Why is modern conservatism afraid of improved education for the masses?

Why is modern conservatism afraid of improved education for the masses?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyotaimori
cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/money-school-performance-lessons-kansas-city-desegregation-experiment
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

It's not that I don't want people to go to college for any reason, it's that I don't want people to go to college for no reason.

a better question for me is this,
why does it seem that trade education, or in other words intensive instruction on how to perform labor more effectively, INCREASES income equality, rather than decreasing it?

to me, it seems that your life circumstances as a student always drilling into you the fact that you're a cog in the capitalism system, and that your whole waking existence (or at least most of it) consists of becoming a better and more effective cog -- shouldn't that make you accept your place, rather than try to shirk it?

how do you spend all these years voluntarily taking part in an education system designed to make you a better labor tool for bankers and politicians, and come out of it more 'conscious'?

Anyone should be free to attend college to study any subject they like, but if you demand me to subsidize it then the area of study had better damn well be something that will provide a definite, tangible benefit to society at large (stem, medicine, trades, etc.)

We used to have one of the best education systems
Niggers dragged it down and they fucked it up with common core to make the niggers look less dumb

Because you can't become an expert laborer without also learning critical thinking. The latter is a natural, inescapable byproduct of the former.

To come up with a new and more efficient turbine engine blade you need to fully piece apart the function of the old one. You have to make a conscious mental effort at understanding its workings. It's not like glorified machine labor where you're putting parts together at a factory in accordance with the diagram you were given by a more educated worker.

To become a skilled engineer or scientist or whatever, you have to also naturally become a skilled thinker. And it's natural that you will also turn these refined thinking skills, and the habit of conscious thought developed from them, onto the subject of income inequality. You will naturally take more interest in doing away with it, casting your vote to remove from power politicians who might stand in the way of that goal, etc.

I think this is why non-STEM education is being pushed so incredibly hard by the government right now. Studying feminist dance theory doesn't give you the same critical thinking skills which make you dangerous to the class system.

Why is Sup Forums so obsessed with black people
This is not healthy.

>I think this is why non-STEM education is being pushed so incredibly hard by the government right now. Studying feminist dance theory doesn't give you the same critical thinking skills which make you dangerous to the class system.
Then why does socialist/liberals loves these kinds of degrees?

>then why does socialist/liberals loves these kinds of degrees?

They were lead to do so. If you're the government, you could probably say to liberal America, 'We don't want you studying art degrees and non-STEM subjects, understand?' and they would sign up for feminist basket weaving classes the next day to, they think, rebel against their masters.

great copypasta and all, but blacks of all types have made for inferior military generals; naturally, the more-white mulattoes are pretty much the only exception, and the whiter they are, the better they tend to be.
You have no mind for war, to say nothing of maintaining infrastructure.
Also:
>muh diqq
An extinct race has no dick. Why would you race headlong into oblivion with a conflict you cannot win?

I don't remember letting you off my cotton farm.

Because no one actually gets a better education. All the money goes towards political indoctrination and wasteful spending. Don't believe it? We spend the most of any country on education and we're not even in the top 10 of countries for education. I'd love if we had more sciences and technical education. Unfortunately all the money gets funneled into the English departments and the sciences have to make do with decades old (or 5~10 year old in the case of computers) equipment.

For the same reason you call people "the masses": communist indoctrination.

>Because no one actually gets a better education.
Then why aren't you for optimizations to the education process? Why it is that every time someone tries to change the education process for the better, conservatives throw a pants-shitting bib-vomiting tantrum?

If you admit that the system is rotten and ineffective right now, why do you resist change? The worst-case scenario is that it stays ineffective. Equally likely is that it improves. So there is zero risk. Why then do you resist it?

I know the actual answer, which is that rich people have manipulated you to resist education reform because it is dangerous for them, but I'm curious what you'll come up with.

Residents of an ultra-capitalist society, on a capitalism-dominated planet, with everyone in any sort of seat of power being a capitalist,

are indoctrinated by communists?

>rich people have manipulated you to resist education reform because it is dangerous for them,
Told you so.

The education system is dominated by communists, so yes.

Why do you argue for the benefit of people who see you as nothing more than a tool to broaden their wealth by maybe 0.0001%?

Don't you think that's an example of fighting fire with fire?

Other than getting to people before capitalistic indoctrination has settled in and hardened in the back of their brain, using their discarded hopes and dreams and ambitions as its constructional foundation, how else would you change the state of things?

>I don't understand how the economy works
Because .00001% for them is 1000% for me. I don't have the capital to do it on my own, but I'm not a slave, I do benefit proportionally from helping them succeed.

>but I'm not a slave, I do benefit proportionally from helping them succeed.

You may feel that way, or you may not feel it but only tell yourself it, but either way it's not the reality of the situation. You, and everyone in your social tier, are being taken advantage of.

I don't believe in subsidization of higher education at all, at least from the public sector. I think if a company like google wants to grant scholarships to aspiring computer scientists then they have every right to. I don't however agree to the notion that someone gets to attend community college for free just because they live at home and live on a single parent's blue collar income.

At least with private scholarships the granters usually look for people who deserve or have earned the money, typically they at least require you to send a letter stating your case and not just blindly giving it out.

This is going to be anecdotal evidence but I'll always use this when I talk about college. I have a friend who got thousands of dollars in grants to attend community college while he still lived at home and had literally no expenses except for gasoline and marijuana. He eventually moved up to a state school where his grants basically just covered the cost of tuition. He graduated almost exactly a year ago and still has no plans of moving out or finding a job. I attended community college the same time/place he did but I didn't qualify for grants so I had to take loans. All of my family eventually moved out of town so I had to find my own place to live and most of my loan money went to rent. I enrolled in a specialized program at the college that would put me on track for a career. Once I passed the program, I didn't even bother finishing up GE to get a degree because the degree itself is not a requirement, the specialized training is. I got a minimum wage job and eventually became manager. My application for my career was just accepted and I'll spend the next 35 years working for the federal government in a high paying field. I'm 24.

I say all that to say that just going to college and getting a degree is a huge meme, what's really important is having motivation to move forward in life and being smart enough to plan to only spend money on what you need.

No, I think it's a means to undermine the system that has proven historically to be the most beneficial for all, even the downtrodden. Human frontiers have expanded exponentially and the human condition is lightyears ahead of where it had been for tens of thousands of years under every other system, due exclusively to capitalism.

-sent from my iPhone while sitting on a clean and sanitary toilet after enjoying a healthy meal made from fresh foods while flying across the country at 30,000 feet.

It sounds like your opinions on education are mostly decided by your personal life experience rather than statistics and scientific evidence.

Don't you think you're biased on this matter, owing to your personal story?

You don't have a black problem, you couldn't and wouldn't understand.

Well you didn't seem to provide any statistics or scientific evidence either so I'm not just going to change my opinion just because I happened to use an anecdotal story.

People in my age group are drowning in student debt and the problem is so bad that they almost elected a socialist who promised to fix the problem by robbing rich people.

It's logically possible to be immersed in the situation while still being unbiased. The story I used just happened to fit the narrative that is causing this huge problem.

>it's that I don't want people to go to college for no reason.
Impossible. A college education improves how you live your life. A high school graduate, even an autodidact, cannot see or understand the world in the same way a college graduate can.

For example. college graduate in business took economics and we know instantly that any increase in education pushes the Production Possibilities Curve to the right - the best way to boost the economy.

The GI Bill transformed American workers returning from the military into world class white collar producers.

>No, I think it's a means to undermine the system that has proven historically to be the most beneficial for all, even the downtrodden.

Like I showed in , 2017 American capitalism is not the same as post-WWII American capitalism. On the subject of income distribution they may as well be completely different systems. The old one gave a relatively proportional share of the wealth generated by laborers to those laborers. The new one gives an extremely disproportionate share to the wealthiest members of society.

>-sent from my iPhone while sitting on a clean and sanitary toilet after enjoying a healthy meal made from fresh foods while flying across the country at 30,000 feet.

Yes, the overall standard of living, or the 'floor' of living, has increased since the 50s, that's an unavoidable byproduct of technological progress. But the *relative* standard of living has gotten exponentially worse. By that I mean: the difference in lifestyle between an unwealthy and unwealthy person is now higher than it has ever been in America, barring special cases like slavery.

>Like I showed in
Whoops, I meant

because it's a waste of money. only the smart should be getting educated. the average idiot should be getting vocational training so they have skills and don't get an inflated view of their own intellect.

just look at the havoc allowing every idiot into college has wreaked

>You, and everyone in your social tier, are being taken advantage of.
And I'm taking advantage of people I do business with and they of me, quit trying foment jealousy to spin it like I'm being ripped off or stolen from. It's mutually advantageous for all involved.
You're the same class of people pushing for open borders and illegal immigration because you see people as interchangeable masses, which actually does hurt me and my social tier.

But education reflects positively on any community regardless of its intelligence level. I think Sup Forums readily accepts that black people are one of the least intelligent ethinicities, so here's an example: compare an uneducated Harlem community to the black people in a private Beverly Hills school. They are still 10-15% less intelligent than their peers or whatever, but there's no crime problem with them.

>a degree in women's studies improves your life
Yeah, no. Literally the only good part of a useless degree like that is hopefully the fact that the college that issued it forced you to pass high school math and rudimentary English.

A person may be more educated for going to college but the nature of the classes/degree is what makes it valuable (or worthless). You can't seriously sit here and tell me that people with STEM degrees are anywhere near the average income of someone with a liberal arts degree.

So yes, it's entirely possible to go to college, pay a bunch of money, and walk away with nothing but a mountain of debt and a worthless piece of paper (if graduation happened at all).

Funny because a college education ruined my life and I hate my parents and my own life because of it.

>inb4 what did you major in?!?!?

Accounting you stupid fucking faggot.

You were just now telling me that you AREN'T being taken advantage of, now you're freely admitting it and proclaiming it as 'mutually advantageous'.

Please tell me what's mutually advantageous about a system where workers are not proportionally rewarded for their labor, with an overly-large cut of their generated wealth going to the wealthiest and most powerful members of society. What is 'mutually advantageous' about that arrangement? I can understand how the wealthy and powerful guy benefits, but how does the worker?

>But the *relative* standard of living has gotten exponentially worse.

So what? What do you think they're doing with their money, putting it in a Scrooge McDuck vault? No. look at Trump. He has enough money that if he just lived off the interest he'd be making a hundred million a year, but he's invested in property and companies that make him a hundred million a year while also creating thousands and thousands of jobs. Because that's what rich people actually do with their money.

If there's one part of this image which isn't up for debate, it's that 'for-profit' schools are absolutely disgusting and predatory and will be one of the great shames in America's cultural history.

Being paid $32/hour is advantageous to me, I don't really give a shit that my boss makes $40/hour except that it inspires me to work harder to accept those responsibilities and make it for myself.

or maybe it's because they are smarter than the average black, hence why they are able to live in a more affluent area instead of in the ghetto with the average retarded blacks.

ghetto niggers get education, and they're still poor and violent.

I work in industry. Why do you hate your life lol? Didn't know what you were getting yourself into? My classmates were some of the most miserable looking people around.

do you think your post represents credible argument?
is this how you were indoctrinated by your trainers at the learning institution?
shit pushed in by liberal cock, brain pushed in by "Statistics?"

because an uneducated population is preferable then a badly educated population

is because of money not education

>ghetto niggers get education, and they're still poor and violent.

But White and Asian children who grow up in 'ghetto' schools are equally violent and criminalistic. There are no refined, intelligent, peaceful souls coming out of inner-city schools.

It's not a real education, it's a facsimile of one. You can't learn anything in that environment.

>top ranking
>not ranked by their greatest heights but by their average
Absolutely plebian.

>common core is a conservative creation
Leftists dicked education and they blame conservatives for it

>Why do you hate your life lol?

Because I can never get those years of my life back. I wasted it learning about irrelevant fucking accounting standards and journal entries. Now I'm in debt with no fucking job and applying to retail positions and not hearing back.

>Didn't know what you were getting yourself into?

I tried to drop out but my parents threatened to disown me. They made me feel so guilty I just kept doing it. I'm an only child so I felt obligated.

I hated everybody in my college I hate so many fucking people I just hate hate hate

I'm so sick of faggot saying "LE COLLEGE DEGREE" when it's just a fucking joke. Yes I got a low gpa and I don't even fucking care. I hate everything.

>Being paid $32/hour is advantageous to me,

So you're just putting your head in a bag and choosing to ignore the Jewish penis splitting your asshole in half. It doesn't matter so long as they give you some money for hot dogs afterwards while they dine on caviar and Kobe beef?

I see now. You're not one of those people who doesn't understand they're being taken advantage of. You're intelligent enough to realize it, you just lack the spine to stand up for yourself. As long as you have your Iphone and your Late Night to watch, you're content.

You fucking disgust me, do you know that?

>But White and Asian children who grow up in 'ghetto' schools are equally violent and criminalistic.
No they are not you complete retard. Everything you believe is stupid and obvious bullshit to anybody even a little bit resilient to jewish brainwashing. They are absolutely right that some goyim are cattle!

wiggers live in suburban areas and usually outgrow that phase. i've actually been to nigger schools, the few white and asian kids just try to avoid the blacks and still manage to get their work done and graduate.

the blacks aren't getting a worse education, on the contrary school systems pump money and resources into black schools only for the black students to completely disregard the education being given to them.

the reason black schools are terrible is because they are filled with blacks constantly fighting,stealing, and raising hell.

>You were just now telling me that you AREN'T being taken advantage of, now you're freely admitting it and proclaiming it as 'mutually advantageous'
No I wasn't. I never said that. I said that you calling it "being taken advantage of" was an attempt to foment jealousy and resentment towards people I have a mutually advantageous relationship with based on proportional contribution and return.
You automatically default to "taking advantage" as a defacto synonym for "being swindled", and that's bullshit. Who are you to decide what's a proportional return?

Because there is no coherent goal to it, and there is no free lunch.

I was talking with this old guy a few years back, he told me, backin the day when he went to college, it wasn't that expensive, and that tuition at state universities was more of a token payment. Certainly nothing like it is now, where one could buy a house with the monies needed to attend a 4 year university.

Listen, I happen to agree with you that black people are ~15% less intelligent than their peers. That's what the science points to. I DON'T agree that educating them isn't a good idea. It makes them more docile, like it does everyone. If only because, for a few years, the content of their life has to become their schoolwork instead of primate posturing and fighting.

But what if your boss makes 32,000 an hour? Wouldn't you much rather you make 40 and him as well? It's not like he has overhead costs, initial investment, innovation, or anything right? /s

Because people will just go to collage for the sake of going to fucking collage. Half the degrees people get are fucking worthless.

are you high? they don't give a shit about school work and bring their niggertry into the classroom. instead of acting like violent savage on duh block, they just act like violent savages in the school.

you clearly have never been to a black school, or even a school with a decent size black population.

Here it is, directly from your fingertips.

>You, and everyone in your social tier, are being taken advantage of.
And I'm taking advantage of people I do business with and they of me, quit trying foment jealousy to spin it like I'm being ripped off or stolen from. It's mutually advantageous for all involved.

You literally say, in your post, that you take advantage of others, and others take advantage of you. You try to postrationalize it by saying that it's actually a good arrangement for everyone, but provide no justification for that statement.

>Who are you to decide what's a proportional return?

It's not me (or any other single person in specific) who should be deciding the proportion of income distribution, but the laborers themselves, like it was in the wake of World War II. See:

>you admit that the system is rotten and ineffective right now, why do you resist change?
So being pro school choice and giving the power to the people instead of the fucking teachers union is resisting...

Fucking please the ones who are resisting to any reforms are Democrats who by in large want to throw more money just so their largest donors can get more money which increases their donations to Democrat candidates.

>It's not like he has overhead costs, initial investment, innovation, or anything right? /s

The labor involved in managing these things is not an additional $31968/hr worth of labor.

>What if our bosses all made a bazillion dollars a minute and only paid us ten cents an hour? Wouldn't you be jealous then?
Quit inventing bullshit to foment jealousy and hatred. Yeah, in a hypothetical situation that you made up from whole cloth, the world might be feudalism. But it's not.

>educating the masses
>implying you can educate niggers
What planet are you on?

>lowest income inequality
Everyone is lower middle class, that is a disease not a cure.

That's technology that improved, and guess what technology also improved under communism and national socialism.

The goal of those technologies isn't the well state of future wokers, on the contrary.

Automatization it's going to destroy more jobs than an economical recession and everyone would be to busy in the internet or being anarcho primitivists to prevent it.

>Yeah, in a hypothetical situation that you made up from whole cloth

It isn't a fictional situation that the wealthiest and most powerful members of society are receiving an extreme and unproportional amount of the wealth generated by the least wealthy and powerful.

See:

>education
>for the masses

Mass education isn't education, it's brainwashing

sage

>You literally say, in your post, that you take advantage of others, and others take advantage of you. You try to postrationalize it by saying that it's actually a good arrangement for everyone, but provide no justification for that statement.
I see we're going to play semantics and you're going to ignore the part where I said in that post and my subsequent post that "taking advantage" is not the same thing as ripping people off.
I take advantage of the fact that my coffee shop is on the way to my freeway entrance every morning. Am I swindling anybody? Taking advantage and being taken advantage of does not automatically imply that anybody is being hurt or screwed. Fuck you, commie.

>So what? What do you think they're doing with their money, putting it in a Scrooge McDuck vault?

1) Taking measures to ensure their continued wealth, and the wealth of their offspring and loved ones

2) Enjoying a standard of living that is absurd. Unimaginable to that lived by your everyday lower-class worker.

They're spending their money on things like this.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyotaimori

One 'Nyotaimori' meal course, which costs some thousands to tens of thousands of dollars depending on the establishment at which you purchase it, produces an enjoyable, small stream of endorphins in the brain of one (1) wealthy buyer. Let's say it produces 50 'units' of endorphins.

Spending that same $10,000 on food for hungry children in America -- current statistics estimate that 20.6% of American children are 'food insecure', meaning there are periods when they don't have enough to eat -- would feed, let's say, 1000 children with luxurious $10 meals. Each meal enjoyed by those children would produce a large amount of endorphins in their brain, let's say 30 'units' apiece.

So a one-time purchase for a rich person could have create 600 times more 'net happiness' if it was instead distributed to a place where it was genuinely needed.

>my individual value is entirely based on another individual's value
Kill yourself, commie.

>It isn't a fictional situation that the wealthiest and most powerful members of society are receiving an extreme and unproportional amount of the wealth generated by the least wealthy and powerful
Who are you to decide what is and isn't proportional? Do you even know what they do aside from "have lots of money"? Quit trying to foment jealousy.

>Yes I got a low gpa and I don't even fucking care

Seems like you didn't even try or apply yourself to the work.

>I take advantage of the fact that my coffee shop is on the way to my freeway entrance every morning. Am I swindling anybody?

It isn't a real comparison. You are not negatively affecting anyone by placing your coffee shop at a strategic location which ensures it will be seen by the most eyes.

However, confiscating 90% of the wealth generated by a laborer, and giving them only 10% of it, objectively is bad for them. There is no context in which it is a positive experience. If you ask a laborer whether they want 10% or 90% of the fruits of their labor, they will say 90% every time.

Because every time we "improve" education post-2000, we get some shit like No Child Left Behind or Common Core or Michelle Obama's Starvation Special

We're jury rigging shit on top of broken plumbing with band-aids and big league chew, it's doomed

>Who are you to decide what is and isn't proportional?

Again, it is not me who should decide, but the laborers themselves. Even that is not a perfectly fair arrangement, but it is fairer than allowing the most powerful members of society decide what portion of the least-powerful's generated wealth should be confiscated and given to them (the wealthy) instead.

>but the chirrens!!

Fuck off, their retarded parents should have fed them. Let them die. The rich guy owned his sushi meal eaten off a model's asshole.

Finland also has the highest rate of autism, so there's that.

>current statistics estimate that 20.6% of American children are 'food insecure
Lol. Can't say hungry anymore because TANF (which rich people pay for) provides for everyone to be able to not go hungry, so now they've moved the standard to some imaginary "standard of "food insecurity"
Where do you think that $10,000 goes when they spend it?

>2) Enjoying a standard of living that is absurd. Unimaginable to that lived by your everyday lower-class worker
This applies literally to everyone in the first world when compared to the third world. Even the most poor part-time minimum wage worker lives a life that is unimaginable to even Americans just fifty years ago. So the fuck what? If you're jealous, the tools exist for you to go out and make that kind of money too.

Any developed society has higher autism incidence, along with the incidence other genetic ailments, because autism incidence is partly decided by the presence of mutagenic chemicals, preservatives, etc.

>90/10
Holy shit you are truly retarded.

At my first job I was eventually a manager and part of my job was balancing labor cost each shift. A good day would be under 30% of the total income, a bad day would be as bad as 45%. The owners, who didn't pay themselves wage or salary, made less than 10% profit, not even factoring all of the random business expenses like broken machinery or upgrading equipment. I did the math and they probably made less than $50,000 per year which isn't great at all, but they provided 15 employees with wages at the expense of being 100% liable for any legal issues and shouldered all of the costs to open the store, including taking out more than $500,000 in loans to get it started. As a manager I made, including tips, around $25,000 per year. So even though I may have ultimately made half as much as the owners, I had absolutely no commitments or responsibility and could have chosen to left at any point without incident. The owners don't have that choice.

>This applies literally to everyone in the first world when compared to the third world. Even the most poor part-time minimum wage worker lives a life that is unimaginable to even Americans just fifty years ago.

Yes, the overall standard of living, or the 'floor' of living, has increased since the 50s, that's an unavoidable byproduct of technological progress. But the *relative* standard of living has gotten exponentially worse. By that I mean: the difference in lifestyle between an unwealthy and unwealthy person is now higher than it has ever been in America, barring special cases like slavery. See:

If the average of each of the 15 employees was $20,000 and the owners made $50,000, that means the owners were only taking 16.6% of the profit while the rest went to the workers.

Kill yourself, commie.

The store-owners in your example are not part of the extremely wealthy and powerful people I was talking about. Instead, I was talking about the owners of mega-corporations such as Samsung or Walmart.

One of those same mega-corporations will, one of these days, come into town and bulldozer whatever establishment you were working at.

Throwing money at your problems doesn't make them go away.

>between an unwealthy and unwealthy
I mean unwealthy and wealthy*

If you want to talk about compromising on principles based on an extreme minority then I will have that conversation with you.

However, I don't think you're arguing a rule you don't actually want to defend. If you agree that the capitalist system works for the mom and pops, you have to agree that it works for the massive conglomerates. Conglomerates don't start off as conglomerates.

What? Improved education does not necessarily mean more expensive education. Like someone said earlier in this thread, America spends more per capita on young students than Finland does, yet Finland is still the #1 educator in the world.

> If you agree that the capitalist system works for the mom and pops, you have to agree that it works for the massive conglomerates.

The difference is that mom and pop are still members of the middle class. At some threshold of success they become firmly upper-class citizens who feel entitled to an extremely disproportionate amount of the wealth generated by their workers.

I don't need to agree or disagree or anything else that massive conglomerates, and very wealthy + powerful people in general, are not fair income distributors. You don't have to take my word for it at all. See:

>throw lots of money at education
>niggers don't get smarter
>wtf why won't conservatives let us through more money at education

The great thing is that this image will get debunked as the third worldifcation of Sweden continues and your education systems for some magical reason begins to fall apart as inequality increases.

Remember that time that the government improved education by spending more money on it?

No? Neither do I.
cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/money-school-performance-lessons-kansas-city-desegregation-experiment

Hint: It's Demographics.

No, you're creating a boogieman so you can foment jealousy among the "uninformed masses" who you actually disdain, so you can swell your ranks and be Commissar user. Because you can't contribute to society any other way.

>Create a race problem
>You don't have a race problem you wouldn't understand
Outwitted by a pole

Not every proposed education reform involves more expenses. In fact, past the initial expenditure of printing new schoolbooks and such, most involve less. Conservatives are still resistant to them, because their masters have conditioned them to be. As the image in demonstrates, an educated workforce does not stand for being exploited. It is therefore in the interests of the very wealthy to suppress good education plans so that the current standard wealth distribution can continue.

Furthermore, I worked at a pizza place. We had to compete with national chains like dominoes, Pizza Hut, any other chain you could think of. To think they wanted to come into our store and bulldoze it is asinine.

You're under the impression that conglomerates like Walmart don't have an expected profit margin to accomplish. Smaller organizations, like mom and pop stores, can afford to settle for small profit margins because they don't have huge profit margin stores on the other side of the country. That leaves the market open to mom and pop stores without worry. And, even if the big bad pizza place had come in and bought the store, wouldn't that be a good thing? The owners would have gotten paid off at a good rate (assuming the store wasn't losing money and they were just looking to get rid of it) and the employees would probably have gotten to keep their jobs. And even if they didn't, they'd have just been filled by other people for a net loss.

Hard goods like groceries may be a tougher thing to argue for me because obviously a company that is big enough to get great deals from manufacturers means smaller markets can't compete, but MOST of the workforce doesn't operate that away, especially the service industry.

>The floor has raised because of technological progress.
>That the exponential increase in technological progress over the last two hundred years when compared to the preceding 10,000 years is due to capitalism is completely lost on me.

So you're prejudice against people based on their income. Thanks for revealing that. That means you believe people are good at one wage, but if they earn a dollar more the next year they're just as bad as Madoff and the rest. You're a moron.

I don't understand how you don't understand this: it's not unfair to distribute wealth unevenly. You and every other commie assume that if the wealth were evenly distributed that we'd all be living in a utopia where everyone is equal, but in reality we'd be living in a third world shit hole where doctors make the same amount of money as cashiers, which means nobody wants to be a doctor or do anything above what is marketable at the "equal" income rate.

>only one mandatory test
Wrong. We have only one mandatory standardized national test and it's a series of tests at the end of high school. Other than that students have mandatory tests that are in many cases made by the teacher teaching the class / course all the time just like any other nation.
And while the gap between best performing students and worst performing students might be true, it comes at the cost of hampering the development of well performing students. We also benefit from not having students who speak 10 different languages in our classes so the teachers can actually focus on teaching rather than communication or trying to herd a pack of poorly behaving niggers.

I wonder at what point exactly the Conservative party lost it soul, that it now campaigns against the very existence of, and wishes to suppress solutions to, child hunger.

>keep telling naive children higher education is the best investment they could make
>well golly gee I should go in debt to get a degree then
>follow your dreams, get a liberal arts degree
>kid gets 50k in debt for a degree that makes him qualified for Starbucks
>kid realizes he fucked up
>it was the capitalists that did this

Higher education is in a massive overvalued bubble right now because you retards keep pushing it as the greatest investment a person could possibly make regardless of the major.

>fuck that, we need an education bailout because it's so fucking good. We should force taxpayers to pay for these garbage degrees because higher education is always good no matter what