HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992 15:59:56 GMT

In article <21651@rpp386.lonestar.org>, jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> 	Yes or no, teachers are underpaid?
 
I don't think that statement makes any sense.  You set your price and you
get what you pay for.  The question isn't whether "teachers are
underpaid", but whether you could attract better teachers with higher pay.
The answer is obviously yes.  The second question is whether the increase
in teacher quality is worth the added expense.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: Pro-life vs. Pro-abortion
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 15:20:28 GMT
Reply-To: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstation Division, Austin, TX

In article <21637@rpp386.lonestar.org>, jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
|> "Pain" can be measured by the stress that it induces.  If I subject
|> you to some "pain", your body will respond in a well-understood
|> manner.

The problem with pain is that it's difficult to distinguish
pain-induced stress from other kinds of stress responses.  In fact
"pain" itself is difficult to define analytically.  It's more like, "I
know it when I feel it".

|>                                            The proof that a fetus
|> can feel "pain" would be in seeing what the secondary effects are.
|> I believe this has been done.  I do know that fetuses are regularly
|> injured in the presence of a doctor if only because of accidents
|> during amneocentisis(sp).  The medical profession should understand
|> what happens in such circumstances quite well.

You'd think so, but there is much controversy in the medical
community, which indicates that it's not so cut and dried.  "Pain" is
sort of a value judgement for an observer.  When does "reaction to
stimulus" start to become "pain"?  If I hit the space just under your
knee with a rubber mallet, your leg will react by kicking forward, but
most people don't describe this as painful.  Unfortunately we can't
ask the fetus if "this hurts", so the controversy rages on.

NB:  I think whether a fetus feels pain or not is irrelevant to the
abortion issue, but it's interesting from an academic standpoint.   

-- 
John Iacoletti       IBM AWD Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"It takes a big man to cry.  And it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man."
                                                              -- Jack Handey
From: gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Prove it!
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 92 21:55:45 CDT
Organization: Ham Radio Operator, Houston Tex.

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

> In <ZF6VRB3w164w@n5abi.hou.tx.us> gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy) write
> 
> >jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> 
> >> In article <1992Sep28.212621.26756@NeoSoft.com> rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mul
> >> >	Furthermore, why not let John's style work against him, as it should?
> >> 
> >> You mean, my style of documenting what I post?  Or my style of not having
> >> any tolerance for idiots?  I'm not sure which style you are referring to
> >> and why that style will, or should, work against me ...
> 
> > I susect only you, John, and perhaps Fred, failed to understand 
> >this comment.
> 
> Oh, I understand it fine.  I think we just disagree on whether or not
> people should ignore John's behaviour (thereby tacitly approving of
> it, or at least judging it 'acceptable') or whether he should be
> treated BY people AS he treats people.
> 
 It's not an "either/or" choice. My mother had a saying when I was 
a kid, and the concept applys here (though not the thought). She 
said "If you act like a kid, you'll be treated like a kid". No, 
I'am not saying John acts like a kid, it's the concept I'am
talking about. Your concept seems to be, "If you act like a kid,
I'll act like a kid". Mirroring behavior you disagree with makes 
no sense to me.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
          Gene Kennedy - Ham Radio Operator, N5ABI - 
                      gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Exculpatory, a nifty little word that meant confuse
           the hell out of the jurors. -- Stephen Coonts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: The blame game
Date: 5 Oct 1992 22:10:14 GMT
Distribution: usa,tx
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Oct5.093526.16799@montagar.com> davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey) writes:
>	You might have to.  You should be aware of lights-out operations and
>that most companies are buying software off-the-shelf.  With all the automated
>management going into systems, a system manager is little more than an
>operator.  Buying supported off-the-shelf software is cheaper than hiring a
>full time systems programmer.

Sorry. Minicomputer systems management != MVS systems programming. Not by a
long shot.

-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
    Vote for a REAL change on 3 November: Throw out the check-bouncing,
  tax-and-spend Democrat Congress! (obviously, not an opinion of UTHSCH)
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Taxes
Date: 29 Sep 92 00:18:50 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: tx
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Sep28.144246.15005@oakhill.sps.mot.com> jcj6@ace3.sps.mot.com (james berry) writes:
>Care to quote sources for this crap?

Census Bureau.  The numbers were posted here about 3 weeks back for
1977, 1981 and 1989, as I recall.  The bottom like was that the <$15K
group grow to about 20% during Carter and shrunk to about 18% during
Reagan.  The middle class got smaller (as I recall) with a very small
increase in upper class (about .1% or so).  The $15K to $50K group
shrunk under Carter.  The >$50K group grow slightly (previous remark)
under Carter, but grew dramatically under Reagan, taking some of the
middle bracket with it.

These were all adjusted for inflation and were posted in costant 1989
dollars.

>As far as MY interpretation of these numbers being patheic, all I can say is 
>I am not saying anything new or original.  Brenard Shaw, you know from the 
>last debate Chicken George attended, hosted a show last night that used the
>same source and came to the same conclusions.  It's sometimes hard to give
>up on an idea that seems to make sense, but for the sake of our children there
>is no choice.

If Bill Clinton is elected, we will see a depression the likes of which
this country has not seen since Herbert Hoover.  Bill Clinton literally
scares the shit out of me.  As the election has drawn closer, and the
likelihood of Bush being re-elected looks worse, I've been trying to
figure out how to prepare for that depression.  I honestly don't have a
clue.  The only good thing I can say is that we have a pretty low level
of total debt (mortage, etc. included) and I know from my great-grandfather
that people during the last depression who had few debts came out of it
pretty well.  Many businesses and investors are starting to get a clue as
to what a Clinton administration will do - some stocks have recently lost
more than 50% of their value because of Clinton's "promises".  The really
bad news is that a Clinton depression is very likely to be a self-fulfilling
prophecy - so many conservatives expect it to happen that it likely WILL
happen.  Clinton will help, of course - he'll raise taxes to the point that
conservatives will be pulling money out of taxable investments by the
trillions.  The only good news is that a Clinton inspired depression will
insure that no Democrat is elected to President for another 30 or 40 years.
This is all just speculation, but we'll see in another 2 or 3 years if it
is correct.

As for Bernard Shaw, I have zero respective for his abilities to analyze
anything.
-- 
John F. Haugh II           [  TSAKC  ]       UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151    [ DoF #17 ]            Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5828 alt.politics.clinton:8379
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Date: 4 Oct 92 15:17:49 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Oct4.061216.9949@nntp.uoregon.edu> eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson) writes:
>In article <21659@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>>You have that completely wrong.  It isn't my contention that teachers DO
>>flee the public school system, but rather that they SHOULD.  Leave the
>>dying carcass to the those that can't get jobs elsewheres.
>
>Why should a public school teacher, with the protections afforded
>government workers (not to mention the grievance process), go to work in an
>"employment at will" private school, where s/he can be fired for any reason
>or not reason, and where the pay is about 1/2 of public school pay?

Because if people like myself have our way, public schools will be
abolished.  The current public school system, as Curt Finch frequently
points out with his news service postings, is based on graft, bribery,
cronyism, and a slew of other unethical practices.

A =good= private school teacher is protected by the free-market.  If
you are a teacher and most of your students excell (see Jaime Escalante
for an example), no private school will ever dump you.  If they did,
all of the parents who want their kids to have the advantage a good
teacher conveys will find out where that teacher has gone and send
their kids there.

Excellence is its own form of protection.

>The economics work against the best going into private schools.  Here, and
>in Washington state, they are places teachers go on a temporary basis until
>they can get a good job--in a public school.  Many of my friends are
>teachers in the public schools.  (They are excellent in Eugene.)  They are
>committed and professional and very informed in their areas.  (I know
>because I work with them in community and church groups.)  As long as
>private schools treat their teachers like serfs (which they do here), no
>good teacher will look at them.

It sounds as though private schools are redundant in Eugene.  That is
quite certainly possible.  However, in many school districts the quality
of public education is so low that private schools are constantly in
need of new teachers.  The free-market system insures that teachers in
such an environment are treated well.

As for the economic issue, the simple truth is that virtually any
college educated person could be a school teacher in some subject or
another.  So long as that statement is true, the FREE-MARKET economics
of education will remain as they are.  Public schools pay more because
they have the force of law behind them to steal your tax dollars.  Take
that advantage away, and public schools won't be able to compete unless
they begin to deliver the goods.
-- 
John F. Haugh II           [  TSAKC  ]       UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151    [ DoF #17 ]            Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Why FICA is theft.
Date: 30 Sep 92 11:48:24 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin

johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>(Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com) writes:

>|> The geezers over 50 are the richest segment of the population by far.
>|> They're also getting the fattest government checks every month.  They
>|> have the largest most powerful lobby organization ever known to man.

>|> It's gotta stop.

>No way.  These "geezers" haven't been paying FICA tax at gunpoint all 
>these years so that you can say "sorry, we're going to give all of
>your money to some POOR geezers".  Yes, in reality FICA is welfare,


Their money was wasted long ago.  This OUR money we're talking about now.


>but it was sold to the American public as a government-run pension
>plan.  If you abolish the system, you damn well better refund the
>money. 


Sold to the American Public by whom.  By the government.  By "We the
people".  I.e. Sold to the American Public by the American Public.

Those rich geezers in question are exactly the ones who voted into
office the idiots who called it a "pension plan" while they lit cigars
with the money instead of saving it.

Demographics can prove that there is NO WAY our children will ever be
able to foot the bill when WE retire.  Therefore it has to stop someday
anyway.

Why not stop it now and avoid national bankruptcy and worldwide
economic chaos while we still have a chance to do so?


-- 
--
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |        Austin, TX
 -Public school administration has gone from 15% to 30% of expenses since 1960-
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5729 alt.politics.clinton:7648
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies (was: Re: Legalized Theft)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 00:03:57 GMT
 <18jtp4INNnas@agate.berkeley.edu> <21487@rpp386.lonestar.org> <1992Sep12.041559.13290@wri.com>
 <00716430161@elgamy.sccsi.com> <00716614550@elgamy.sccsi.com>
Distribution: world
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <00716614550@elgamy.sccsi.com>, Eric Lee Green writes:
> If you're pregnant and don't get proper prenatal care because you can't
> afford a doctor, you are ten times more likely to have a child who is
> either premature, low birth weight, has birth defects, or is mentally
> retarded. If you are pregnant and don't get proper medical care because you
> can't afford it, your children will be worse off for it.

This is irrelevant, at least in Dallas and Tarrant counties.  The county hospitals
provide free (or low cost for those that can pay something) pre-natal care.  I
suspect that most other counties do also.


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Lena Guerrero
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 00:13:44 GMT
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <lbis36INN1lu@boogie.cs.utexas.edu>, Janet M. Swisher writes:

> 
> What's the temperature at the Railroad Commission?
> 
> 
> 
> Minus one degree.
> 
> 
> ;-)
> 

Hey, that was a good line!


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
From: drichter@owlnet.rice.edu (David Richter)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Sex Education <fairly long, but good!>
Date: 3 Oct 92 23:44:43 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Rice University

In article <1992Sep23.152306.30091@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>In article <exuptr.656.716846590@exu.ericsson.se>, exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (Patrick Taylor) writes:
>|> In article <1992Sep16.225706.29013@watson.ibm.com> john@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>|> >Did it ever occur to you that they don't clean their rooms because
>|> >they don't want to?  
>|> 
>|> No kidding?
>
>Yes, no kidding.  You're using this as an example that teenagers don't
>make wise decisions, when in fact it IS a wise decision from their
>point of view.
>
>|  >Did you ever stop and think why it's so important
>|> >that they clean their rooms anyway? 
>|> 
>|> Oh, yes.  If you can't see that, then nevermind.  The whole discussion is 
>|> over your head.
>
>"If you don't know, then I'm not going to tell you.  NYAH NYAH NYAH"
>
>Now answer the question.  Why spend all that energy nagging a teenager
>about such trivia?  It's his room; let him decide how it looks.  If
>you don't like to look at it, close the door. 
>
>|> Do you have kids?
>
>Yes I have kids, but they're not old enough for this to be an issue. 
>Enlighten me O experienced one.

I don't have kids, but I was/am one of those teenagers.  While I certainly
cannot speak for everyone, I can (presumably) speak for myself and of
my own experiences.

Yes, I rarely cleaned my room.  But I could move around, I knew where 
everything was, and that's enough.  Isn't it?  If I knew that someone
would be visiting me, I might (ie: I would sometimes, for some people) 
_bother_ to clean up: consolidate the piles of papers on the floor, 
pull the covers up on the bed, put the laundry in the hamper, and,
if it needed it, vcacumn.  There were times when I would clean up
similarly for myself--_not_ because my parents would tell me to do so.
It just was a mess.  And they can live with it.  Eventually, they wisened
up and stopped nagging me.  Energy conservation looses to sheer inertia.

In my experience, then: Teens, by and large, will clean their rooms when
it suits them.  Threats about grounding, etc., have little effect.
(For some, carrying out those threats, however, can have an effect: on
both the parent-child relationship and the state of the room.  It's foolish
to assume that both effects are positive.)


dr
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Subject: Re: BullShit
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: tx
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992 01:49:46 GMT

In article <21646@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:

>I don't believe that anyone on the net has the slightest clue how much I
>actually make.  Some people may have been mislead to believe they know, but
>the truth is that my income is a well guarded secret.  I can safely tell you
>that it is between $40K and $250K.  If it is convenient, I'll tell you that
>I make $60K per year.  On the other hand, it might be convenient to tell you
>that I make $160K per year.  I might even tell you that my gross income for
>last year was $97,365.  But it wasn't, unless you believe the people I told
>that.

	Might I begin by calling attention to the subject? Might I 
continue by calling together a few loose ends? Fred says John skews
things. John says John does things. John says that, among those
things, he scours the beast for a kernel of truth. John says that,
in order to get "quality" posts from him, we must pay his salary.
John claims that, if it's convenient, he'll lie. I will infer that
we could pay him to tell the truth. (-: After all, he did scour the
beast. (-: John, you've been on the net too long, Im afraid. There are
those of us who are not yet jaded. From a friend- take a break. Come
back when you realize that this, and every activity you take part in
is real life. If you're a dickhead here, but a nice guy out there,
then you're part dickhead, part nice guy. And your faith hasn't yet
dealt with the consequences of your actions. It will. 

>It is interesting that you feel the need to bring my (supposed) income into
>this discussion since it has nothing to do with subject at hand.  Is there
>anything else that isn't you business that you'd like for me to lie to you
>about?

	Hmm. How 'bout: "It's none of your business."? I can read it
now: 
Person A:"How much do you make"?
JFH: "That's private. It's none of your business."

	Works for me. (-:


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"They say 'David, what shall I do? They wait for me in the hallway'.
I say 'Don't ask me- I don't know any hallways."- David Bowie, "Scary Monsters"
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
From: eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson)
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 06:12:16 GMT

In article <21659@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>
>You have that completely wrong.  It isn't my contention that teachers DO
>flee the public school system, but rather that they SHOULD.  Leave the
>dying carcass to the those that can't get jobs elsewheres.

Why should a public school teacher, with the protections afforded
government workers (not to mention the grievance process), go to work in an
"employment at will" private school, where s/he can be fired for any reason
or not reason, and where the pay is about 1/2 of public school pay?

The economics work against the best going into private schools.  Here, and
in Washington state, they are places teachers go on a temporary basis until
they can get a good job--in a public school.  Many of my friends are
teachers in the public schools.  (They are excellent in Eugene.)  They are
committed and professional and very informed in their areas.  (I know
because I work with them in community and church groups.)  As long as
private schools treat their teachers like serfs (which they do here), no
good teacher will look at them.



Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: jreese@NeoSoft.com (Jim Reese)
Subject: Re: Quality of Public Education.
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: tx
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1992 15:04:33 GMT

Here's an interesting observation on this issue...

Many say that low pay is the biggest problem faced by teachers today.
Is it?

My mother is an elementary school principal.  She maintains that the
biggest problem faced by administrators today is that the people who
interview for teaching jobs are under the mistaken impression that
they will only have to work nine months out of the year, and yet they
expect to be paid as well as someone who works twelve months.

While I certainly don't think that teachers are paid well enough, it's
interesting to me to hear my mother, who has been a teacher all her
life, say that money isn't the biggest problem.  She says that she's
tired of having to hire people who don't want to work.

It may be a Catch-22...


-- 
     Jim Reese, WD5IYT            | "you can predict what happens until the
  jreese@sugar.neosoft.com        |     signal leaves the antenna..."
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5681 alt.politics.clinton:7266
From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (Patrick Taylor)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: KILL THE RICH!
Date: 25 Sep 92 20:45:44 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson in North America.
              The opinions expressed are strictly those of the user and
              not necessarily those of Ericsson.

In article <1992Sep21.153800.26593@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>Well, the simple fact that you equate the necessity of things like
>food and housing with that of things like TVs shows how much we should
>listen to you.  I'll tell you what.  I won't watch TV for a week if
>you'll move outside and not eat for a week.  Is it a deal?

Hey, I'll throw in taking a bus to work!

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - Douglas Adams
  - Patrick Taylor                                       (Arthur Dent)
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    or exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org, exu.exuptr@memo.ericsson.se
Newsgroups: tx.politics