Education: America vs. the World---Where Do We Stand? Pt 3 of 3 of Our "Where America Ranks" Series

The Greek inventor Archimedes once said that given a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, he could move the world. If knowledge is the fulcrum, then education is the lever which can move the world. Education can open doors as well as minds. It is not only the measure of success of the individual, it's the measure of success for a nation. Unless its properly nurtured, a nation will stagnate and eventually decay economically, politically, and societal. So, where does America stand in terms of quality of education when compared to the world? How does our students compare to other developed nations in the areas of math, science, and reading?

As we've examined in our previous two articles of this series, much of what we're told about America doesn't gel with the published facts. We have one the worst healthcare systems of any developed nation; in some areas such as prenatal care, number of beds, and availability of healthcare professionals we actually rank in the second tier along with second world economies and crippling income inequality which puts us near the bottom tier among developed nations. In terms of freedom, we again rank only in the second tier in several areas, and even overall, we're nowhere near the top. So much for being the "leader of the free world". Now, according to a 2018 report by Business Insider, the US ranks 27th overall in education; down from sixth place in 1990 (their report also ranks the US in 27th place in terms of healthcare).

The 2018 "World Top 20 Project" which focuses solely on education and its affect on each nation's economy, the top ten nations are South Korea, Finland, Norway, Russia, Hong Kong, Japan, Estonia, Latvia, Israel, and Sweden. The United States came in 24th out of the 201 nations examined. While that places the US in the top 25%, we still fell behind nations like Kazakhstan (15th), the former Soviet Republic of Georgia (17th), China (20th), Croatia (22nd), and Saudi Arabia (23rd). Why is that?

One explanation cited in the reports is the decline in spending by 3% while student growth increased by 1% between 2010 and 2014. Meanwhile, Turkey increased its spending on education by 76% along with similar growth in spending in China and Brazil. According to the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) which measures 15 years students in developed and developing nations, the US ranks 38th out of 71 countries in math, and 24th in science and reading; all of which placing the US well in the second tier. Interesting, the top nations were Singapore (which topped all three categories), along with Japan, Estonia, Taiwan and Finland in Science; Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and Japan in Math; and Hong Kong, Canada, Finland, and Ireland in reading. What makes this so interesting is that these countries were all ranked higher than the US in terms of overall freedom and/or healthcare. As an aside, the top ranked US schools according to US News and World Report's 2018 edition, which are in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Utah, New Hampshire, and Iowa still fall far behind all the top Asian and several of the European schools (Kentucky, by the way, was ranked 34th while Indiana was 35th).

In terms of higher education, Masters and More, which publishes a ranking of the best countries to pursue a post-bachelor's degree based a Pearson, a multinational education and publishing company, the top nations are South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore with Finland coming in fifth. Rounding out the rest of the top ten are the UK, Canada, the Netherlands, Ireland, and Poland. The US came in 14th out of the 40 countries represented and just behind Russia and ahead of Australia. The report looked at the primary and secondary school systems (which lays the foundation for higher education) as well as the colleges and universities. According to Pearson's CEO, Jon Fallon, the rankings "strongly reflect the economic growth of the countries", meaning that there is an obviously correlation between the quality of education and the economic success of each nation. But just how true is that?

The US spends more per student than any other country according to a Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report. The report says that the average amount spent per student from primary through high school is $10,759. However, the US spends $16,268 per student. As pointed out earlier, the US is, however, on the decline in spending per child by an average of 4% between 2010 and 2014. Meanwhile, the other OECD nations have increased their spending an average of 5%. Of course, that still means the US is currently spending more per child yet getting worse results than those who spend less.

The report suggests that one reason it that teachers in the US are seen as individuals who were unable to doing anything else whereas in other countries teachers are viewed as "professionals" on par with doctors, engineers, or lawyers. Accordingly, not only are they more respected in society, they are also better paid. American school teachers make on 65% of what their peers in other countries earn. The highest paid teachers are in South Korea, followed by Canada, Finland and Germany. In fact, US school teachers actually fall below the OECD average.

Another explanation is that the requirement to getting into a teaching program in other countries is much tougher than the US. Prospective teachers are expected to have higher GPA out of high school and do better on their college entrance examinations that their American counterparts. In Finland, it's easier to get into law or medical school than a teaching program. In addition, foreign students in teaching programs are required to take much more academically rigorous courses. They are also required to take continuing education courses, like their American peers, however, the courses are considered much tougher and more on par with other professionals.

Also discipline is far more strict in international school systems than they are in the US. Unlike the US, there is a zero tolerance for any bad behavior, back talk, profanity, sloppy dress (uniforms are the norm), and needless to say, violence against teachers or other students---even bullying---is a non-starter. These school systems expect---insist---that parents instill respect and discipline in their children and that carries over to the schools where physical punishment, though rare, can be enforced. Parents are also expected participate in any school functions. Failure to do so will usually warrant the attention of school administrators. I strongly suspect that excuses aren't tolerated.

Some have argued that bad behavior results from low income or "disadvantaged" children, especially among minorities, yet according to OCED, there are 37 other countries with are economically poorer and have fewer resources than the US yet they consistently outperform the US academically. One possible reason it that schools in Europe, and especially Asia, set and demand higher academic standards that American schools, and that translates into discipline in school. In fact, it's their official academic policy and practices. Children in Singapore for instance, are given a thorough assessment prior to first grade in order to determine if they meet the minimum grade criteria. If they fall below the bar, they must first be brought up to speed before being allowed to start.

Students are also regularly tested in ensure they meet minimum grade criteria before being passed to the next grade unlike many American school systems which "fail forward" students out of fear that parents will complain or allege "discrimination". American schools seem to have adopted the Washington solution to dealing with problems which amounts to kicking the can down the road and letting someone else deal with it. The end result is students graduating with a high school diploma but having only a functional eighth or ninth grade education or less in terms of reading.

In Germany, which is noted for its academic excellence, students are tracked academically as well as to their interests. In Germany, students may be tracked for higher education or for one in the trades, which is another key difference. In the US, it's assumed that all individuals are destined for college regardless of whether they are so inclined. As a result, you see students racking up crippling debt and ending up with useless degrees. It also artificially raises the bar for getting a job.

The majority of employment opportunities should require no more than a high school degree or perhaps even a six month or two year technical certificate. Meanwhile, critically needed trade jobs, which require less education and are far cheaper, go unfilled. In addition, these jobs typically pay much better than the average four or six year degree and have better benefits. In Germany (and the rest of the world), there is no stigma between someone in the trades and some with professional degree, which can't be necessarily said of the US.

So, in terms of education the US is no better off than when we looked at its ranking on freedom or healthcare. At best, the US education system is well out of the top ten list and typically falls towards the middle of the second tier. The main reasons do not include the amount of money spent on each child (we top the list), but on attracting less the best into the teaching profession. This is due to both the perception that a career in education is somehow inferior, therefore the criteria is lowered, and that teachers are poorly paid when compared to their peers elsewhere.

The second reason is that expectations for students are set lower for US students than elsewhere, and that includes discipline. Respect should be a given, not something we bargain for in order to avoid violence in the classroom. We've allowed ourselves to become so focused on meaningless labels as part of a group rather than on our potential as individuals. Students should be individually tracked and constantly monitored as to their performance. Parents must be made a part of the solution rather they expecting teachers to serve as their glorified, if underpaid, babysitters. Lastly, students should be expected to perform and not "flunked through" or "failed forward". They either meet minimum expectations and move on or their they don't. If they don't, they must be held accountable and meet the criteria before moving on. A high school diploma must be made to mean something again. Also, I believe way too much emphasis is placed on sports, especially at the Jr High School and High School levels rather than on academics. Only a tiny percentage make it into professional or even semi-professional sports but everyone needs critical thinking skills and know how speak and write properly along with how to read and
do math.

The third key reason is attempting to herd students through a system where they may or may not fit. Not everyone is college material and not every job needs someone with a college degree. If a high school diploma is restored to its former value, most graduates can handle the majority of jobs out there. Technical and trade schools are an excellent option for many students. They pay well, have great benefits and they're in high demand. They also can be earned quicker and at a fraction of the cost of a four year degree. Students who do chose to attend college should be strongly encouraged to obtain degrees which have some market value (ie: requiring a Art History or Minority studies degree to also have a mandatory dual major in business, accounting, or computer science). Coming out with a worthless degree and tens of thousands of dollars in debt makes no sense at all and creates additional financial problems down the road.

A nation's overall success depends on the quality of its citizens. A uneducated populace is a little better than herd of sheep waiting to be led to slaughter. It's one of the key reasons---if not the key reason---democracies and republics fall. For the tyrant, an educated populace is dangerous. They know the limits of government. They understand and will defend their rights. An educate citizenry also provides the best opportunities for a strong economy, and that means job growth and economic stability. It also means a better quality of life for everyone, and who doesn't want that? As our readers know, America is an Oligarchy now, run by a professional political class of plutocrats who think they know better than us. One can almost track their rise alongside our decline in education, and with it, our standing as a nation of free people. The only question we need to answer is this---what are we prepared to do about it? Lastly, I would like to thank you for reading and your comments. I hope you've enjoyed this three part series about how America ranks with the rest of the world in the areas of freedom, healthcare, income inequality, and education, which are at the core of every nation's success or eventual downfall.



The US was once the leader in healthcare and education--now ranks 27th in the world

US students' academic achievement still lags that of their peers in many other countries

World Top 20 Project: International Education Database

40 Top Education Systems in the World

The US spends more on education than other countries. Why is it falling behind?

US News and World Report: Education Rankings

The State of America's Education System: How Low Can You Go?

I've always been a strong proponent of education. Education, as far as I'm concerned, is the linchpin to society. An educated populace is a productive populace; capable of doing a vast variety of work. This attracts businesses which generates taxes (both direct and indirect), as well as attracts other peripheral businesses, and so it continues. The result is often a community which offer a wide range of amenities, such as parks, museums, restaurants, as well as a strong social and structural infrastructure, from up-to-date sewer systems, electrical grids, clean water to adequate and well trained police, EMS, and firefighters. It should also include not just well paid teachers, but teachers who are as well respected and appreciated as some sports coach.

Without a strong educational foundation, nothing in society works (or at least very well). If you have a well educated population, you should have a society of individuals capable of critical thinking skills, an understanding of history, geography, political science and Civics; who have a general appreciation of world literature as well as the ability to perform basic mathematical computations, the sciences, and diagram sentences in order to write and speak properly. 

I would add that a well rounded graduate of high school should have completed an art or art appreciation, music class, or theater class. Kids that take what they want, without being intellectually challenged leave school underserved by not just the teachers, but the entire school system as well. Many are simply "flunked through" because of pressure by parents and the school system not to hold students back out of concern that it will "damage their self-esteem", not to mention how it makes the school system look to voters.

As a result, both the student and society often end up paying the price. The student-now-adult often finds that their nonchalant attitude in school now makes them virtually unemployable. Many take low paying and unrewarding jobs. Some end up in criminal gangs, which eventually leads to prison and/or the cemetery. 

 For the girls, they often end up pregnant and more often than not, on their own since their boyfriends end up being more immature and irresponsible "boys" than men. Either way, an significant portion end up on public assistance (tax supported charity in truth). The same goes with those who just want to concentrate on sports. Fewer than 1 in a 1000 every actually make it into professional sports and make the obscenely big money. That's some pretty poor odds.

Those who do succeed need more than athletic ability. They need the intellectual ability to think critically, to hold a reasonably intelligent (and intelligible) conversation. Most of all, they need to be able to properly interact with others; non-jocks like lawyers, financial advisors, team agents, owners, managers, the media, and other players. Far too often we see student-jocks coming out of high school (or even college) who aren't smart enough to do basic manual labor.

One of America's big failures in terms of education, has been "dumbing down" the academic expectations of students (this is a big problem in some communities where academic success is seen as a "betrayal" of one's race or cultural identity). 

The idea has been that create some misplace notion of "parity", as if all students are somehow intellectually equal, or that one group may fail disproportionately to another group. As a result, everyone gets punished. 

 Instead, students should be allowed to advance based on their own ability. Meanwhile, slower students should be allowed to progress at their own pace. Perhaps more advanced students could serve as teaching aides and help individual students in exchange for extra credit.

Another big problem in many school systems are those who cause discipline problems. Typically these are academic failing students, many of whom are insecure emotionally, who are determined to cover up their shortcomings by trying to keep other students from learning. I guess that somehow makes them feel better about themselves. 

In recent years, we've seen an increase in students attacking teachers. Hand-in-glove with this, we've seen an attempt by public schools to engage in a form of appeasement by allowing students to take what classes they want, lowering standards and grading requirements, providing "cooling off" rooms, etc.

Meanwhile, teachers aren't suppose to strike back or defend themselves. At best, the student might be suspended for a brief period. In a few cases, the student might be arrested, but there is usually a lot of pressure brought to bear not to press charges out of concern that it may have a negative impact on the student. 

We certainly don't want to see them forced to take responsibility for their bad behavior now would we? As for suspended students, they end up getting what they want---out of school and free to go do whatever they want, which eventually turns out bad for them and occasionally for society too. Students with a repeating pattern of this type of behavior need to be dealt with in specific manner.

Instead of suspending these students, they need to be placed in special schools designed to modify their behavior. Here the rules have to be different. Emphasis has to be on engaging the student directly, and if necessary, responding to violent outbreaks with appropriate responses.

 Bullies (and these often tend to be bullies who haven't been taken down a pig or two previously), need to be confronted. In addition, these individuals need to be assigned to these type of schools for a minimum of a month---24/7. Their personal behavior and academic performance dictates the length of their stay. 

Parents and selected friends can visit, but they can't leave. It can be a tough punishment, but their behavior brought it on themselves and it's better that they learn to take responsibility for their action now than down the road and end up in prison or dead (as an aside, America leads the world by far in terms of percentage of imprisoned population).

Speaking of school, I also want to stress that while there is a strong emphasis on going to college, college is not only not for everyone, it's really not necessary for most jobs (especially if high school had properly prepared the individual for life after school). Not every manager or supervisor needs a four or six year degree. Trade and vocational schools are often a much better option than college. 

First off, they prepare individuals for entry into the workplace much faster than college. They are also far cheaper so you don't rack up the massive school debt, and you often can start working in the field of your choice while still in school. They pay is generally excellent, as are the benefits. For experienced individuals, it's usually a short step to go into business for yourself.

For those who do decided to go to college, it's important to think realistically about what you want to major in. It's nice (or idealistic) to think about getting a degree in gender or racial culture studies, or in some other obscure topic, but will it give you a job when you graduate? Will taking a course in "Star Wars vs Star Trek" actually help you land a job? Is the degree you end up with enough to pay off a $100,000+ school debt? You have to think in practical terms.

College is about learning to think more critically. It's about learning to appreciate different opinions without not necessarily having to agree with or feel threatened by those opinions. It's about being able to express your ideas in a well thought out and reasoned manner. It's about using reason and logic to analysis an argument or situation. 

College is not about shouting down those you disagree with. It's not about forcing them off the stage or destroying property when you don't get your way. It's not about having a "safe space", nor is it about getting coddled or trying to make everyone happy. It about making an informed and well reasoned argument in a respectful manner using critical thinking skills. If you can't do that, then you need to consider what you need to do grow up emotionally. Perhaps you should consider a stint in the military. I guarantee you'll grow up there in a hurry.

So, with that said, how does America stack up academically compared with the rest of the world? According to the site "Ranking America", their latest study from 2015 ranks American public schools 14th overall academically in the world. South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Finland, in that order, make up the top five. 

The best performing school systems in America, Vermont and Massachusetts, can't compete with students in countries like Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, or Singapore in subjects like math and science.

Speaking of science, the school systems in Alabama and Mississippi are closer in academic performance to countries like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, while the school system in the District of Columbia is the academic equivalent of Bahrain. Overall, America's academic performance among its public school resemble those of third world countries. 

Countries like China, India, Pakistan, and Japan far out produce the US in graduates with medicine, engineering, robotics, and computer science degrees, especially at the masters and PhD levels. Ironically, the US spends more on education than most countries--6% of its gross domestic product---which is on par with countries like Ghana, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, and Morocco. Interestingly, it's also far more than countries like Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, who outperform us, spend.

Finally, in terms of teacher pay, apparently US teachers are about average in terms of pay with an average of $43,600 per year for a primary school years with 15 years of experience compared to an average of around $39,000 for other teachers in economically developed nations with the same experience. 

Thus, American school teachers are paid roughly equivalent to teachers in the UK, Australia, and Holland. As an aside, the highest paid teachers are those in countries like Luxembourg, South Korea, Switzerland, and Germany.

However, American school teachers spend a lot more time teaching compared to other teachers around the world. US teachers spend, on average, 1089 hours teaching compared to 794 hours in primary education, 709 hours in lower secondary education, and 653 hours in upper secondary education. 

Thus, it appears that while US teachers spend more time actually teaching, they aren't equally compensated for the time they spend in the classroom. Of course, I should point that it's not uncommon for teachers to pay for school supplies out of their own pockets to make up for shortfalls in schools budgets (which often ends up in the salaries of administrators, who tend to be to numerous for most school systems).

So, there you have it. This is the state of American schools, where bright students often find themselves held back in underperforming schools; where even average students find the academic process disruptive and their academic opportunities short changed. In college, students aren't properly taught critical thinking skills and instead of being taught the true meaning of liberal arts, they become narrow minded and provincial. 

 Our teachers aren't paid bad, but neither are they paid for the work they actually do. We are continuing with our downward trend academically compared to the rest of the world, which may soon render us just another second tier nation with large swath with more in common with third world nations than not; a faded world power like so many who came before us. Meanwhile, America's military budget, at the direction of the ruling Oligarchy, continues to expand at the expense of our infrastructure, and ultimately, our children. The only real question is what are we going to do about it?

 If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!  

Estimated probability of competing in professional athletics


A Long Shot: More than three-quarters of men's Division I basketball players think they will play professionally, but less than 2 percent make it to the NBA


Here's How American Stack Up Against Students In Other Countries


America's Top States For Business 2017

The Two Faces of Racism

I think any who knows me or is a regular reader of A/O knows that I couldn't care less about someone's race, income level, gender or sexual orientation, or religion. My interest is on social justice and non-partisanship. I view people on how they treat me and how they treat others. 

People need to accept responsibility for their actions and stop blaming others or using social crutches when things don't go their way By the same token, however, I never gave anyone a pass based on their race or whatever. You are what you are and that's it as far as I'm concerned. 

Nevertheless, we seem to hear the term "racist" or "racism" bandied around a lot these days (including reverse racism). It seems that in most cases it's coming from Blacks or Hispanics and is being aimed at primarily whites. In a few cases, I think it may be justified. There are some examples of subtle and not to subtle racism taking place, however, it appears that more often than not the term is being used as some form of chastisement for disagreeing with someone of color; of not giving them what they think they're entitled to, and that's wrong. It cheapens the impact of the term. Back in the 60's and 70's, a term for narrow mindedness was to call someone a "conservative". By the 1980's, being called a "liberal" was seen as derogatory.

Now, I do want to clear something up before going any further. There is such a thing as institutional racism, which is the more subtle and perhaps sinister form of racism. This type of racism has manifested itself in several well publicized events involving the police where a Black individual was shot and killed (Tamir Rice comes to mind). We've all seen the video where Eric Garner was choked to death by a New York City cop or Walter Scott, the unarmed Black male repeatedly shot in the back while he ran away. 

The South Carolina police officer claimed he feared for their life. There has been numerous other examples. In some instances, the officer or officers are usually found innocent when they clearly weren't. In several incidents, the officer was justified in taking the kill shot since their life was obviously threatened. In most of these events, as tragic as they were, these events are usually followed by looting, robbery, arson, and attempted assaults on police officers. Most of us are taught that if an cop tells you to stop and put your hands up, that's what you do. Yet you'll hear others say that because Blacks are taught to fear police, they should be treated differently if they decide to run.

I fail to see how any of that made the situation better. Some apologists will say that the community was "angry" and "had" to act out. Really? You mean to tell me that the answer to violence was more violence and destruction of property and robbing neighbors? You'll note that rarely, in similar circumstances, do you see the same "torch and trash" mentality among whites or Asian (or for that matter, generally among most Hispanics). 

Therefore, if that is indeed the case, then we have not a racial problem but a psychological group problem that either willfully ignores right from wrong or is mentally incapable of understanding the difference between the two, and that would likely lead to a societal failure; the treatment of which I could only guess at but assume it would result in the wholesale drugging of an entire population. Perhaps the problem stems from broken homes without a strong supportive male presence. 

Perhaps it also results in behavioral problems in school where defying authority is accepted as the norm (the argument being that black students, especially males, resent non-white authority figures yet the behavior remains the same in schools where the facility is predominately black as well). Some add that there is a "hopelessness" anticipated upon graduation due to low GPAs and students being "flunked forward", which might be true (unfortunately , however, academic performance is usually repeatedly lowered across the board to artificially inflate the passing grades).

 
However, academic performance is often seen as "acting white" or "acting Asian" and thus, strongly discouraged by peer pressure. As with any single parent families, the responsibility for the welfare of the child or children falls on the mother (if she's even present in their lives) or their extend families such as grandparents, cousins, or even foster homes. 

As such, they rarely if ever are able to take an active role in the child's academic or even social life. Well, obviously, poor academic performance coupled with poor discipline (and the lack of ability to administer any discipline) is a near guarantee for life failure (and let's face it, not everyone is going to be a sports star, especially if they can barely spell their name). The result is usually a quick track to jail or gangs and both generally lead to the cemetery. The Black community has always had an unusual attachment to their churches, which seems to attempt to fill the broken home void and instill a sense of self-worth and pride, community, and values; all good things in my opinion, but nothing beats a stable home life.

Schools exist to teach. Not to serve as glorified babysitters. Teachers should not fear being attacked, nor should they be forced to pass failing students to meet some mandated quotas. Control of academics should be at the local level and taken out the hands of the federal government as much as possible. 

Discipline must be restore, either with the parent's permission or the parent's direct intervention. No exceptions. Students should be required to meet minimum academic performances before any extracurricular activities are allow, especially sports. We must stop dumbing down academics and trying to make everyone fit into one neat peg hole.

Those who excel should be encouraged and provided with the resources to help them achieve their potential regardless of race or any other factor (those who attempt to bully students of color for "acting white" or acting Asian" should be dealt with severely. No one should fear having their future taken away from them). All students should be required to take some form of art, music or theater. 

All students should be required to take a civics class and perform at least six academic hours of community service. Lastly, we need to return to trade and vocational education since not everyone needs to attend college but everyone does need a professional skill. In fact, there are shortages in the trades and most pay quite well. Technical knowledge is easily transferable, so no matter where you live there will likely be a demand for your skills. I think once we can improve the academic and self-worth side, I think we can go a long way to eliminating the sense of inferiority which leads some to claim "racism" and the need for violence.

On the institutional side, we need to take serious steps to eliminate the internal protection of those who engage in subtle racism and, to be blunt, bad cops. Right now we seem to have a system which protects and hides bad officers from punishment the same way the Catholic Church has done for pedophiles (another hideous crime which must be stopped). I understand the need for police officers to protect one another (they have this "us against the world" attitude and that most of us are simply criminals they haven't caught yet). T

he point is, bad behavior reflects on the good guys just as much as it reflects on the bad ones and on the judicial system. True, if convicted, these officers are likely to be placed in the same prison system they helped to send the thugs. Frankly, I think that's just too bad. They should have thought about that before they acted irresponsibly. For a society to function properly, there has to be a sense of trust in those whose jobs are to provide safety and administer justice. 

Right now, that's lacking in this country. We have a level of confidence in the federal government which would have triggered an all out revolution in just about any other country several times over (and I have no doubt that we'll have one yet). However, until the system steps up to plate and takes responsibility for the actions of those it hires, the situation will continue to get worse, and that means more people will disregard the police, the courts, and take matters into their own hands, which includes shooting cops and judges if that's the only way they see justice happening.

Lastly, the corporate media. After watching the actions of the corporate media---the so-called "liberal" and "conservative"---it's clear they have "crapped in their own nests". The corporate media, which has long been biased, dropped all pretenses this last go around and openly endorsed Democrat Hillary Clinton. They did everything they could to distract, bury, distort, and misdirect. 

Right now they're towing the "Russian's did it" line to cover for Hillary's loss as the result of her corruption uncovered by WikiLeaks. and other sources (including the use of unsecured servers, cell phones, etc). They are trying to find a reason to blame the Russians for "interfering" with our election process, yet we---the American People---know fully good and well that the Russians weren't involved. 

We have the same intelligence agencies who claimed the Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, claiming that the Russians somehow hack through the security wall of the NSA, FBL, DIA, CIA, and Homeland Security, just to see Hillary defeated when we've witnessed Hillary, Debbie Wassermann-Schultz of the DNC caught red-handed fixing the Democratic Primary to ensure Bernie Sanders lost, and then rigging the Democratic Convention to keep Sander's supporters out.

So, when it comes to "racism", we see these same corporate media types trot out the same race baiters and show the same cherry picked and heavily edited footage. In fact, under President Obama, there has been as greater racial divide in this country since the early 1960's. In fact, there seems to be an underlining theme to promote as much division between Americans as possible, be it race, religion, illegal immigration, importing unvetted Muslims from hostile countries, attempts to rekindle a cold war with Russia, issues involving sexual orientation, and so forth. 

 If you look back to the 1980's for instance, you'll note that issues involving race were pretty rare. In fact, there was a significant rise in inter-racial relationships that was unprecedented. Inter-racial or minority dominated TV shows were commonplace and no one cared! Now, it seems like some folks are wearing it on their sleeves and some Black Congressmen and Senators are again talking about Civil War reparations, which would go a long way to raising racial tensions.

Personally, I think this is intentional. As most Americans know by now, America is an oligarchy. We are headed headlong into a neo-fascist police state. The State needs for us to feel insecure. They need for us to demand protection, and they will be all to happy to provide it...in exchange for our personal freedom and greater control over our lives. 

In order to be successful, they need for us to be at each other's throats. They need for violence and uncertainty to reign, and they requires that we be divided; they we be afraid. It also requires that we be unarmed and unable to defend ourselves. As long as we fear or hate each other, we are not looking at them. We are not watching or questioning our freedoms vanishing in the name of "security" or "protection". After all, we were the ones who "demanded" it. 

We need to acknowledge that we are being manipulated and intentionally divided. The government is not our own. It has been usurped by a corporate elite---the 1% if you will. We must ignore the race baiters. We must demand that those who do engage in legitimate hate crimes, regardless of their race, orientation or religion, be punished. The threat to our liberty won't coming thundering. It will be subtle and it will be cloaked in good intentions.


If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 


Obama Has Produced More Racism Than 200 Years of Slavery


Socialist Leader: Racism Is Worse Under Obama


Deep Racial Divide Remains Under Obama


Obama Scolded for 'Divisive' Speech on Racism to Blacks

Immigration and Outcomes

Everyone knows that the US has an illegal immigration problem. We've had one since at least the Ronald Reagan Presidency. Estimates range from 12 million all the way up to 20 million individuals living in this country illegally. However, no one in Washington seems to care, We used to get empty promises of a border fence; of more border patrol and ICE presence; of more severe penalties for businesses, churches and the like who willfully broke the law. Now, politicians in Washington don't even have the decency to look into the camera and openly lie to us. They simply don't care what you and I think or want. The simple matter is that their corporate masters want cheaper labor. That means that they need more workers willing to accepting low paying jobs with little or no benefits. The more potential workers, the lower wages (and benefits) go. It's basic economics 101: supply and demand.

Many labor unions support illegal immigration too, not because they necessarily care about the welfare of these individuals but because they hope these largely low or no skill workers will accept the menial low paying jobs which is mostly all the private sector unions have left to offer since many of the good paying jobs have been outsourced overseas where companies can pay employees less...much less. Nevertheless, these low skilled and often poorly educated employees with still have to pay union dues out of their meager salaries, which will bolster the faltering union treasuries. Again, basic economics.

Many low wage service jobs like those found in the fast food industry, have been demanding dramatic pay increase; from current wages just over minimum wage to new $15 dollar an hour wages. That's all well and good. I hope they get them. I really do, however, what most people tend to forget is that these jobs were created to be primarily part-time and never as jobs to solely support households, but with the exporting of the majority of manufacturing jobs overseas, these have become the "go to" jobs for the low skilled and/or low educated individual, especially for single parents.

Corporations have, of course, attempted to justify the exporting of jobs overseas as a means to compete in global markets. Corporations have long maintained that they're unable to compete against other businesses that pay employees a few dollars or even cents on the hour, and usually with no benefits (including vacations). Often employees are required to work in unsafe or unhealthy work conditions over long hours, few if any breaks, and with machinery that's unsafe. Thus it's not uncommon for employees to be injured at work due to the equipment failure and/or exhaustion. However, since many countries lack anything similar to an OSHEA and with few (if any) employee rights, they have little recourse. A few companies have even exported jobs to countries actually employ prison or child labor (which is not uncommon in the garment or shoe industries for instance).

Nevertheless, US corporations are able to ship foreign products goods back into the United States while paying little if any tariffs since they maintain a presence here in the States. As a result, not only are American companies able to reduce employee costs, as well as avoiding expenditures on proper equipment requirements or meeting proper health or safety guidelines, they can also avoid any importation penalties. As a result, many US corporations are reaping a financial windfall. Is it any wonder CEOs making on average up to 400% percent more than their average employee? The result is, as alluded to above, those seeking employment, especially those without a college or technical education, are forced to accept whatever job they can find. In addition, there are the tax breaks and taxpayer based incentives commonly known as "corporate welfare". Frankly, who can blame them for attempting to force employers to pay out more in wages? After all, it's not like you can export service jobs right? Well, perhaps.

What many haven't counted on is that low wage employers do have a few recourses available. They can cut back on the number of employees they hire and require existing employees to pick up the slack, including mandatory work on the holidays, longer hours and fewer benefits (especially healthcare). Another recourse is automation. Some fast food restaurants for instance have begun experimenting with automated ordering devises that eliminates order takers (purchases are made with debit or credit cards, so there's no cash transactions). So, instead of four or five employees working the counter, maybe only one or two will be needed. In addition, owners can and most likely will raise the costs of their products a few cents. Thus while they may pay their employees more, they will be paying fewer of them while the public will have to pay more for the same items.

As a result of all this, there will be an increase in competition for the decreasing availability of jobs, and with more demand than supply, wages and/or benefits will decrease. What happens to those unable to find jobs? Many will fall through the cracks into a economic netherworld. Some will eke out a living somewhere between the murky recesses of part time jobs, the black or gray marketplace of cash only transactions or barter, a loose public safety net or maybe low level crime, while for others, especially the young, they can be sure there will always be a war or conflict somewhere for the control of resources or markets to help eliminate any "excess" population.

So what can be done? Fortunately there are options available if we have enough political will. One solution would be to impose tariffs on any imports, be it foreign or domestic. We could also eliminate any types of "corporate welfare" or taxpayer based assistance available to companies with manufacturing centers overseas who use those to ship back completed products to the US. We could also reform our labor laws to permit employees in foreign nations hired overseas by US based companies to be eligible to join US labor unions. Thus, for instances, employees of Ford in, let's say, Mexico or China, would be allowed to join the UAW. This would put them on the same footing as their domestic counterparts and create a more balanced playing field when it comes time for negotiating labor contracts (wages would, of course, be adjusted based the local economy). In addition, US companies who relocate US facilities overseas would be barred for obtaining government contracts, including their subsidiaries.

There is also the matter of illegal immigration. It's obviously going to be difficult at best to remove 12 million illegal immigrants. Building a wall, while a good (and expensive) symbolic statement will, in fact, dissuade very few individuals from crossing illegally into America. Most will simply bypass the wall and enter through other means, including tunnels or boats or find other entry points. Yes, we need to increase the ICE and border patrols agents along with giving them full authority to stop the flow using whatever means at their disposal up to and including direct confrontation. However, the only real solution will be by eliminating demand and that means strict and severe enforcement of penalties for anyone---individual, business, or religious institution---who aid or hire illegal immigrants without exception. Penalties should not be limited to just significant financial fines but also include suspending business licenses or loss of tax exempt status as well as possible imprisonment of key officers or officials for repeated offenses. Only by eliminating demand will we encourage illegal immigrants to return home. Lastly, we need to refuse the use of taxpayer based services to illegals and make English not just the "official" language of America but the only language used on government forms or other legal documents, as well as taught in US classrooms.

We also need to address our current educational standards. For instance, does every job actually require a college education? Personally, I don't think so. In fact, I would say that only a small percentage of jobs should require an applicant having a four or six year degree. In most cases, a solid high school education would be enough while for other jobs, a one or two year technical or trade school degree is more than adequate, and let's face it, not everyone is college material.

Germany, one of the world's top manufactures and known for their outstanding educational system, has a two tier system based on students academic performance, aptitude, and interests. The first track takes applicants toward "real world" jobs such as manufacturing (which also utilizes a two prong approach of academics and apprenticeship programs), the trades, or business (such as accounting, bookkeeping or sales), while the second track encourages qualified students on to higher education where they may pursue careers in law, medicine, engineering, and so forth. I should also point out that there is absolutely no stigma associated with individuals pursing the first approach since the system recognizes that each student is different, with different skills, talents, and abilities. In addition, no student is "locked in" and may pursue whichever track they're most interested in.

Of course, this type of system requires students who are dedicated and disciplined. Something which are lacking in American schools, but is still within the realm of possibility. US schools did, at one time, produce high quality students, especially in the years before the 1970's when a number of ill conceived "reforms" where introduced. If you have any doubts, feel free to check out any school book used in the 1940's, 1950's or even the 1960's for example (and remember, they didn't have computers or calculators) and see for yourself. Also, the US school system made good use of technical and trade schools which provided students with business ready skills to take them from graduation straight into the workforce without any significance additional training (and certainly with no remedial reading, grammar or math courses).

We must understand and accept that the economy is now global. Not only do companies compete on a global scale, but for a significant number of individuals, they too compete with others for jobs on a global scale. Furthermore, the United States is no longer a democratic republic. It's now a oligarchy, controlled in large part by global corporations who view nations as mere marketplaces to be exploited for their bottom line. Some see employees as necessary liabilities instead of the assets they really are. Capitalism, by its very nature, must consume and expand to survive. That's simply the nature of the beast. It has an insatiable appetite. However, if it continues to reduce wages and benefits in its pursuit of market share, it will reach the point where it's unable to sell its products because there will be too few people able to afford them. Therefore, a balance will have to be reached, and soon, which allows economies and wages to grow and expand while satisfying shareholders and consumers alike. At present, only a tiny percentage controls the overwhelming majority of the wealth, both in the United States and abroad. That leaves an underclass which will grow more restless and more desperate. And that is an dangerous combination.


The Pros and Cons of Raising the Minimum Wage
http://wheniwork.com/blog/the-pros-and-cons-of-raising-the-minimum-wage/


Increasing the Minimum Wage: Pros & Cons
http://www.salary.com/increasing-the-minimum-wage-pros-cons/


These CEOs Make A Lot More Money Than Their Workers
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-13/these-ceos-make-the-most-money-compared-with-their-workers


How much more do CEOs make compared to their employees?
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ceo-pay-preview-20150805-story.html