Bush to call for 20 percent cut in gasoline use

On last night's speech:

Where's the beef?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viking31 @ Jan 24 2007, 04:32 AM) [snapback]379970[/snapback]</div>

Well, nobody, and that is part of the problem as I'll explain below.

There's no comparison to last generation. My kid could ride a bicycle two years younger than I was. She's doing math two years younger than I did. Learning to read two years younger. I'm sure she'll be sexually active before I was - and none of this has to do with her formal "in-school" education.

This I don't believe. Not ANY child who's willing. The No Child Left Behind act has often led to a "no child allowed to excell" situation. If nobody is left behind, then that means sometimes the front runners have to be held back to even it up. Otherwise, the guys at the back of the pack WOULD be left behind. It can (and has in some situations) become a case of teaching to the lowest common denominator.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 24 2007, 04:56 AM) [snapback]379981[/snapback]</div>

And this of course is in direct competition with the idea of leaving no child behind. How do you maximize anybody's education without leaving the un-maximized folks behind?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Jan 23 2007, 01:18 PM) [snapback]379602[/snapback]</div>

When the EV vehicles finally become widespread then we can get rid of gasoline and plug them in ... and run them off of coal or nukes instead!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Jan 24 2007, 11:24 AM) [snapback]380067[/snapback]</div>

That's total BS. Yes, of course all children have different intelligence levels, different degrees of motivation, etc. You state as if all children are taught in "one proverbial large classroom" for each grade level and courses are taught so even the dumbest, most disruptive child can understand the simplest lesson at hand.

Public education is now (as opposed from the past) set up so ALL children can progress at the level most appropriate for them. If the child cannot even pass the minimal standards for their grade level (and they are not difficult) then that child and only that child will be held accountable until the child achieves those standards. Special teams of teachers are set up in every school to give every effort to these children to get them up to speed.

But if your child excels at some or all subjects presented to him/her, they too will be challenged with higher level courses. Currently, my eighth grade son is in a high level algebra class that actually awards him credits applicable to his future college transcript. This, I might add, a concept that wasn't even considered in my time.

Perhaps soon a high school diploma will actually be a true high school diploma again, not a minimal attendance record.

Rick
#4 2006

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viking31 @ Jan 24 2007, 12:47 PM) [snapback]380132[/snapback]</div>

The greatest sin a society can make is not ensuring the top 10% of its citizens/children in terms of intelligence gets the best education possible - NOT - insuring the bottom 25% or 50% gets the same education as the top 25% or 50%.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PA @ Jan 24 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]380117[/snapback]</div>

Dont forget plug-ins can also provide power to the grid especially important in times of crisis. If we were to have 10-20% of all our cars as plug ins that would add up to a significant amount of available power - not to mention savings in gas use.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Jan 24 2007, 12:30 PM) [snapback]380121[/snapback]</div>

What? No Solar? No Wind?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viking31 @ Jan 24 2007, 12:47 PM) [snapback]380132[/snapback]</div>

It's called differentiated instruction. Not only is instruction given at different levels, it is also paced different. And different learning styles are offered so that each child can absorb information in their strongest style.

That is not to say there is no room for more reform. We need to get away from the "one size fits all" which is what standardized testing is aimed at. Personally, I think grade levels should be abolished. Even grading IE. report cards. Schools based on an agrarian year and the Henry Ford production assembly line should also hit the road. There's no reason why students can't learn at their own pace. If it's at reading level 3 and math level 5, then that's what it should be. And if one child completes the "course" in 6 months and another takes 11, then that's what it is. Yes, schools should be restructured. But they should be radically changed. Not just more efficient models of the past.

And standardized tests don't do anything but teach kids how to fill in a bubble. They do NOTHING to improve achievement.

We should use 21st century knowledge and resources to create 21st century schools, not more efficient 19th century schools.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viking31 @ Jan 24 2007, 09:47 AM) [snapback]380132[/snapback]</div>

Gosh. Thanks for the open-minded discussion. I guess it might be total BS from your experience - but I'm not making up *my* experience. I happen live in one of the best areas of my state for grade school education (by what metric, I cannot tell you). And we have these "total BS" problems that you dismiss.

That's the ideal, yes. You are implying that it works like this everywhere? It does not.

Again - that's a wonderful ideal. It does not happen in every American school as you suggest. I am sorry that you view my comments as "total BS" - and I have nothing to defend my comments with except for direct experience with the education system to which I have been exposed through my child and teachers and staff who are my family and friends.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PA @ Jan 24 2007, 09:24 AM) [snapback]380117[/snapback]</div>

I assume, and hope (from your little smile) that you're kidding.

I don't agree with dbermanmd every day, but the concise reply he's already posted was right on the money. And I'll add to it:

Even if EVs were powered by coal, they'd be better for us than burning gasoline. The fact is that we do NOT have to burn coal to power electric cars. AND... and this is a big and... gasoline cars use just as much electricity as electric cars consume! Surprise. Takes a ton of electricity to make that clean gasoline that we all know and love.

 

I think a 20% annual reduction for the next ten years is a great idea. Then we can begin to make some real changes.

 

My girlfriend and i were debating this the other day. We came to one conclustion. It's a cover up.. a scam. With the current direction we are going (hybrids and such) we'll cut 20% by ourselves... while the administration will probably try to take credit for it with little to no work put into it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 24 2007, 12:58 PM) [snapback]380139[/snapback]</div>

You've gone from "I read an article about..." to "The greatest sin a society can make..." in a very short period of time; I'm wondering how this came about.

I think what concerns me about things like this is, how we make sure "the rest of them" (who aren't qualified for elite education) don't become disenfranchised?

Also, if everyone pays into the system, doesn't everyone have the same right to receive the best education they can earn for themselves?

How might a student feel when she learns that she's no longer eligible for the top tier?

Are we really willing to, as a society, make these sorts of decisions about people who are still developing at an intense rate?

I feel that your eagerness to divide and categorize, based entirely upon an arbitrary standard, is a bit concerning.

 

"--The 20% cut refers only to a cut relative to a projection of future gasoline usage in 2017. Therefore, given the expected growth in gasoline usage between now and 2017, the Bush proposal would aim simply to cut back consumption toward current levels, not necessarily below them."

More

Haven't you all learned by now that Bush=liar?

 

As usual he is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

amtrak budget is slashed 38% again, and certainly there is little support for the other commuter rail systems that have to fight tooth and nail for every dollar.

Fund the railroads and keep mass transit convenient and affordable so people use it!!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(barbaram @ Feb 11 2007, 03:09 AM) [snapback]388365[/snapback]</div>

This is typical of our political system at all levels.

Locally our superintendent, Alan Bersin (who resigned before he could be fired and now works for Schwarzenegger) was all about raising literacy and supporting reading. He speeches were full of increasing literacy. So....he eliminated the positions of all of the school librarians. BTW California ranks 51st in ratio of certificated librarians per student at about 1:5,000+. Yet California legislators and the Governor never cease talking about raising student achievement and supporting literacy.

Duh.

How many times have we heard it?

The Uniter?

The Education President?

Every time he says he's going to suppor the environment I wonder where they're going to build the roads to cut down the forests next.

Global Warming? I guess that means.....drilling in Anwr?

Going to support alternative fuels by...putting money into hydrogen fuel cell research. Gee....how about a fusion car?

Then there's biodiesel....from Corn because of the Corn Lobby.

It's a shell game. If they were serious about conservation you'd think something actually constructive would be proposed. Something. Anything. Gee. They could make 55 mph a national mandatory max speed limit. It would hardly be popular and it would be hell to enforce. But....it would be the easiest, fastest start to conserving gasoline.

 

There is a Senate bill proposed to raise the CAFE standards. It was presented by Ted Stevens of Alaska (of all people).

http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cf...1&Year=2007