Re: The Captain Trips Anxiety thread
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:42 am
Capitalism, still great after ruining lives for all these centuries.
It's the sixth version of The Swamp. What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.sportsfrog.net/phpbb/
And no one is forcing you to go to school either. Teach them yourself.
Not sure if you are responding to me, I never said there isn't a real impact. And it's not just educational. My wife is doing a ton of work on this with the CDC and other entities... I'm fully aware of the negative impact.HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:19 am But you're wrong about the educational impact. It will be real. And you do compete with private school kids for opportunities and other states kids' and other countries kids. That's real. And there will be an impact on achievement and testing. I agree to some extent that you just adjust the pace of learning (way slower) and move on but don't dismiss those costs. They're real and will impact opportunities.
You can't just hire teachers right off the fucking street. In some states there is a teacher shortage. Here in Indiana, some districts have a hard enough time finding teachers during a "normal" school year. You think any Joe Schmoe could come in and start teaching 2nd graders or AP World History? Throw in they would be forced inside for up to 8 hours a day with little to no break with not just their classroom 1/2 full of kids, but all the other classes in the school. Plus all of the support staff that helps a school run.
Dude I'm scared or else I wouldn't bother debating. The question is how small are those concessions and what's the likelihood that it will impact someone else's life. It's makes no sense to be so binary with your analysis.BSF21 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:57 am It’s clear that several of us are wasting our time here. You can’t reason empathy into someone. You either got it or you don’t. I hope nothing unfortunate happens to you or your loved ones HC but I’m done trying to convince you that small concessions might be worth someone else’s life or livelihood.
What I see is your willingness to make that fear someone else’s problem. The concession is not forcing citizens who chose teaching as a profession to make a choice between providing for their families and greatly increasing their risk of exposure to something that has proven very deadly. There is no likelihood this is impact someone else’s life, it is a certainty. People will get sick and die due to these decisions. This is changing the terms of the deal after the fact and accepting that some loss of human life is ok for your life as you know it to “likely” go on unabated. Doctors and nurses made that choice. Cops make that choice. Johnnie made that choice. America’s educators, most of which are woefully under supported and underpaid did not. Binary works fine. Wait it out and greatly diminish potential risks or worry about Boeing’s share prices and whether or not little Suzy or Jimmy is going to get dinged for a 6 month gap of not being present in a classroom on their college applications.HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:00 pmDude I'm scared or else I wouldn't bother debating. The question is how small are those concessions and what's the likelihood that it will impact someone else's life. It's makes no sense to be so binary with your analysis.BSF21 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:57 am It’s clear that several of us are wasting our time here. You can’t reason empathy into someone. You either got it or you don’t. I hope nothing unfortunate happens to you or your loved ones HC but I’m done trying to convince you that small concessions might be worth someone else’s life or livelihood.
Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:21 pm There's a fundamental problem with the last 3 pages on this thread...
It is not Trump propaganda to suggest that there are very serious and potentially long-lasting public health issues with not having (especially young) students not able to go to school... Many children only receive a steady diet (breakfast and lunch) if they attend school. Many children with abusive or highly dysfunctional homes are only able to receive services and interventions by attending a school. There is a longer list, but I don't feel like typing it all out and I think a lot of you guys already know this.
To present the discussion as simply "it's not worth the risk, just so little Hakim or Susie doesn't fall behind academically" is not really what's up for debate here.
Citgo is right, this isn't a binary or B/W discussion.
The way I look at this is this: If you are a family that has the ability to keep your kid home, you are playing a part in potentially reducing the spread and hopefully keeping students, teacher and staff safe. So, while the hybrid models may suck for teachers from an administrative and quality of education standpoint, it's actually probably necessary to mitigate the OTHER potentially negative outcomes of keeping EVERYONE home.
I get that there's still a debate to be had on that point. But I think those other negative impacts are missing from this debate.
Every district I'm aware of is still providing meals and has through the summer.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:21 pmSo, while the hybrid models may [strikethrough]suck for[/strikethrough] kill teachers from an administrative and quality of education standpoint, it's actually probably necessary to mitigate the OTHER potentially negative outcomes of keeping EVERYONE home.
I will absolutely concede this point but will say that the fact that public education is systemically intertwined to a child’s nutrition and overall well-being is sickening and this is a great place to put a foot down and start reforms on this.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:21 pm There's a fundamental problem with the last 3 pages on this thread...
It is not Trump propaganda to suggest that there are very serious and potentially long-lasting public health issues with not having (especially young) students not able to go to school... Many children only receive a steady diet (breakfast and lunch) if they attend school. Many children with abusive or highly dysfunctional homes are only able to receive services and interventions by attending a school. There is a longer list, but I don't feel like typing it all out and I think a lot of you guys already know this.
EXACTLY MY POINTBSF21 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:27 pmI will absolutely concede this point but will say that the fact that public education is systemically intertwined to a child’s nutrition and overall well-being is sickening and this is a great place to put a foot down and start reforms on this.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:21 pm There's a fundamental problem with the last 3 pages on this thread...
It is not Trump propaganda to suggest that there are very serious and potentially long-lasting public health issues with not having (especially young) students not able to go to school... Many children only receive a steady diet (breakfast and lunch) if they attend school. Many children with abusive or highly dysfunctional homes are only able to receive services and interventions by attending a school. There is a longer list, but I don't feel like typing it all out and I think a lot of you guys already know this.
Even this doesn't work in a lot of cases. The schools my youngest go to all qualify for free breakfast/lunch for every student. The people in my neighborhood by an large don't need that I don't imagine. But you cross a road and it's lower income housing. But you are correct that I can be more comfortable saying that my kid can stay home and not fall behind too far which won't be the case for a lot of kids. That is definitely a more than fair point.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:24 pm Which brings up something I've been low key harping on: Decisions need to be made on a zip code by zip code basis. And where that's not feasible, at a minimum it should be each school district tailoring things to their reality.
This idea that some governor (or fucking moron president) can make some decree that stretches across massive disparities and socio-economic realities is just monumentally stupid.
Get off your high horse. Nobody else signed up for this shit either. But ask dsafe maybe he did. Teachers are fortunate enough to have been insulated for 6 months and are just now having to deal. Go try that conversation with a grocery clerk that makes way less than teachers.BSF21 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:23 pmWhat I see is your willingness to make that fear someone else’s problem. The concession is not forcing citizens who chose teaching as a profession to make a choice between providing for their families and greatly increasing their risk of exposure to something that has proven very deadly. There is no likelihood this is impact someone else’s life, it is a certainty. People will get sick and die due to these decisions. This is changing the terms of the deal after the fact and accepting that some loss of human life is ok for your life as you know it to “likely” go on unabated. Doctors and nurses made that choice. Cops make that choice. Johnnie made that choice. America’s educators, most of which are woefully under supported and underpaid did not. Binary works fine. Wait it out and greatly diminish potential risks or worry about Boeing’s share prices and whether or not little Suzy or Jimmy is going to get dinged for a 6 month gap of not being present in a classroom on their college applications.HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:00 pmDude I'm scared or else I wouldn't bother debating. The question is how small are those concessions and what's the likelihood that it will impact someone else's life. It's makes no sense to be so binary with your analysis.BSF21 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:57 am It’s clear that several of us are wasting our time here. You can’t reason empathy into someone. You either got it or you don’t. I hope nothing unfortunate happens to you or your loved ones HC but I’m done trying to convince you that small concessions might be worth someone else’s life or livelihood.
I cannot get into specifics, but I promise you I am going to be looked after to a much, much greater degree than anyone who goes back to any school. And I was leaning toward backing out of having signed up until it was made clear of how I was going to be looked after (original verbal sign-up date was in January, the reassurances did not come until May or early June and they were willing to be very generous with concessions if I wasn't comfortable with things).
Okay, I missed a few days over the past week or so.DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:04 amNot all conventions. In fact, there are some people who just this morning grabbed a box and threw some daily life items needed for three weeks of living in some sort of pseudo-furnished housing (toilet paper, paper towels, hand sanitizer, dish soap, etc.). And they have already bookmarked the website with the paperwork they will need to complete and present upon returning to their home state. Some even talked about how they're going to self-quarantine in their master bedroom and bath for two weeks after getting home, which will include the partner staying home moving some furniture from the master into the spare bedroom and other furniture into the master bedroom while the traveler is gone.
Between discussing this and some return-to-school plans, some of these people have had a really sensational morning.
Schools are still providing lunches and meals to those that were receiving them. Sure, those families had to make an effort to get to the high school to pick up food but it was there. Now other services, that is hard. But that isn't the schools sole responsibility. Those services are most likely provided by a third party, non-school entity. Those places should have plans in place to provide their services in another function, if possible.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:21 pm There's a fundamental problem with the last 3 pages on this thread...
It is not Trump propaganda to suggest that there are very serious and potentially long-lasting public health issues with not having (especially young) students not able to go to school... Many children only receive a steady diet (breakfast and lunch) if they attend school. Many children with abusive or highly dysfunctional homes are only able to receive services and interventions by attending a school. There is a longer list, but I don't feel like typing it all out and I think a lot of you guys already know this.
To present the discussion as simply "it's not worth the risk, just so little Hakim or Susie doesn't fall behind academically" is not really what's up for debate here.
Citgo is right, this isn't a binary or B/W discussion.
The way I look at this is this: If you are a family that has the ability to keep your kid home, you are playing a part in potentially reducing the spread and hopefully keeping students, teacher and staff safe. So, while the hybrid models may suck for teachers from an administrative and quality of education standpoint, it's actually probably necessary to mitigate the OTHER potentially negative outcomes of keeping EVERYONE home.
I get that there's still a debate to be had on that point. But I think those other negative impacts are missing from this debate.
Welp, shoulda workshopped harder.mister d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:58 pmI would never sign off on a shortened version. The first joke gets maybe 20% of the audience to laugh and then the second one makes that 20% stop but reels in a different small percentage who are part of the in-group who knew the first joke sucked and that's the joke.
here fucking here, trav.travzilla wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:04 pm I am a teacher, usually alternating between working full-time terms and as a sub. Our (Nova Scotia's) back to school plan was just announced this week - all students 100% back in the schools starting Sept 8th, with distancing in classrooms and masks in hallways. While many people, espcially in my poorer, "essential worker" heavy region, desperately need kids in school, I still hear a significant amount of comments that people are worried, thinking of homeschooling, etc. All of this in a province where Covid has for all intents and purposes been eradicated since early June (No known active cases, no positive tests for weeks, other than two people who travelled in from the states).
So while I feel fairly comfortable going back to work in a month, I have tried to think about what I would be feeling if I was in the same position in say Texas or California. As the situation appears now I think I would be of the mindset that working in a school would result in a near 100% chance of being infected, and I would then have to make some tough choices from there. I think I would probably opt out unless there was no other option. Almost certainly wouldn't continue to sub.
My response to Haul CItgo would be: yes, obivously everything in a society is a series of risk calculations and nothing is black and white. Long before covid I would probably still not teach in the states because of all the bullets flying around. But I feel like when you are talking about trade-offs (schooling is to critical therefore some teachers have to die), that comes across to me as the one being binary. Your arguements feel based in a defeatest mindset of "this is the way things are now so lets just adapt to the new reality", while I think everyone else is pulling their hair out at your posts because the obvious answer is to the risk calculation is to defeat the pandemic rather than to accept and live with it. Yes, a disease and a commute and playing softball are all risks to one extent or another, but not in an on/off state. If actions can be taken to mitigate risk (like say, not feeding an airborne pandemic by confining hundreds of thousands of people to cramped buildings) then a functioning society should look into that.
Yeah, my 17yo has been working this entire time, or at least since the initial six-week panic passed. I'd tell her no, but she'd do it anyway.rass wrote: ↑Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:49 amAlso, I was overruled/outvoted and my oldest will be starting her first job in the next week or two, working at an ice cream shop downtown. Their safety protocols, at least from a customer standpoint, seem very thorough and we've been comfortable getting ice cream there all summer long, but I would have preferred she wait until next year.