• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Progressive Grading in School

Would you support Progressive Grading?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No

    Votes: 21 100.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    21
Redress said:
What does this have to do with what I said? You are making the most tenuous of connections to try and show that two dissimilar things are the same. They are not, they are dissimilar. This is why you should not steal talking points from Beck.
Click to expand...

Not from Beck, it's from a blog on bias and exploring how people make mental short cuts to excuse their inconsistencies, without being able to articulate why these 2 things are different enough to dismiss it.

Overcoming Bias : Natural Hypocrisy

You're free to review his material, I found it interesting and thought to make it a poll.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Not from Beck, it's from a blog on bias and exploring how people make mental short cuts to excuse their inconsistencies, without being able to articulate why these 2 things are different enough to dismiss it.

Overcoming Bias : Natural Hypocrisy

You're free to review his material, I found it interesting and thought to make it a poll.
Click to expand...

The comparison comes from a Beck talking point from about a year ago that I suspect was re-aired this week. Your link actually misses the point too. If you where to ask people a question comparing any two highly dissimilar items why they are dissimilar, the normal reaction is to look at you funny and walk away in disgust. It's not a sign of being unable to articulate the reasoning, it's a sign that you are asking a stupid question.
 
Redress said:
The comparison comes from a Beck talking point from about a year ago that I suspect was re-aired this week. Your link actually misses the point too. If you where to ask people a question comparing any two highly dissimilar items why they are dissimilar, the normal reaction is to look at you funny and walk away in disgust. It's not a sign of being unable to articulate the reasoning, it's a sign that you are asking a stupid question.
Click to expand...

I don't watch Beck, not much TV at all, this was linked from another blog I read.

If it was so easy to dismiss, why walk away, why not thrash the person asking the question?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't watch Beck, not much TV at all, this was linked from another blog I read.

If it was so easy to dismiss, why walk away, why not thrash the person asking the question?
Click to expand...

Why don't we paint bricks the same color as airplanes since they can both fly through the sky?
 
Redress said:
Why don't we paint bricks the same color as airplanes since they can both fly through the sky?
Click to expand...

Both Grades and income are a means of social status, they are both achieved through some kind of productive work, they are both a measurement of achievement in work.

They are far more similar, than bricks and airplanes.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Not from Beck, it's from a blog on bias and exploring how people make mental short cuts to excuse their inconsistencies, without being able to articulate why these 2 things are different enough to dismiss it.

Overcoming Bias : Natural Hypocrisy

You're free to review his material, I found it interesting and thought to make it a poll.
Click to expand...

They are completely different, and I'll tell you why. Because grades are earned for the individual, to represent that individuals education, and are not meant to be taxed. It would be like downgrading a black belt in karate to a orange belt, so that the lower levels can also be a orange belt. ( I know nothing of karate so I just picked orange) Now with income it is different, you know it's going to be taxed, and how to effectively tax a population for the greater good is to tax the people who earn more, more. Because they can bear the burden, more than someone who doesn't make as much.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Both Grades and income are a means of social status, they are both achieved through some kind of productive work, they are both a measurement of achievement in work.

They are far more similar, than bricks and airplanes.
Click to expand...

Bricks and airplanes can fly through the air. Bricks and airplanes have weight. Bricks and airplanes are frequently seen at airports.
 
Your Star said:
It's a ridiculous concept.
Click to expand...

no it's not. those students have benefited more from the public resources (the school, classroom, teachers) that have been made available to all. they are the lucky ones, and can afford to lose some points to help to bring the less fortunate up. So maybe the Rhodes Scholars will have a slightly lower GPA - but they still be able to get into a far better college than the less-advantaged students will get into, and the reward of the trade is that our less-advantaged students will be able themselves to attend colleges, albiet more likely community colleges. College degrees have been demonstrated to better a person for life - including their income, personal stability, lower divorce rates... by spreading some of the grades around at the beginning, we can lift disadvantaged students up while not costing the uber-advantaged students anything they can't afford. Rhodes Scholars and Harvard Business Grads can afford some GPA points to help make our society more fair.

and if you don't agree with that - then you're a racist.

just sayin.
 
Last edited:
Your Star said:
They are completely different, and I'll tell you why. Because grades are earned for the individual, to represent that individuals education, and are not meant to be taxed. It would be like downgrading a black belt in karate to a orange belt, so that the lower levels can also be a orange belt. ( I know nothing of karate so I just picked orange) Now with income it is different, you know it's going to be taxed, and how to effectively tax a population for the greater good is to tax the people who earn more, more. Because they can bear the burden, more than someone who doesn't make as much.
Click to expand...

Knowing doesn't change anything.

Greater good is arguable.
It could be a great good to have people graduate, and that them feeling successful does more to help them, than actually making them go through the steps to complete it themselves.

Both are forms of taxing achievement, both can claimed to be done for the "greater good."
 
Redress said:
Bricks and airplanes can fly through the air. Bricks and airplanes have weight. Bricks and airplanes are frequently seen at airports.
Click to expand...

Except that bricks don't make airplanes, but good education can make a good career.
You don't build a plane out of bricks, nor do you build an airport out of airplanes.

Income and education have a high correlative connection.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Knowing doesn't change anything.

Greater good is arguable.
It could be a great good to have people graduate, and that them feeling successful does more to help them, than actually making them go through the steps to complete it themselves.

Both are forms of taxing achievement, both can claimed to be done for the "greater good."
Click to expand...

You don't get that a grade has no value if it is not representative of an education, and just giving them grades does not help them. Also it doesn't hurt taking away the grades of the kids who earned A's, because they have an education that is superior than what their grade shows, and they will have the education they earned, but the kids who were given the grades won't. And like I said, a high graduation % means jack **** if the kids are idiots. It is not for the greater good. Your analogy is weak, and there is no hypocrisy for not believing in this, and believing in a progressive tax system.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Except that bricks don't make airplanes, but good education can make a good career.
You don't build a plane out of bricks, nor do you build an airport out of airplanes.

Income and education have a high correlative connection.
Click to expand...

Education != grades

They are just as similar.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Except that bricks don't make airplanes, but good education can make a good career.
You don't build a plane out of bricks, nor do you build an airport out of airplanes.

Income and education have a high correlative connection.
Click to expand...

But they have not received a good education, you just gave them grades, and not given them an education.
 
Your Star said:
You don't get that a grade has no value if it is not representative of an education, and just giving them grades does not help them. Also it doesn't hurt taking away the grades of the kids who earned A's, because they have an education that is superior than what their grade shows, and they will have the education they earned, but the kids who were given the grades won't. And like I said, a high graduation % means jack **** if the kids are idiots. It is not for the greater good. Your analogy is weak, and there is no hypocrisy for not believing in this, and believing in a progressive tax system.
Click to expand...

Would you then agree, that everyone having X amount of dollars is meaningless, if they are unproductive?
 
Your Star said:
But they have not received a good education, you just gave them grades, and not given them an education.
Click to expand...

..... you do understand that you have just picked out the fatal flaw in the President's higher education policy?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Would you then agree, that everyone having X amount of dollars is meaningless, if they are unproductive?
Click to expand...

No because money can be spent, help the economy, help provide people with housing, food, clothing etc, make sure that people aren't living in favela like conditions, and provide people with the opportunity to improve their scenario. ( This is where the discussion could lead to reforming welfare, but that's not for this thread IMO) While grades mean nothing if they are not earned, because they do not represent an education. I repeat grades are NOTHING if they do not represent the education one has received.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Giving someone grades is very similar to giving someone money/services, that they haven't earned.

You aren't teaching anyone, anything.
Click to expand...

No it's not, money has value no matter how it is received, while grades do not have value unless you earn the education.
 
Your Star said:
No because money can be spent, help the economy, help provide people with housing, food, clothing etc, make sure that people aren't living in favela like conditions, and provide people with the opportunity to improve their scenario. ( This is where the discussion could lead to reforming welfare, but that's not for this thread IMO) While grades mean nothing if they are not earned, because they do not represent an education. I repeat grades are NOTHING if they do not represent the education one has received.
Click to expand...

And I fully agree.
Grades are meaningless if they aren't gotten through the means of actual learning.

Money can be spent but the thing that you keep separating is that in both situations, the person given the money or grades, hasn't earned it, hasn't learned how to earn it, they merely get it.

Which is not productive in either situation.
Helping the economy through progressive taxation in not actually helpful in the long run, it sends false signals to produce, when the consumption is artificial.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
And I fully agree.
Grades are meaningless if they aren't gotten through the means of actual learning.

Money can be spent but the thing that you keep separating is that in both situations, the person given the money or grades, hasn't earned it, hasn't learned how to earn it, they merely get it.

Which is not productive in either situation.
Helping the economy through progressive taxation in not actually helpful in the long run, it sends false signals to produce, when the consumption is artificial.
Click to expand...

And this is why I don't think just giving money to people is the best idea. But we should give them skills to earn money on their own. But this is a complaint on the welfare system, not progressive taxation.
 
Your Star said:
And this is why I don't think just giving money to people is the best idea. But we should give them skills to earn money on their own. But this is a complaint on the welfare system, not progressive taxation.
Click to expand...

That is typical excuse given for the need to progressively tax people.
That is how our system operates, it takes from the top and gives to the middle, with some going to the lower.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That is typical excuse given for the need to progressively tax people.
That is how our system operates, it takes from the top and gives to the middle, with some going to the lower.
Click to expand...

The rich can handle a bigger burden of tax, unlike the middle, and lower classes. That is why I support a progressive tax, and I think the government should offer programs for the lower classes, and under educated people to educate themselves, and raise their status in live. That is something I believe the government should do, because I think it is best for society.
 
Your Star said:
The rich can handle a bigger burden of tax, unlike the middle, and lower classes. That is why I support a progressive tax, and I think the government should offer programs for the lower classes, and under educated people to educate themselves, and raise their status in live. That is something I believe the government should do, because I think it is best for society.
Click to expand...

Your first statement isn't necessarily true though.

What if the "rich" derives his/her income from a business, with million dollar loans to pay, which started the business?

What if the middle class person is living with his/her parents and can afford to pay more?

These all encompassing statements don't measure up, they are like stereotypes, without context to each individual situation.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Your first statement isn't necessarily true though.

What if the "rich" derives his/her income from a business, with million dollar loans to pay, which started the business?

What if the middle class person is living with his/her parents and can afford to pay more?

These all encompassing statements don't measure up, they are like stereotypes, without context to each individual situation.
Click to expand...

It generally is true, and I'm assuming you are arguing for a flat tax, which would overwhelming put burden on the middle and lower classes.
 
Your Star said:
The rich can handle a bigger burden of tax, unlike the middle, and lower classes. That is why I support a progressive tax, and I think the government should offer programs for the lower classes, and under educated people to educate themselves, and raise their status in live. That is something I believe the government should do, because I think it is best for society.
Click to expand...


Look at the marginal value of income. A 100 dollars means more to a person that makes 30k vs. a person that makes 100k.

In the end the people that have more cheapen the value of money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom