Econ Lesson

I don't read Daily Kos. I hear it's ridiculously left-leaning website, so I've stayed away. I'm pretty left-leaning myself (OK, I'm way left of most people), but I take pause when dealing with blatant political bias. Much as I love Michael Moore's work, I don't trust its objectivity. Same goes for Daily Kos.

But someone on an unschooling message board posted a link to an essay on Daily Kos the other day. Thankfully, I took the time to follow the link and read the essay. Entitled Polyphemus, it's an excellent explanation of some of our country's economic history and how it relates to the global economy. Fascinating stuff. I'd comment more, but the author said it all.

Wow. Just... Wow.

I was just on my local paper's website, investigating rumors that Kendra Wilkinson (one of E!'s Girls Next Door) is not 3 miles from my house. Right. Now. I'm a fan of the show, but not in that gotta-see-the-star kind of way. I'm interested in seeing her simply to satisfy my own curiosity regarding her real level of intelligence (can anyone really be THAT stupid?!). I found nothing helpful about K-Dub's current or expected whereabouts, but I did come across this little nugget.

Go ahead and follow the link. I'll wait.

Now, I know there is a lot of controversy over Gardasil, the HPV vaccine by Merck. I know that a lot of parents are pissed that anyone would even suggest their daughter should be vaccinated against a sexually-transmitted disease at the age of eleven or twelve (yes, I'm sure your daughter will be safe, just as long as your head is completely covered with sand). I also know that the vaccine's potential side effects are scary, and that many people think it's totally unnecessary, even if it is effective. I get all of that.

But what pisses me off is that the government -- a group of thousands of bureaucrats, mind you -- have decided to play doctor. Apparently, the government has weighed the risks (and there are MAJOR risks with Gardasil) and has decided what's best for your child. No, it does not matter if you are uncomfortable with the risk factors; the government is comfy with the numbers, so too bad if your daughter is one of the casualties. Luckily, Virginia is the only state pompous enough to follow the federal government's recommendation and require vaccination of all girls aged twelve and up (and theoretically, this includes homeschoolers). And very luckily, Virginians have big enough mouths and screamed at their Representatives enough to belay that order for another two years.

Immigrants, however, are not so lucky. They are apparently required to get every vaccination on the fed's list of recommendations, whether any individual state agrees and requires the shots or not. And to add insult to injury, the immigrants have to pay for it themselves. The Land of the Free isn't free, my friends. You gotta be rich enough to get in, but then you're gonna be so poor you'll wish you lived in Mexico. I hear rent's cheap there.

No wonder so many immigrants are illegal.

The Great Depression, ver. 2.0 -- Part 2

To continue our history lesson about the Great Depression, we come now to FDR and his New Deal. As you read this, think about what Robert Kiyosaki (the Rich Dad, Poor Dad guy) would say. What we had then -- as now -- was a stop in the flow of money. What we need now -- as then -- is a way to get the cash moving again. The problem, as I see it, is that the federal government has been living the same way the individual American consumer has been living: on credit.

As a nation, we are in debt up to our eyeballs. Most middle class families now know what that eventually leads to... the proverbial shit hitting the fan. Now that we are, individually, experiencing a financial crisis, how long until we, as a country, suffer the same? 'Cause I hate to say it, folks, but this "crunch" we're feeling now is nothing compared with what's to come if our government doesn't do some serious debt consolidation.

But now read how our financial crisis was handled the first time around:


The Complete Book of United States History
[emphasis and comments mine]

Part 2: Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal

In 1932, it was again time for U.S. citizens to elect a president. The Republicans renominated Herbert Hoover, who had been president since the Great Depression began. The Democrats nominated Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the governor of New York.

Franklin Roosevelt felt that the national government had to start helping Americans who were hurt by the depression. He believed that "To ... unfortunate citizens, aid must be extended by the government -- not as a matter of charity but as a matter of social duty." He promised that if he were elected president, he would help end the depression with "a new deal for the American people."

The American people believed Franklin's promise of a "New Deal." They proved it by electing him president in 1932.

The New Deal: New Agencies, New Laws
March 4, 1933, was a chilly, somber day. It also was the day the Franklin Delano Roosevelt became president of the United States. First, he took the oath of office that every president takes. Then, he made his first speech as president. He said, "This great nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." He also told the American people "this is no unsolvable problem if we face it wisely and courageously."

President Roosevelt did not just talk about change. He acted, too. One of the first things he did was set up a series of new agencies. [someone read "Rich Dad, Poor Dad"] Each of these agencies helped to put unemployed Americans back to work.

One of the agencies President Roosevelt set up was the Works Progress Administration, the WPA. The WPA put the unemployed to work building and repairing bridges, roads, and public buildings; writing guidebooks; and creating murals. The Civilian Conservation Corps, the CCC, was another important agency. It put young, unmarried men to work planting trees, building forest trails, and doing other things that conserved the natural environment. Then, there was the National Youth Administration, the NYA. It offered part-time work for students so they would stay in school.

[I'm not sure that such a plan would work this time around; in fact, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't. How can the government pay workers if the government itself is in debt for over ten trillion dollars? And speaking of the national debt...Where the hell is that surplus we had eight years ago?!]

As you can see, many of the New Deal agencies came to be known by their initials. There were so many that President Roosevelt's government was sometimes called a "government by alphabet." Even the president himself became known as FDR.

Under President Roosevelt, the government also passed a series of laws to help the citizens especially hurt by the depression. For example, to help farmers keep their farms, the Agricultural Adjustment Act set prices on some farm products. To help homeowners keep their homes, the Home Owners Loan Act helped people pay their mortgages. [How were these programs financed? The money has to come from somewhere.]

The Social Security Act of 1935 was another very important new law. It provided the elderly with a monthly pension, or retirement income. It also gave money to the states to help them care for the homeless, the visually handicapped, and other needy Americans.

What the New Deal Did
The New Deal did not end unemployment in the country. Neither did it bring the depression to its knees. However, the New Deal did help Americans believe in America again. It showed that the government has a responsibility to help its citizens when its citizens need help.

The Great Depression ver 2.0 -- Part I

What do you remember about the Great Depression from school? It happened in the 1930's. People were out of work and homeless. Stock market traders killed themselves after losing fortunes. Kids worked horrible jobs to help the family get by. And that's... well, pretty much it, right?

McGraw-Hill has a textbook, readily available in bookstores, entitled "The Complete Book of United States History" ("for grades 3 to 5"). I would hardly call this a complete history -- only major events are covered, and then not very completely. Still, I like to pull from a wide variety of sources on such objective topics as history, and my boys can only handle textbook information in small doses. The book's come in handy.

I have always believed -- from the first whisperings about the mortgage industry -- that our country cannot possibly continue operating in the way it has without serious ramifications. Our citizens (a/k/a our consumers) cannot keep living off of credit without some kind of consequences at some point. Credit should be for unusual circumstances in which you need more money upfront than you can get, but that you can, over time, repay. It is not for paying bills or buying stuff that you can't outright afford.

Alas, the shit is hitting the fan for many Americans.

So, while looking through my "Complete History" last night, searching for information about Jamestown and the Revolutionary era to share with the boys, I glanced at the book's unit entitled "A Time of Troubles." I knew there were similarities between what caused the Great Depression and what our country is facing now, but I hadn't realized just how many similarities there are. It's frightening. What's more frightening is trying to envision John McCain coming up with a modern New Deal or WPA. But I digress.

I'm going to post the relevant text from the book here (in parts) with occasional personal comments. Mostly, though, I just want you to read what happened in the 20's and 30's. Think about it. Comment if you feel compelled, or post your opinions on your own blog -- but at least think about it.

The Complete Book of United States History
[comments and emphasis mine]
Unit 9: A Time of Troubles -- Part 1

"The Great Depression"
In every economy, there are good times and there are bad times. A good time is called a boom. A bad time is sometimes called a depression.

The 1920s seemed like a boom time. [like the 1990s and early 2000s] But, times were not booming for everyone. New inventions helped increase the amount farmers could produce. However, farmers produced so much, that the prices of some crops dropped. This meant that, although farmers produced more, they often made less money. So, many farmers did not share in the boom of the 1920s.

During the 1920s, some people made a lot of money, but most did not. Those who wanted to buy things began buying on credit. That is, they gave some money at the time they made the purchase. Then, every month, they made a payment until the item was paid for.

People also began spending a lot of money to buy stocks. A stock is a share in the ownership of a company. People watched as stock prices doubled during the 1920s. They wanted a share of that wealth, too. For the same reason, many banks and businesses also bought stocks during this time.

The Stock Market Crashes
In October 1929, stock prices began to drop. They dropped again and again. On October 24, 13 million shares of stock were sold. On October 29, 16 million shares changed hands. Many, many people wanted to sell their stocks, but few wanted to buy. This caused the prices of stocks to drop even more. People were forced to sell their stocks for much less than the original prices. The people, businesses, and banks with money invested in the stock market lost a fortune that October.

In addition, businesses now found that no one had money to buy their products. To stay in business, they often had to fire workers. Other businesses had to close. By 1933, almost one of every four American workers had no job. Many who were still employed had to take pay cuts or work fewer hours.

Banks, too, were in deep trouble. Many people who had borrowed money from the banks now couldn't pay back that money. In the next few years, thousands of banks were forced to close their doors. People who had accounts in those banks lost all their savings.

Usually, depressions last for a year or two. [That's comforting...] The depression that began in 1929 lasted for over a decade. [...but that's not.] In fact, it lasted so long and was so bad that to this day, it is known as the "Great Depression."

During the Great Depression, thousands of families lost their homes, because they couldn't make their mortgage payments. All over the country, shantytowns sprang up where people built shelters from flattened tin cans and cardboard or car bodies or anything else they could find. Many called these shack cities [like the one outside of Las Vegas] "Hoovervilles," because they felt that President Herbert Hoover was partly to blame for their condition. [Um, "Bushvilles?"]

People who didn't have jobs found there were no jobs to be had. Some became shoe shiners. Others sold apples on city streets. Still they starved. America was full of scenes such as the one a woman witnessed in a Chicago alley: "One vivid, gruesome moment of those dark days we shall never forget," she said. "We saw a crowd of some fifty men fighting over a barrel of garbage outside the back door of a restaurant. American citizens fighting for scraps of food like animals!"

The President Responds
Herbert Hoover was president during this time. He didn't believe the national government should help the people. He argued that in times like these, it was the responsibility of individuals to look after their neighbors. What individuals couldn't do, the local or state governments should do. The national government -- at least as long as Herbert Hoover was president -- would give aid only as a "last resort." According to the president, that time of "last resort" didn't come during his presidency. As a result, the national government offered little aid to the nation's overwhelmed states, cities, and citizens.

A Shameful Story

One of the darkest days of the Great Depression happened in Washington, D.C., near the Capitol Building, where Congress meets. In the summer of 1932, fifteen thousand World War I veterans straggled into Washington. They were part of perhaps two million men who had lost almost everything since the depression began.

As veterans of the war, they were holders of bonus certificates. These certificates were to mature, or reach their full worth, in 1945. The veterans hoped to talk Congress into letting the certificates mature in 1932.

Congress voted not to advance the bonus money. So, most of the veterans went back to their home states. About two thousand, though, stayed in Washington. Many of these men had no homes they could return to. They set up places to live in a shantytown they built near the Capitol Building.

President Hoover worried that the two thousand veterans in the nearby shantytown might become violent. Plus, their presence was embarrassing to him. So, he told the U.S. Army to make the veterans leave the area.

On July 28, 1932, Chief of Staff Douglas MacArthur ordered the Army to scatter the veterans. Troops armed with tear gas, tanks, guns, and bayonets forced out the desperate, hopeless men, women, and children of the "Bonus Army." Then, the Army burned the shacks of their shantytown.

Later, General MacArthur defended his actions. He said that the veterans were a bunch of "riotous elements." Regardless of what he said, many Americans were furious with his and President Hoover's treatment of people who had faithfully served their country during World War I. The Washington News spoke for many when it said, "What a pitiful spectacle is that of the great American Government, mightiest in the world, chasing unarmed men, women, and children with Army tanks. ... If the army must be called out to make war on unarmed citizens, this is no longer America."

Many Americans had become frustrated with President Hoover's failure to end the depression. Many, too, were horrified by his treatment of the veterans in Washington. A cry went out for new leadership for this difficult times.

Next, Part 2: Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal

Texbooks, Shmextbooks

In an article (published in 2004 and now found here), entitled "Why Textbooks Stink," Kathy Ceceri gives an eye-opening account of how textbooks come to be written. I was more than a little disturbed to read this paragraph:

"Parents and citizens groups regularly call for changes in textbooks reflecting particular political or religious views, and many times, they succeed. One hundred years after the Scopes Monkey Trial, opposing sides are still waging the evolution-creation fight. ([Harvard science professor and evolution expert Stephen Jay] Gould, who often testified on behalf of teaching evolution, wondered why his son’s high school biology textbook invited students to “investigate other theories” when he never saw similar invitations to, for instance, check out levitation as an alternative to the theory of gravity.) In November 2004, CBS News reported a group of parents were suing a school district in Georgia which had added stickers that said "Evolution is a theory, not a fact,” to biology textbooks at the earlier insistence of other parents. The same story noted that the State Board of Education in Texas exerted pressure on publishers to change the wording in their health textbooks to specify that marriage was a lifelong union between a man and woman, an issue of debate in many parts of the country."

Seriously?! Homophobia aside, even if you are simply defining it in a legal sense, marriage is hardly "lifelong." And Mr. Gould's point is spot on: I see no one proposing that we theorize other reasons for Earth's orbit around the sun or Old Faithful's promptness.

But I was particularly pleased to read this paragraph:

"[Textbook editor and writer Tamim] Ansary would like to see states get rid of the textbook adoption process altogether, and let teachers pull together their own classroom resources instead relying on a single text. He envisions teachers supplementing a mini-encyclopedia reference core with related fiction and nonfiction books, board games, software and hands-on materials like maps or models that would make the subject come alive (similar to the way many homeschoolers design their own curricula without textbooks). Ansary believes that letting schools pick and choose the elements of from different, smaller publishers would encourage competition by smaller companies and increase diversity, instead of stifling it."

Uhh... yeah! Why are students (and their teachers) in schools expected to all learn from these same, terrible textbooks? Why is pulling information from varied and interesting resources such a revolutionary idea?

And why -- WHY -- do people think that home educators should aspire to using the same resources as the schools? That seems to be a great concern among the detractors I've spoken with: where will I get my textbooks? Or tests? Oh, don't get me started on that one.

My kids have learned history through dress-up, games, stories, and role-playing. I doubt they could tell you what year Caligula was assassinated (though they can Google it, if you really need to know), but they can tell you all about his insanity, as well as what life was like for the average Roman citizen during his tyranny. They've also seen how a simple salt mixture mummifies flesh, how paint becomes part of a wall in the fresco process, and why trebuchets fling farther than catapaults, which fling farther than onagers.

Anyone can look up information these days, and even a young child can look up false information. It takes hands-on learning and interest-based reading to get to the meat of the matter, to really understand the reasons for scientific principles or historical events, and to be able to glean from this knowledge how to move us all forward.

Totally Selfish Wish List

I've been thinking about Christmas a lot lately. Mostly, I've been thinking how the hell are we going to buy anyone anything?!?!

And in the true spirit of an American Christmas, I've also been thinking about the stuff I'd love to have for myself or my family, if money fell from the sky onto all our friends and family. Assuming, of course, that it misses us: if we had our own money, I'd buy this shit right now and wouldn't have to ask anyone for any of it for Christmas.

On to my list:

For Aengus: a real drum set and unlimited participation in soccer, fencing, and flag football for the year. And a pet penguin. And a pool -- to house the penguin, of course.

For Noah: A violin, recording equipment, his own computer, a good stereo, a room makeover, several new guitars, and a year of fencing lessons. Oh, and a gas card (to pay for all those trips to see his girlfriend).

For the whole family: An Xbox 360 (with games and all peripherals, plus a headset, subscription, etc. for online play), membership to museums around Virginia, a gas card to get us to all the museums in Virginia, a camcorder!!!!, a year's membership to the community center, a weekend in D.C., a trip to the beach, a weekend in Williamsburg, a camping/fishing trip, and a new entertainment system (a CD/DVD player, radio, maybe even a TV -- and speakers that emit sound).

For Jason: R/C helicopter supplies. And clothes. That boy still wears the old-man clothes he's had since 1992. And maybe a tan.

For me: A community center membership for the family, instruments for the kids, a camcorder, fabric to recover my deck furniture, a laptop that works, an occasional meal at a restaurant that does not have a drive-thru, a few days in NYC to see Equus, a month or two (or more) in -- well, pretty much all of Europe (hell, throw the Middle East in there, too). And a haircut. I cannot maintain my hotness with this god-awful soccer-mom bob.

So, what's on your totally selfish, if-I-could-have-anything Christmas list?

I'm trying hard to think of a post for my other blog. But what did my kids do yesterday? I know they learned something, I just can't put my finger on anything educational. Aengus wasn't really here much, though I know he did a lot on his camping trip. I can certainly come up with something for him. It's Noah I'm worried about.

What did he do yesterday? What does he do any day? All I can think of is what he doesn't do. He doesn't read, he doesn't write, he doesn't work on any math; he doesn't even watch educational TV anymore. He plays his guitar (good) and Runescape (good, but I think he's gotten about as much out of it educationally as he can). He watches videos on YouTube (I think a lot of music videos, so that's good) and emails his friends (OK, so that's socialization and writing).

I guess I've answered my own question: he actually is doing stuff. But it's what he doesn't do that has me concerned. I feel he should know more about history, should be able to express ideas on paper in a somewhat coherent and organized fashion, should be able to manipulate numbers beyond multiplication and division.

But all that will come in time, I suppose. Wait it out, Adesa. Every time I've gotten worried about academics in the past, it's always been a matter of waiting for his interest and maturity to catch up to my goals for him. And eventually, it all kicks in.

Wait it out, Adesa.

For now, what we need to work on is his work ethic. I'm very concerned that he's learned about the value of work from his mother, who never met an excuse she didn't like. I jokingly refer to him as "Half-Ass Hafford," but... well, the name fits. Not his fault, like I said: he learned it all from me. But I'm really getting worried that what was just a habit is becoming Who He Is. And no matter what he does with his life, he'll need to work hard at it. Motivation he can find on his own; determination must be cultivated.

I think that this is one of those dilemmas that all parents face, unschooling or not: to change (mold? guide?) our children or let them be who they are, despite the potential problems we see? To what extent do I try to step in and affect this path he's on? He is who he is, and I respect that. I don't want to impose my own ideas on him. And I really don't want him to get the message that he's not good enough just they way he is. I love him completely, lazy or not.

But I also don't want him to be a 30-year-old man who lives with his mom because he can't keep a job. Even worse, I don't want his future family to suffer financially (the way we have) because I didn't teach him better habits.

But how does a lazy person teach industriousness?