raised. Like me and everyone else, you've probably fucked up or been screwed over a few times in your life. But from what I know of you, you have in your parents a similar support system that I did. Am I wrong to assume your parents paid for most of your college education? There's nothing wrong with that - my parents gladly paid for most of college for me. But keep in mind that you are where largely because of where you started.

Try reading those NYT articles.

Flip wrote:"Well" you would say "we could stleast broaden our monkeyspheres to as many people as you can." Well, what if i said i feel as if i can only be comfortable broadening it to the people i care for and are close to me. Does that make you a better person then me because i would rather slip 50 bucks into my nephews birthday card rather than fund a drunken hooker goes to college program?

I'm just going to say what I'm thinking...which is, more or less, yes.

And applause for Kup on last post too.

Try reading those NYT articles.

Tried the other day, more regs

I'll register for it sometime soon and read them, i am interested.

I'm just going to say what I'm thinking...which is, more or less, yes.

We will never convince each other on this subject if our priorities and opinions differ this much.

Flip wrote:Tried the other day, more regs :/

Damn, sorry. You can try running through <a href=http://www.bugmenot.com/>BugMeNot</a>.

You're also solidly in the middle class, which means that you have a safety net in your parents and their income. I do too. I don't think it's coincidence that of all of the domestic graduate students I know, we are all from solidly middle class families. The fact that you have that sort of confidence in your own abilities is a result of your upbringing, which is necessarily a function of the environment in which you were raised. Like me and everyone else, you've probably fucked up or been screwed over a few times in your life. But from what I know of you, you have in your parents a similar support system that I did. Am I wrong to assume your parents paid for most of your college education? There's nothing wrong with that - my parents gladly paid for most of college for me. But keep in mind that you are where largely because of where you started.

What you're talking about, then, is the whole fabric of society. If i'm confident due to my upbringing, which was by middle class parents so i am simply a product of middle America and my confidence means nothing in relation to this topic and i am not allowed to comment on the subject. Thats fine, i get tired of hearing it, but it is typical in debates for the 'you dont know, you've never been there' argument to trump. If what we've learned on other areas of life cant apply then so be it.

My mom immigrated from Germany when she was 9 with her mother and half-sister and half-brother... all 3 kids had a different dad and my grandma was unmarried. My parents got married at 18 and had 3 kids by 24 (i was #3, i am 24 now and i cannot fathom). My dad went to community college at night/home and got his bachelors in accounting, worked for the man for a while and then put it all on the line by starting his own tax/accounting service firm from the house. My mom graduated HS. Things got lucky and worked out, but i by no means had a cushy life as a kid, things were tight all the time and i learned the value of a dollar. Was their hard work the product of my dads parents being middle America, thus negated, and just fluff when their wisdom was passed on to me? They paid my tuition and board through college and also couldnt have ben happier to do it. No programs involved, they wanted something good for their kids and they did it through sweat and tears.

If money was re-allocated to infastructure and education as you would like it to be Mental, then it would become a money pit since the terrorists would now target civilians who sent their kids to these schools or partook in the infastructure activities. Thus, spending money on these projects just to have them destroyed and have needless civilian casualties in that nation just may out-weigh the need for education at this time. I'm not saying that you don't need education and infastructure, you do need it to mold the minds of children and families, but first you need to protect them before you can nurture them back to health. You can't do too many things at once, or else it all just falls apart. Specialize in some areas then once you're done, start on the other areas. Keeping people safe is priority over education. I'd like to be kept safe so I'd have the chance to learn.

Mental wrote:

Flip wrote: Does that make you a better person then me because i would rather slip 50 bucks into my nephews birthday card rather than fund a drunken hooker goes to college program?

I'm just going to say what I'm thinking...which is, more or less, yes.

Ah, yes, the old "I'm better than you because of my way of thinking". Nice.

*Sigh*

I wondered if that was an ill-advised post on my part, and see now that it was.

Flip, in all seriousness, I don't know which charitable act being discussed will do the most good - yours to your nephew or, I suppose, mine to the drug-addled hooker - if your nephew is likely to use it well and make the most out of it, then I think it's a great idea. I just have a very wealthy and VERY Republican grandfather, and I've seen what his constant gifts of money to my father have done. Which is to say, my dad is now in his mid-fifties and has very little in the way of money OR career satisfaction, because constantly getting money from his own father, I believe, prevented him from acquiring the career skills necessary to have a truly successful career in the long-term. Many of his siblings, my aunts (my dad is the only male sibling), have this problem as well.

Given that the gifts of money to my dad and his sisters were a hell of a lot bigger in scope, it's not exactly an accurate comparison to make and I realize that.

I don't have time today to really do this up and shore up my side of the argument, but I would like to say this. It is VERY VERY hard to have one's "Monkeysphere" include everyone - and if anyone gets there, try extending it to animals, that will REALLY fuck you up, you start to understand where vegans get their "meat is murder" stuff from - but, back to humans at least, I think it is worth it in the long run. It would be an interesting discussion of whether or not to continue being nice and/or giving to someone if you KNOW that they will never, ever give anything back to you, and I'm talking about intangibles here such as gratitude, etc. as well - THAT, at this point in my life, I disagree with in most cases. But I know that the very few times I've really managed to make a difference in someone's life, it's been among the most wonderful feelings I've ever had.

I'm not saying that doing this within a family is wrong, on the contrary I think it's crucial. But opening up my "Monkeysphere" (barf) to include many people just broadens the number of opportunities to experience that joy, for me. Also, if we were to get into the idea of a "social contract" which somehow includes the idea of mutual giving (not necessarily financial), I'm not going to actually trace out the social "logic" fully, but it goes something like the following and I believe there is actually economic benefit from it:

a. "it feels good to experience acts of kindness from others" (I'll ignore that in my experience, as long as it doesn't adversely affect one's own health or productivity, it feels good to actually PERFORM acts of kindness as well)

b. "when people feel good they are happier and more productive"

c. "helping others people out causes the cycle to repeat itself"

Anyway, I'm sure my argument is full of holes right now and can and will be picked to pieces in its current embryonic form, but I thought it was worth getting out there.

(I only skimmed that Monkeysphere article, which looked like rather the masterpiece of gonzo journalism. I disagree with that as a principle. But at least it got across the idea of trying to include all people in one's sphere of "who to extend compassion to".)