BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
It is Men, Not Women, who are Disadvantaged in our Society

The claim of women having a "disadvantaged status" is preposterous. A quick examination of our laws and societal practices shows that women have an incredibly advantaged status. They are not required to register for the draft[1], like men are. They have a government council devoted solely to them[2] [3], whereas men do not. They have female-only scholarships and grants[4], whereas men do not. They have shelters to escape domestic violence[5], whereas men do not. They are protected from circumcision by law[6], whereas men are not. They're names are hidden when they accuse others of several kinds of crimes, whereas men are not[7]. If anyone is disadvantaged, it's men. Men are 80% of suicides[8], 40% of colleges students[9], 40% of degree earners, 80% of the homeless[10], 80% of the layed off[11], and 92.7% of the job deaths[12]. Men are more likely to die from every major cause of death[13], and yet there exists no amount of medical funding and research for them, on par with that of women. And this is to say nothing, of the blatant discriminations, under the law, that men suffer, as mentioned above. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *1- The Selective Service Act (http://www.sss.gov/PDFs/MSSA-2003.pdf) *2- Executive Order 13506 (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-5802.pdf) *3- Executive Order 11126 (http://www.thecre.com/fedlaw/legal6/eo11126.htm) *4- Scholarships.com (http://www.scholarships.com/financial-aid/college-scholarships/scholarships-by-type/scholarships-for-women/scholarships-for-women.aspx) *5- The Violence Against Women Act (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=105_cong_bills&docid=f:h3514ih.txt.pdf) *6- The Federal Prohibition on Female Genital Mutilation Act (http://www.fgmnetwork.org/legisl/US/federal.html) *7- Rape Shield Law and Statutes (http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/vaw_rape_shield_laws_may_05.pdf) *8- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Center for Health Statistics (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus05.pdf) *9- National Center for Education Statistics (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/ch_3.asp) *10- National Center for Education Statistics (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_258.asp) *11- The Financial Times (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d28c79d6-2d11-11de-8710-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1) *12- The Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0238.pdf) *13- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics; Health, United States, 2003 with Chartbook on Trends in the Health of Americans, pages 136-139 (http://www.menshealthnetwork.org/library/TopCausesDeath2000.pdf)
Costs

Research done by researchers at the University of Minnesota in 2009 found that high school exams may reduce the amount of students that graduate from high school," but neither boost academic achievement nor improve graduates' post-high school labor market prospects"[[ University of Minnesota "The Price of High School Exit Exams" http://www1.umn.edu/umnnews/Feature_Stories2/The_price_of_high_school_exit_exams.html Accessed 28.08.2009]] Also according to research done by Cecelia Rouse every drop out costs the US as a whole an alleged approximate $260,000 on average due to the fact that they are earning less income then those that graduate and have lower employee productivity then those that graduate. Further more Rouse predicts that if high schools fail to graduate more students then the US could lose an estimated $3 trillion over the next decade [[ Alliance For Excellent Education http://www.all4ed.org/files/archive/publications/HighCost.pdf%5D%5D
Sets a critical level of knowledge of what a student should know

The exams provide a basic level of knowledge of what a student should know. If students do not know these things whether in maths or in English or other subjects then they are unlikely to suceed in any subject or profession. Thats why in some countries like Britain national curriculums were formed to ensure that students did not miss out on key areas. This helps in that if high amounts of people have knowledge in the critical areas then colleges, the armed forces and other institutions or businesses can spend less time or money in providing basic level tuition on skills that students should have learnt while in high school
Measures achievement relative to external standards

These exams enable comparison of students not just in school "relative to other students" but also outside the class and with other schools, in other areas such as states or districts . A analysis done by Costrell in 1994 of the ideal setting of education standards "concluded that more centralized standard-setting (state or national achievement exams) results in higher standards, higher achievement and higher social welfare than decentralized standard setting (such as teacher grading or school graduation requirements) [[ John Bishop "Do Curriculum-Based External Exit Exam Systems Enhance Student Achievement?" CPRE Research Report Series RR-40 http://www.cpre.org/images/stories/cpre_pdfs/rr40.pdf Accessed 28.08.2009]] Bishop also notes that if students aren't assessed externally then potential benefits of going for higher academic standards such as prospects for being accepted in to college are delayed. [[ John Bishop "Do Curriculum-Based External Exit Exam Systems Enhance Student Achievement?" CPRE Research Report Series RR-40 http://www.cpre.org/images/stories/cpre_pdfs/rr40.pdf Accessed 28.08.2009]]
Employers do not look for standardized test results

Employers may not look for those scores now but they soon will in the future partly to see whether a person has learned and can remember the basic elements that they need to remember under pressure from the subject they can study. This will be in order to avoid the costs both in manpower and money of training employees in core skills. [[ Jennifer Solis "What is the future for high school exit exams" Education News.org http://ednews.org/articles/what-is-the-future-for-high-school-exit-exam.html Accessed 26.08.2009]].
Too much focus on test prepation to the detriment of other skills

And just what is so bad about teaching to the test? If the tests measure things that need to be measured and that students need to learn and prepare for then that is not so necessarily a bad thing. In fact it could be benificial to the students themselves as they are prepared Some teachers integrate test preparation into the core curriculum of their classes for example like Matthew Matera [[Great Schools Staff "What's So Bad About Teaching to the Test" http://www.greatschools.net/students/academic-skills/teaching-to-the-test.gs?content=400&page=all%5D%5D So teaching to the test isn't necessarilly a bad thing. What is bad is when the states "shy away from performance based tests" which are in accurate and don't allow for a wider array of skills to be represented.
Re-entrenches disadvantage

As the data obtained about tests is over ten years old and tests have been reformatted and improved, the statistics may not be wholly accurate. The resolution does not give specific standards for the test. We could choose to improve the quality of the tests by including styles suited to a broader spectrum of people (multiple choice or short answer sections as well as essay or analysis sections). It is not having standardized tests alone that is discriminating against minorities, but it is the way the tests are created. Minorities are given the same public school opportunities as majorities, so they should be tested like everyone else. We should focus our efforts on assisting them to reach the necessary level rather than eliminate all testing. In 1999, Montgomery County, Maryland, discovered the way to eliminate effects of biased testing. ". . .closing the gaps in test performance is the best way to quell the argument over the place and purpose of standardized testing" [[Meserve, Jeanne. "Standardized Tests under Fire." CNN. June 15, 1999. 24 Sept., 2009. http://www.cnn.com/US/9906/15/standardized.tests/%5D%5D
Costs

The cost of drop outs isn't going to be helped by dropping exams. What is going to help is improved teaching methods, improved teachers and raising standards across the board . Drop outs may hurt the taxpayer but bad education in whatever subject and lack of skills costs more. Furthemore as Robert Heiny puts it "Schools receive on average about $10,000 per student annually. That's a lot of money per teacher, especially for a high school teacher responsible for five periods daily." So by extension it falls that exams are a natural cost as part of the way for schools to get more money[[ Robert W Heiny http://www.robertheiny.com/2006/09/hidden-costs-of-high-school-exit-exams.html%5D%5D
Sets a critical level of knowledge of what a student should know

But what exactly is a basic level of knowledge? Exit exams can be argued to overfocus on a specific core element of knowledge without looking at the outside areas. For example a Politics student might need basic maths skills such as statistics and Alegbra to use political analysis software such as SPSS (an improved version of Excel used by analysts as well as interpret data . However they'll also need other subjects like a good knowledge of history or maybe a media studies course that shows that they can interpret messages coming from different mediums and how they are created. In contrast while a person studying engineering might need good maths skills which the test can provide they'll also need to have a strong understanding of physics or engineering. The point is that for high school students particularly seniors a basic level of knowledge is relative to the subject that the person is interested in studying.
Holds schools accountable to their stakeholders

Just what exactly is accountable in this case? Is it accountable in the. Furthermore standardised tests only provide part of the full picture of what is happening in a school. For example what pupils are learning, what teaching methods are being used, how experienced or well trained the teachers are etc[[FAPE "Accountability and Testing: Standardized testing http://www.fapeonline.org/accountability-and-testing-standardized-testing.htm Accessed 28.08.86]]. They also don't account for the demographics of an area as some kids may have to travel long distances by bus or car to get to school. How can they be made out to be the way to hold schools accountable to their stakeholders when they only provide a small part of what's needed to judge a school[[Jennifer Solis "What is the future for high school exit exams" Education News.org http://ednews.org/articles/what-is-the-future-for-high-school-exit-exam.html%5D%5D
Measures achievement relative to external standards

The whole race to improve external standards is based on a massive misunderstanding that people fit in to the law of averages. Some people learn in certain areas quicker than other people. Other people don't learn so quickly. To create a single motion for "for all students in all subjects is to simultaneously tie together the laces of the fleet and kick out the crutches of the slow." [[ Andrew J Coulson "The Case Against National School Standards" Cato Institute http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10446%5D%5D Furthermore high outside standards have never been a major pushing factor behind human progress so the benefits that opposition describe are false. Human nature has been because of humans both male and female's nature to desire to push their knowledge to the limits and compete against each other to be the best or in high schools case valedictorian[[ Andrew J Coulson "The Case Against National School Standards" Cato Institute http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10446%5D%5D
Employers do not look for standardized test results

Graduation Tests don't demonstrate the capabilities whether in the form of knowledge or skills such as organization or time management. [[Fair Test "Why Graduation Tests/Exit Exams Fail to Add Value to High School Diplomas" Accessed 26.08.09http://www.fairtest.org/gradtestfactmay08]] A large number of employers don't look for standardized test results when it comes to employing high school graduates. Instead employers are more likely look for a portfolio of different work which provide a demonstration of students capabilities for instance in problem solving. [[ Fair Test "Why Graduation Tests/Exit Exams Fail to Add Value to High School Diplomas" The National Centre for Open and Fair Testing Accessed 26.08.09 http://www.fairtest.org/gradtestfactmay08%5D%5D
Too much focus on test prepation to the detriment of other skills

As a result of preparing for exams which could decide the outcome of whether a person goes to college or not teachers tend to "teach to the test" and not around it meaning that skills and subjects outside the test can become secondary to succeeding when they shouldn't be. Currently the Standardized Assessment Test I focuses on verbal and mathematical abilities rather then on the wider subjects meaning more emphasis is put on English and maths rather than on other subjects which deserve more attention. [[ Richard C Atkinson "Achievement Versus Aptitude Tests" http://www.ucop.edu/pres/speeches/achieve.htm%5D%5D Its rival exam the ACT tests scientific reasoning and a persons essay writing capabilities on a current affairs issue in addition to english and mathematics[[ ACT "The ACT Test" http://www.act.org/aap/%5D%5D but this does not cover the range of subjects. Admittedly the person who made the point about Atkinson was not arguing that all standardised tests should be abolished but it is a strong indicator against having standardised tests given the variety of professions that high school students may be looking to go in through.
Re-entrenches disadvantage

Standardised exams like the SAT hit minorities badly when they don't need it. For example African Americans amongst other minorities suffer. A glaring statistic from an analysis conducted in 1998 shows that "October 1998 SAT showed that out of 78 Verbal and 60 Math questions, there were no items on which African Americans or Chicanos outperformed Whites."[[Fair Test "10 Myths about the SATThe National Centre For Open and Fair Testing Accessed 28.08.09 "http://www.fairtest.org/10-myths-about-sat]] There is also a big gender bias too in certain tests like the SAT. Because it is a "fast-paced, multiple-choice test.. [it]rewards strategic guessing -- a non-academic skill at which males tend to excel" [[ Fair Test "10 Myths about the SAT" The National Centre For Open and Fair Testing Accessed 28.08.09 http://www.fairtest.org/10-myths-about-sat ]]
Children’s pocket money

There are a great many traditions in our society that we would lose out on if we had a cashless society; children’s pocket money being the one closest to the heart. Every adult remembers receiving their pocket money.. No matter how little the amount, to hold the cash in our hands at a young age was something of a joy. For the parents it was a bit of loose change in their pocket, but to the child it meant so much more. It made them feel independent. However, if we introduced a plastic society and did away with cash, what form of pocket money would we give our children? Surely we would not be as cold as to get them a plastic card and place money on their card for them. If we did, it would make the child not value money. They would begin to see it as numbers as opposed to something that has intrinsic value. For this very reason, cash will never become redundant in our society.
The recession has made us more wary of card payments

We have all seen the devastating effect that the recession has had on people’s lives. The media insist on talking about the recession time and time again. We all know the root cause of the recession and we are all very wary of it; debt. We are wary of mortgages, the prime cause of the recession, as it is a vast amount of debt owed to banks. We are wary now of credit cards as we have seen how the interest on those cards and keep accumulating until you owe more in debt than what you originally spent on the card. We are now also wary of our current accounts and their overdraft charges. With so many concerns revolving around, debt and plastic cards, Briton’s would be unlikely to warm to the idea of paying by card for everything. There is an element of unease. It would be all to easy to go into your overdraft if this were the main form of payment. At least with cash we can hold and see the money we have. We need people in Britain to start spending what they have and get out the idea of spending that which they do not have. Implementing a card system before this lesson is learnt would be disastrous.
If we move to a cashless society it will be the biggest mistake central planners ever made.

The absence of cash will encourage the barter system, and as every well educated human being knows the natural evolution of a barter system results in a commodity based currency which eventually will be gold and/or silver! Once people will get used to using gold and silver as mediums of exchange the demand for the precious metals will skyrocket and their price will go through the roof, and that is before people will start to look at them as a store of value. A cashless society will kill the fiat paper system http://israelfinancialexpert.blogspot.com/2010/01/if-we-move-to-cashless-society-it-will.html
Cheques are a thing of the past, direct debits have taken over

There is a natural, very human tendency to feel reassured by the presence of the physical. You own a car—you can see it, sit in it and drive it. You can also own a star—or at least register your name for a star on the star registry-- but chances are you won't be able to see it or touch it and someone else may own it too. Most people would prefer to use the former as collateral rather than the latter. Cashlessness requires that all of society’s stakeholders—organizations, financial institutions, governments and individuals—agree on and trust in digital currency. With the global meltdown and continuing fallout in the financial services industry, people are more comforted by the physical and less likely to put all of their confidence in banks and other financial institutions. In a February 2010 Wall Street Journal Opinion editorial, Harvard Law Professor and Head of the Congressional Oversight Panel Elizabeth Warren posited that "Banking is based on trust. The banks get our paychecks and hold our savings; they know where we spend our money and they keep it private. If we don't trust them, the whole system breaks down”. While according to a survey by Forrester Research, consumer trust in financial institutions is returning, banks have a long way to go. Payment processes are the first frontier of a cashless society and will also provide the spark for innovation. Because currently the infrastructure and technology required to support new payment technologies remains largely disconnected. As the world increasingly relies on digital currency, all banks—big and small—will have to evaluate and in some cases enhance their existing technology to reduce errors, increase efficiencies and add transparency. In many cases, the greatest push will be for systems that can deliver end-to-end visibility of the transaction process since accountability will be a major factor in any wide-spread cashless initiatives. Given the glacial pace of financial institutions and other key stakeholders to invest in the technology and infrastructure required to provide true transparency and end-to-end transaction visibility, it is highly unlikely that the world will rush to make a wholesale switch to digital currency any time soon.
Cash is expensive

Steve Perry, executive vice president of Visa Europe makes an astonishing claim that is backed up by a reasonable explanation. He argues that dealing in cash is expensive. It is for this reason that supermarkets operate Cash Back systems. They want to take the electronic payment and offload the cash onto the consumer. That way they have less money to safeguard over night and less money to count up when the store closes. [[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/6968143/Is-a-cashless-society-on-the-cards.html, 11 January 2010]] McKinsey, the consultants, estimated that each person pays £180 a year for the upkeep of cash in our economy[[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/6968143/Is-a-cashless-society-on-the-cards.html]]. Given the recession, surely we will do away with cash and put this money to better use than keeping an old tradition.
Do away with cash and you do away with crime

Other crimes such as card fraud, hacking, identity theft online and through fake cash machines will increase. On a base level, people can still steal your card and find out your PIN. Large drugs and arms deals are transacted using non-cash physical goods such as diamonds anyway. With risk of being over-cynical. the fact that it will make underhand dealings much more difficult is one reason why it is unlikely to happen - it will not be approved by large corporations and politicians who want to make the occasional underhand deal.
Some schools and businesses already take plastic or RFID chip implants only to transact

College campuses and businesses have been used to test the RFID environment for the last twenty years. It's all about conditioning the youth. Once conditioned, there is no complaining or rejection because the person hasn't known anything else. I am not in support for a cashless society but it is very clear that we are going the way of the RFID chip. Everyone will eventually have a global database assigned to them for all facets of life that will also contain an inventory. Anything found on a person that is not in their inventory will be fined or imprisoned. Underground trading will also force one to remain underground and apart from life as we know it now. Some assume that they will be able to reject the chip and still be able to have a job, home, car, school, and etc., but that can't happen. Hence, every home in the U.S. will have to be license and subjected to inspections and they are already marking the GPS location of every front door to every home.
The recession has made us more wary of card payments

Quite to the contrary a card payment system would actually help our economy. Card payments are estimated to be 50% quicker than cash payments. Therefore queue sizes would be halved and this would encourage people to go shopping on their high street. It is this convenient and fast method of payment that would entice customers to use their cards to pay. Whilst stores would have to pay to implement the appropriate card reading equipment, they would also see the benefits. Statistics show that people spend 20% more when paying by card than they would pay by cash[[http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-charts/economics/is-this-the-end-of-cash-as-we-know-it.aspx, 27 June 2007]]. It is easier for us to hand over a plastic card than it is to hand over notes and coins. Therefore this would help the recession. More money would be pummelled into retailers’ pockets, therefore they would hire more people and have the ability to raise wages to increase output. Far from being disastrous, this is desirable.
Charity collections would suffer to greatly

If we had no cash how would we be able to donate small amounts to charity. People often see it as too much money to sign up to direct debits. People do not want the commitment of having their cash being retracted out of their accounts every month on a set date. Instead, people prefer to make small regular donations when they pass a bucket in the street, or when they see a collection tin at a shopping counter. These charities do valuable work for our society and they will cease to work effectively if we do not use cash. This is not something that Britain would like to see happen. Therefore, it is very unlikely that Britain will abandon cash in favour of cards.