Nick Hanauer was a big supporter of charter schools. As he explains in this fascinating article, he swallowed the Corporate Reform Dogma whole. He believed that America’s “failing public schools” were the cause of poverty and inequality. Fix the schools and—poof—poverty and inequality will disappear.
He writes:
Taken with this story line, I embraced education as both a philanthropic cause and a civic mission. I co-founded the League of Education Voters, a nonprofit dedicated to improving public education. I joined Bill Gates, Alice Walton, and Paul Allen in giving more than $1 million each to an effort to pass a ballot measure that established Washington State’s first charter schools. All told, I have devoted countless hours and millions of dollars to the simple idea that if we improved our schools—if we modernized our curricula and our teaching methods, substantially increased school funding, rooted out bad teachers, and opened enough charter schools—American children, especially those in low-income and working-class communities, would start learning again. Graduation rates and wages would increase, poverty and inequality would decrease, and public commitment to democracy would be restored.
But after decades of organizing and giving, I have come to the uncomfortable conclusion that I was wrong. And I hate being wrong.
What I’ve realized, decades late, is that educationism is tragically misguided. American workers are struggling in large part because they are underpaid—and they are underpaid because 40 years of trickle-down policies have rigged the economy in favor of wealthy people like me. Americans are more highly educated than ever before, but despite that, and despite nearly record-low unemployment, most American workers—at all levels of educational attainment—have seen little if any wage growth since 2000.
To be clear: We should do everything we can to improve our public schools. But our education system can’t compensate for the ways our economic system is failing Americans. Even the most thoughtful and well-intentioned school-reform program can’t improve educational outcomes if it ignores the single greatest driver of student achievement: household income.
For all the genuine flaws of the American education system, the nation still has many high-achieving public-school districts. Nearly all of them are united by a thriving community of economically secure middle-class families with sufficient political power to demand great schools, the time and resources to participate in those schools, and the tax money to amply fund them. In short, great public schools are the product of a thriving middle class, not the other way around. Pay people enough to afford dignified middle-class lives, and high-quality public schools will follow. But allow economic inequality to grow, and educational inequality will inevitably grow with it.
By distracting us from these truths, educationism is part of the problem.
Oh, my God! Did he read Reign of Error?
I wrote exactly that! I demonstrated that the graduation rates of every group were the highest ever, the dropout rates were the lowest ever, we were never number one on international tests but consistently mediocre or less because of high child poverty rates, etc etc etc. I said that test scores were a reflection of family income and education, not a cause of poverty.
Could I be dreaming?
Then he wrote:
Whenever i talk with my wealthy friends about the dangers of rising economic inequality, those who don’t stare down at their shoes invariably push back with something about the woeful state of our public schools. This belief is so entrenched among the philanthropic elite that of America’s 50 largest family foundations—a clique that manages $144 billion in tax-exempt charitable assets—40 declare education as a key issue.
Well, of course. These are the billionaires who want to privatize public schools without the permission of the families and children who like their public schools.
Here is the kicker: Educationism appeals to the wealthy and powerful because it tells us what we want to hear: that we can help restore shared prosperity without sharing our wealth or power.
Well, this is an article you must read.
I wonder if Nick Hanauer would join the Network for Public Education and help us push back against the powerful elites that he now understands so well. Then he could join with those who understand what he has happily recognized.
If he still has that philanthropic spirit and energy, why don’t you reach out to him and try and enlist his help?! He sounds like he could become a great ally.
I tweeted him. Looking for a way to reach him.
Diane, Nick is a person I highly respect. He is in Seattle. I have tried to get in front of him several times but to no avail. I wanted to talk with him on this topic. If you can get in front of him Diane, and if you come to Seattle, would you invite me to the meeting? This is a serious ask. He was a major factor in getting the $15 minimum wage passed in Seattle. He like you gets what is going on. I have provided some links.
https://www.nickhanauer.com/
John,
Great news! I tweeted Nick Hanauer and he responded with his personal email. We have corresponded and I hope to meet with him, not immediately, but after he returns from abroad and I do too. I was very encouraged.
Diane, I truly believe he is a straight up guy trying to do the right thing for the people of this nation. Please keep me in the loop.
Stop the presses!
“I have come to the uncomfortable conclusion that I was wrong.”
Please read this article, Mr. Gates.
Hanauer did that shocking thing that I did a decade ago. He said he was wrong and said it in public.
Rare examples of high character from those who never need to admit mistakes. Grateful for your transformation, Diane!
Dearest Dr. Ravitch:
I try to believe in what this author billionaire said. IMHO, if he is what he said, then his rich circle of friends will not pay their workers so low. I will Google to know his profile. His background will determine that he is worth it for your attention or not.
All rich people did not take 10 years to realize that they damage their country. Wealthy people ( the one to make money from their own labor in both brain and hands) are very cunning, cheap, and calculated. But wealthy people who inherited from parents or grandparents, hahaha, I cannot commend because it is very complicated.
Respectfully yours. ( I respect and really adore your kindness)
May, your faithful reader.
Wrong is a word
We’ve never heard
For goodness sakes
From lips of Gates
It isn’t for us
In Gates’ thesaurus
Cuz Billy hates
The humble traits
Wrong is a word we never hear from the likes of Trump and his brother-in-crime Gates. The only difference between Trump and Gates, Gates has smarter dishonest lawyers. Tump seems to only hire dumb dishonest lawyers.
I read this revealing article yesterday. I wish more billionaires would come to this conclusion and revelation, and cease their relentless attacks on public schools. According to Hanauer schools contribute less than 20% of a student’s capacity for “Improvement,” but family station contributes more than 60%. If Hanauer wants to support enabling working families to better provide for their families, he should write a big check to Bernie Sanders’ campaign. Sanders is supporting all the factors that will improve outcomes for working families. Sanders supports universal healthcare, a living wage, unions, and investment in education. Each of these initiatives combined will contribute to improved health and well being for this nation’s children. Children that live in families with stability and economic security fare better in the real world.
I love you, retired teacher. Amen! You are so smart and wise.
Thanks, Yvonne. You are very kind.
Agree with Yvonne about retired teacher.
To retired teacher:
Yes, You present the best solution. You are very humble. I hope that Nick will support Bernie’s campaign a well as will cooperate with Dr. Ravitch BY reading and spreading “SLAYING GOLIATH”, new book in January 2020. This will be absolutely to earn respect from Dr. Ravitch’s 3,000,000 + readers globally.
If Nick can appreciate Dr. Ravitch, then I would suggest him to speed up the publication as soon as possible. The earlier Nick can publish “SLAYING GOLIATH”, the better America’s economy can improve. I truly admire your sincerity with wisdom and very humble. May
“In short, great public schools are the product of a thriving middle class, not the other way around.”
Bravo.
Too, public schools are the ONLY thing that’s still working in some of the decimated industrial areas of Ohio. They’re the only public or private entity picking up the slack, along with churches. They really deserve support and encouragement for that.
There are areas in Ohio where kids get NOTHING unless they get it in a public school. This isn’t recognized in ed reform. If wealthy people think low income areas are bad now, destroy the public school system – the only functioning, cohesive public institution or entity left- and see what happens. Complete collapse.
I was happy to see Hanauer debunk the “skills gap” myth that billionaires like Tim Cook have been perpetuating. Companies do not outsource because of a “skills gap.” They outsource to reduce production costs. Their goal is profit, not patriotism.
Not just Tom Cook! Obama. Duncan. DeVos. Three quarters of the US Congress. For YEARS they recited this.
It’s nonsense. They don’t care. They all swallowed it for a reason- the “skills gap” puts the onus on working people and OFF of political and business leaders.
If Tim Cook needs programmers why doesn’t he take some of the huge cash reserves he’s hoarding in low tax jurisdictions and PAY to train some. They’re his employees. He could cover the cost of training them. Companies used to do it. Why don’t they now? Since when it is the public’s job to provide them with off the shelf employees trained for their particular sector? Spend a billion or two on training employees. They can take it out of their obscene CEO compensation packages.
Exactly. Companies can hire low wage workers in other parts of the world. Cheaper than paying American workers.
Apple’s Steve Jobs and Google’s Eric Schmidt headed up a wage fixing cartel whose purpose was suppressing the salaries of engineers.
https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/
The CEOs of these companies don’t even care about their own employees. Why would they care about other people’s employees?
American tech companies like Apple and Google are interested in one and one thing only: increasing profits. They will do anything (engage in illegal price fixing activities, outsource their engineers and manufacturing to countries that have no labor or pollution laws etc) to achieve that end.
Their claims about not be able to find qualified American workers are a joke. They have no desire to hire American workers because American workers cost more. The companies avoid doing so by placing artificial impediments in the job descriptions like requirements to have CS degrees when there are lots of people who could learn programming with a little training. After all, even babies learn languages and most programming languages are actually much simpler than natural (human) languages.
“Complete collapse” explains the investment of John Arnold and Pew in community monitoring systems and, the investment in DNA and facial recognition databases by the ruling class.
Diane Here’s the “false idea” that holds court in the minds of the wealthy and blocks any new movement: . . . “that we can help restore shared prosperity without sharing our wealth or power.” As long as that idea holds which, at its root, is fed by GREED, nothing substantial will change. And BTW, greed is a human condition that they share with those they, themselves, refer to as criminals. CBK
I’ve been saying this for a while now……We have poverty NOT because we can’t afford to feed/house/clothe/educate the poor, but because we CANNOT satisfy the rich. It’s greed pure and simple and until everyone catches onto the charade, this will continue. Our politicians (both sides) have perpetuated the problem because they ARE the problem.
LisaM Someone here earlier said that: it’s a moral problem. I think that’s true . . . because we still live in a democracy (such as it is), and the assumption THERE is that, though we are still ruled by outer laws, our freedom is rooted in the moral center is IN EACH OF US–it’s in THAT interior domain, in our socio-moral and even spiritual state of development, that our power to change lives. (I suggest that most teachers know this already). But if that’s true, and I think it is, then it also applies to the rich.
Unfortunately, the lesser-developed (aka: low-life moral-political-spiritual idiots) who, like Trump, think their own mentality constitutes the right STANDARD for all) are very organized and do not ONLY work on Wall Street, but are creeping their way into governments all around the country (like ALEC) and might I say the world. Too bad their self-regard doesn’t match anything real. CBK
CBKing, you can’t expect good morals. Human nature being what it is, a good percentage of folks will take a mile if you give them an inch. Give them the vote [democracy] & they’ll put themselves first; empathy is developed through experience, not inborn. Law is tricky: it can’t move too much faster than the evolution of social conscience, but it must be a few steps ahead of instinctive behavior in order to have civil society. Laws have to incentivize sharing, pro-public behavior—e.g, if you want a thriving middle class, support it w/govtl policy. Hence a balance: capitalism “trammeled” by laws like anti-trust, promotion of unions, progressive income-tax policy, corp tax policy reqg adequate input to pubgoods but breaks for charitable giving, etc.
We learned most of these lessons after the industrial revolution, when a lack of such laws landed US & the world in global depression. Of course much of our subsequent prosperity is owed not just to those laws but to the fact that we were “last man standing” after WWII– yet, many of our current social problems derive from allowing those laws to be pared back to the bone as we encountered the next big economic revolutions [digital automation plus global trade—mfg decline].
It makes me sad to think that was accomplished by rightwing govtl actors old enough to understand how to play on the fears of those who spent their childhoods not knowing where their next meal was coming from— but I think that’s exactly what they did, callously & perhaps subconsciously based on similar experience, to ensure their class’s grasp on biggest pieces of what they knew was a shrinking pie.
bethree5 Writes: “You can’t expect good morals. Human nature being what it is, a good percentage of folks will take a mile if you give them an inch. Give them the vote [democracy] & they’ll put themselves first; empathy is developed through experience, not inborn.”
Well, human nature IS developmental–and in part, to develop (or not) morally. If so (and I think it is), then we CAN expect good morals (especially of our leaders), even though not certainly, and certainly not necessarily in every case. I think if your point is that it would be naive to expect everyone to act in a morally sound way in every case, then I think you would be right in this.
The tension between the outer law and the inner development of a sharp moral conscience emerges precisely because of that developmental reality. Fortunately, we have arrived at a political state of affairs where the laws themselves develop and tend to call us to heed our “better angels.” And if it is true that “a good percentage of folks will take a mile if you give them an inch,” then we are talking about the real-politic of moral demise. (I presume you aren’t to talking about yourself.)
But that’s not a static reality–again, it’s under the developmental principle. <–and THAT is exactly what is evident in our billionaire’s (and Diane’s) experiences of having a change of heart, and especially in having the gumption to admit it. AND that’s exactly what’s missing in DeVos and Gates though, as others have said here, for completely different reasons (one driven by religious zealotry; the other by a egregious lack of depth; but both supported by internal towers of vanity, kept standing apart from the potentials of their developmental nature by their insane wealth). CBK
Well said, Catherine!!!
I feel like the culmination of this cluelessness was “the skills gap”. There was 15% unemployment and ed reformers in combination with CEO’s decided the problem was not low wages or a crashing economy, the problem was workers. They were stupid and needed to be scolded to “upskill”. The “skills gap” has been completely debunked as an economic theory and they are STILL doing it. DeVos gave a speech yesterday where she recited this slogan again. This is really all these fancy people have to offer? A slogan? There are tens of thousands of paid ed reformers. Faced with income inequality this huge mob of “policy” people decide that scolding people on “upskilling” is what they get paid for? They’re career coaches? Professional public school critics? Do we really need thousands of them?
Chiara and Diane I saw some push back this morning on MSNBC (Stephanie Ruhl)–by Walt Disney’s heir (didn’t catch her name) who are organizing, and talking about paying workers of wealthy companies enough to NOT have to live in their cars while holding full time jobs.
The undercurrent of the interview was to see the 30-year stagnation in pay, and to redefine “capitalism” to include a regard for ALL concerned. There are little pin-pricks here and there, or so it seems by some of the coverage of late–and then there’s that millionaire that Diane wrote about earlier.
Let’s keep the ball rolling (of course), but stay tuned . . . CBK
Is there a better illustration of the truth of the adage that “money talks, nobody walks”? If you have enough money, you can believe nonsense and hire people to say that nonsense is good public policy. You can hire politicians to pass laws that put the power of the State behind stupid public policy ideas. All in the service of maintaining the power of billionaires. If most people have to spend their time refuting stupidity, there’s not much time left over to do anything useful or meaningful! Welcome to American political culture in the 21st century.
Opt-out moms, AOC, Bernie and folks like them (such as you Diane) are beginning to have some success in calling out the game for what it is, and demanding that we stop wasting our time and effort responding to stupidity, and get to work on real problems: poverty, anti-democratic abuse of power, income and wealth inequality, White Supremacy, Patriarchy, permanent imperial war, and, last but not least, environmental degradation. (We know that education, by itself, solves none of these problems. Are there not are many well-educated people who devote their lives to maintaining and promoting these problems? Were there not brilliant, educated, Nazis?)
I applaud all those who fight the torrent of stupidity we face in public life everyday. We don’t really have an education problem at all. We have a moral and political problem.
More billionaires need to understand that the blame game they have been playing against public schools is a farce. So-called reform has been a wasteful distraction based on wrong assumptions and lies. All it has done is weakened public education for no better results. It has moved tremendous amount of money out of public schools and caused more harm than good.
Gates and company should understand that even with improved AI, computer instruction that supplants real humans is not effective. Human instruction is essential to most students, and CAI is inadequate for teaching in depth understanding of subjects with big ideas such as literature, humanities and social sciences.
retired teacher Yes to your note.
However, for Gates and all, it seems that what we have often called the “hidden curriculum” still exists, is operative as we speak, and is (apparently) still hidden, at least from the eyes of (also apparently) the badly-educated wealthy (“Well, I made a lot of money, didn’t I?”).
The hidden curriculum: the point is that children are not only learning knowledge as such; they are ALSO learning “how to be a human being” every day, and from those HUMAN BEINGS around them. And the younger they are, the more of THAT kind of learning they need, as a cumulative thing, to actually become humanly mature in all of its complexities and in a constantly moving history; and THAT as consistently modeled at school and in the home<–such as they are and can be.
Unfortunately (or fortunately, in the deeper sense) the test-makers cannot put THAT on a test, nor can it be a part of AI–insofar as NO AI IS ACTUALLY HUMAN. BTW, have you seen that old movie: Brazil?
CBK
You assume that billionaires want ordinary people to receive a wonderful, broad, education in many subjects, but that their methods of achieving this goal have not worked. But what if they do not want the great mass of citizens to become truly educated, critical people, capable of governing themselves? Privatization means more than just more money for these guys; it means reducing the expectations ordinary people have about what their futures might look like and who ought to lead them.
I believe privatization of public education is about teaching young people to follow the authority of billionaires and their political flunkies without questioning that authority. The best evidence of this belief is that fact that billionaires would never, ever, subject their own kids to the bs education that one finds in a “reformed” public school. Just as billionaires would never bring their kids (or themselves) to the doctors you go to, or use the same public services you use (mass transit, etc), or accept the same access to political figures that you enjoy (hahahaha, which is zero), they would never think that their kids ought to grow up the same way that your kids are going to grow up under a “reformed” public education system (i.e., privatized, computerized, militarized, racialized, and stupified).
We are in a fight over whether this country exists to serve the will of billionaires and their bought lackeys or whether it exists for the benefit of everyone, equally. As Warren Buffet said, “there’s a class war going on, and we’re winning.” Indeed.
I love this: “Were there not brilliant, educated, Nazis?” You have to check out SS-GB if you’ve not already seen it. I believe it is available at the moment as a STARZ series.
Nick Hanauer hasn’t gotten his message through to the Fed. Reserve Chair. The Fed. chair said on 60 Minutes last week that the skills gap and the opioid crisis (reduced labor participation) were the threats to economic expansion. Not even on his radar- concentrated wealth and the failures of trickle down economics.
Because nothing caused the skills gap or the opioid crisis. No one had any involvement in that. It was like the phases of the moon- it just happened.
These people spend all their time lecturing people who make 12 dollars an hour on personal responsibility yet none of them take responsibility for anything.
Step One: identify problem
Step Two: Dump it on public schools or workers themselves to fix.
You are correct, Chiara.
Also, forgive me if I don’t take advice from anyone who was hired by Donald Trump or works for him.
That I don’t need. They should fix themselves first. They’re not my role models and I will punish my teenager if he behaves like any of them.
Speaking of the “skills gap” and retraining, when does DeVos retrain? She has a 50 year old bachelor’s degree and no relevant experience for the job she holds. When do any of them retrain? They go from secure highly paid position to secure highly paid position with no additional training or “skills”. Are they just better people than a machinist? As far as I can tell they need massive retraining. They all better enroll.
Chiara Devos’ interior voice: “But I have so much money. . . and, BTW, I PAID for this government position.” CBK
Case in point about accountability- The Center for American Progress manages not to gag while it demands public school accountability. Meanwhile, CAP’s leaders don’t blame their own ineptitude or negligence for the failure of Hillary’s campaign. They blame the Russians and Fox’s badmouthing.
And, media continues to promote CAP as the liberal voice despite
the egregious conflict of interest evident when CAP’s creator and current board chair, respectively, build a bi-partisan influence peddling and lobby shop for wealthy clients.
Chiara Succinctly-said. I think that one truth to THEIR argument (that the problem is in the teachers), however, is that for a very long time TEACHERS have worked under the naive and FALSE idea that, like most teachers themselves, everyone wants what is best for ALL of the children. It’s a kind of unsaid regard for our own good-meaning, but now uncritically projected to all others, including the rich, policy-makers, businesses, stock-holders, etc.
Finally, however, the greater “we” of teacher-dom is waking up to the sad idea that: “it ain’t so.”
And when the anti-education, anti-teacher mentality gets into the government (e.g., Betsy Devos) then WE really do have a problem that cannot hide under all of the propaganda. The cancer drug, in this case, is political activism on the part of teachers. Who else in a democracy has the kind of knowledge and connections (at the grassroots level) that can turn the tide with the consistency that is needed? CBK
Yuh, Chiara, the so-called skills gap [read yawning poverty due to decades-long failure of US industry] and the opioid crisis came out of the blue and are unrelated. For anyone interested in the connection, read the brilliant poet William Brewer “I Know Your Kind,” poetry of Oxyana, slang for WVa’s Oceana, an impoverished coal town where opioid deaths occur once every 10 hrs.
Hanauer’s most intriguing leap- “public commitment to democracy would be restored” as a result of “educationism”. That provides a false front for the ruling class’ goal of colonialism.
The current education reform movement launched with a takeover of a city that had just suffered a natural disaster followed by a massive failure of government. The takeover was conducted by people who parachuted in there, fired all the locals, declared themselves a reconstruction authority and seized all the schools.
They’re not my role models for “democracy”.
A former Kaplan executive is at the helm for CAP’s disaster capitalism in Puerto Rico.
Reform is a reboot of colonialism that provides separate and unequal education mostly for communities of color. It is sickening that the government continues to embrace and underwrite such inequity. Separate is never equal.
The no-excuses schools are an example of colonialism in action.
The full quote– mocking “educationism”– is “if we modernized our curricula and our teaching methods, substantially increased school funding, rooted out bad teachers, and opened enough charter schools—American children, especially those in low-income and working-class communities, would start learning again. Graduation rates and wages would increase, poverty and inequality would decrease, and public commitment to democracy would be restored.”
It is indeed an absurd leap, but I’m not sure what it has to do with “colonialism.” I think it just gets back to his thesis: great public schools are created by a thriving middle class, not the other way around, thus pointing out that public school problems relate directly to the hollowing out of the middle class.
Here’s the US Department of Education continuing to promote discredited economic theory:
“Betsy DeVos
There is a fundamental disconnect between education and the economy – a workforce skills gap. This dynamic and changing economy requires dynamic and changing approaches to education.”
Can they possibly stop robotically repeating these slogans they all swallow? They’re supposedly promoting education. Why don’t they learn something themselves? How is this a role model for students? It’s mindless. They can’t read a summary of one study in 2010 (or probably not even that- probably an op ed) and just keep repeating it for the rest of their careers. Why should students listen to them? They give bad advice.
If they’re going to start legislating on “career and technical education” they might want to find someone who has actually worked for an hourly wage, in a trade or related job.
Putting forth Ivanka Trump as an expert on middle class career options for high school students is not credible. Surely they can drum up one person who has actually done any these jobs. Not in Congress or the Trump Administration, obviously, but maybe they can call a plumber or an electrician or a nurse’s aide.
Do Arne Duncan or Betsy DeVos know what a coder does? Why would they tell millions of high school students to do it, then?
DeVos is telling them to go get 2 years of training in food service. They’ll make 15 dollars an hour, or exactly what they would make without two years of training.
This is a bad deal for them.
I wouldn’t expect a heiress billionaire to know this, but maybe she could read something or ask someone.
In “Reign of Error,” I cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics report projecting the occupations with most growth in the next decade.
With the exception of nursing, almost all were low-wage jobs that did not require a postsecondary degree or STEM.
Americans are becoming wage-slaves. Not much need for education.
Now now, ladies. Those of us w/4-yr arts degrees can also find a career working as serfs for those to the manor-born. My kids are musicians so practiced in their field they can teach tiny kids chord-changes for their fave cartoon-movie-theme songs or how to play in rock ensembles ; I teach foreign languages to the very young. These are growth fields, why: because the ever-growing .1% demand extra arts for their kids! 🙂
it’s up at OENhttps://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/A-Billionaire-Declares-Be-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Billionaires_Diane-Ravitch_Economic_Inequality-190611-976.html#comment736187
with this comment
When there are Three billionaires who are wealthier than half the US population– http://www.greanvillepost.com/2017/11/10/three-billionaires-are-wealthier-than-half-the-us-population/
then the problem lies in income inequality and in poverty.! Period.
Thanks for the link. Media should be showing the video.
It is interesting to have a billionaire who is actually interested in examining evidence and facts instead of those who absolutely know that they are the smartest guys in the room and don’t need no stinkin’ evidence or those who fund research by desperate “scholars” who understand that they better come up with evidence that makes the billionaires’ views look good and quash the evidence that makes them look bad.
Thank you Mr. Hanauer for going where the evidence takes you instead of falling for the propaganda like so many billionaires and politicians who are so smug in their knowledge that they are right that they refuse to look at any evidence that disputes their world view that they are always right.
That he would admit this so publicly and argue the case so eloquently speaks extraordinarily highly of him. Wow. This is magnificent.
So refreshing to to see pragmatic experience conquer ideology. That’s what hooked me on Diane and this community.
It is a sign of intelligence, a sign of thinking, to be open to new ideas. It requires courage to say in public, as Hanauer does, “I was wrong.” It astonishes people to hear a simple admission of error.
An announcement was made that the Koch machine is going to fund incumbent Dems against progressive challengers in the primaries.
Linda They are shopping for the better of two bads. CBK
While the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican, there some Democratic politicians who are DINO’s.
DINO
Took me a moment to translate: Democrats in Name Only. I call them fake Democrats. One way to catch some or all of them is the follow the campaign money back to the source and if that source is a conservative multi-millionaire or billionaire, then we have a DINO or fake Democrat.
I don’t know about the other states, but California has laws in place that make it easier to trace the money back to the conservative/corporate DINO’s campaign supporters.
Calf. Rep. Susan Davis is a corporate shill which explains why she is a privatizer while claiming to be a Democrat.
Linda Then she shouldn’t have any trouble getting support from the charter camp. CBK
Here’s a great clip from THE BIG SHORT.
( 1:29 – )
( 1:29 – )
In a phone conversation, Steve Carrell’s character hears about the October 2008 bailout that’s about to happen — “Bernanke just left the White House.” — then laments that Wall Street interests will get away with everything, no one will get prosecuted, no preventative regulation will be enacted, and …
Then, they’ll do what they always to. Blame immigrants and poor people.” (Which worked like a charm for Donald Trump — the blaming immigrants part, anyway)
The Narrator then shifts gears, and says, “No”, that’s NOT what happened, then describes the fantasy of the moral world that we should, but sadly don’t live in — prosecutions of the guilty, regulations to prevent this from happening again, etc. … underscored by Neil Young’s ROCKING IN THE FREE WORLD, which the Narrator interrupts and says …
NARRATOR: “Just kidding.
“Banks took the money the American people gave them, and they used it to pay themselves huge bonuses, and lobby the Congress to kill reform.
“And then blame immigrants and poor people, and then, for the first time, even teachers.”
Carell’s character’s lament was in late 2008, just before the election.
Soon after this, as in the Narrator’s “blame even teachers” prediction, it was the heyday of the propaganda machine diverting attention away form Wall Street and other corporate corruption, and instead blaming everything wrong with the country on public school teachers, and their evil unions, culminating in WAITING FOR SUPERMAN in Fall 2010, and Scott Walker’s decimation of the Wisconsin teachers’ union in early 2011.
THE BIG SHORT’s narrator was referring to that time — roughly 2008-2012 — when Fox News and the rest were vomiting up the party line:
“Don’t you get it?
“If you’re poor, it’s all the teachers’/teachers’ unions’ fault.”
“If millions of people are losing their homes, it’s all the teachers’/teachers’ unions’ fault.”
“If there’s income inequality, that’s also all the teachers’/teachers’ unions’ fault.”
“If anything, or even everything in the country is going to Hell, well… yeah … once again, THAT’S all teachers’/teachers’ unions’ fault.”
Great stuff, Jack. This movie is so important. One cannot remind people, enough, of this recent history.
I read Nick Hanauer’s article and looked at the website where his praise for disruptive innovation and entrepreneurship is unreflective, offered as a panacea for everything.
In the Atlantic article he chose to blame educationism and “educationists” for flawed thinking as if to inoculate himself from being a collaborator in blaming schools for problems well beyond their power to remedy.
I do not know if I am an educationista or not.
I am unsympathetic to this billionaire’s casual apologies with no clear recognition of the collateral damage he and his billionaire playmates have done to public education and are still doing.
Unlike Diane Ravitch, Nick Hanauer’s “conversion” does not rest on any claim to expertise as a scholar of education, or meticulous research, or informed understanding of the harm that corporate and entrepreneurial thinking has done, and is still doing to public education.
He is a billionaire who takes pride in being entrepreneur–thrives on moving fast and breaking things. All he is doing is changing the subject. He is saying education is not the problem but money is, who has it, who does not, and why that matters. Well, and good but what then? How does he proposed to reverse the damage that he and other billionaires and entrepreneurs and corporatists have done to public education?
Educationists and educationistas did not write the federal and state legislation that portrays the fate of the US economy as the responsibility of schools, teachers, their students, and test scores.
Educationists and educationistas did not determine that test scores should be used as productivity measures or the basis for pay-for-performance schemes.
Educationists and educationistas have been subjected to unconscionable ridicule by billionaires and entrepreneurs who are unapologetic and unwilling to listen to any person who has expertise, experience, and warranted claims to the knowledge in education.
I looked at the Civic Ventures website. Here is his bio. Nick Hanauer is the founder of Civic Ventures. He is a successful business leader, entrepreneur and venture capitalist. Hanauer was the first non-family investor in Amazon.com, and a company he founded, aQuantive, later sold to Microsoft for 6.4 billion dollars. In recent years, Hanauer has established himself as a civic innovator, public speaker, and fierce critic of America’s growing income inequality. He co-authored two bestselling books — The True Patriot and Gardens of Democracy — and his policy pieces for outlets like Politico, Bloomberg News and TED have gone viral, reaching audiences of tens of millions.
Here is a sample of thinking posted at the website.
We believe in progress and innovation in all of its forms. We believe that the technological innovation that solves human problems is the source of all improvements in living standards. But we also acknowledge that every commercial technological innovation brings with it disruption—and therefore that healthy communities depend on matching the rate of commercial innovation with equal amounts of civic and social innovation.
Hanauer’s unfettered praise for civic and social innovation makes me wary of his ideas–ideas that I might otherwise take at face value and worthy of praise. His reasoning about social and civic innovation and the virtues of technology strike me as unreflective. They are not far removed from the billionaires investing in pay-for success contracts, and social innovation bonds–financial products that are marketed as if better than anything that implicates public deliberation and professional expertise.
Perhaps I am just in a bad mood from an overdose of seeing how billions of dollars have been sequestered by billionaires in private foundations, then used to lobby for preferred federal, state, and local policies.
Thanks, Laura, for your close reading!
YES, wary: “Educationism appeals to the wealthy and powerful because it tells us what we want to hear: that we can help restore shared prosperity without sharing our wealth or power. “
I’m glad and thankful for Laura raising some healthy billionaire skepticism. Hanauer’s argument that education doesn’t affect economic situations nearly as much as economic situations affect education is very true, but Laura is right to be skeptical about that. I could easily see billionaires engaging in some new meritocratic philanthro-capitalist scheme to “raise test scores” by giving handouts to families who send their children to charter schools instead of to the charter schools, just for example. Love hearing Hanauer praise Bernie and call for much higher taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations, but remain weary of any billionaires saying anything because of their outsized influence over public policy and the greed it took to become billionaires.
After all, Hanauer wasn’t calling out philanthro-capitalism itself, but just the schools improving income inequality part.
No, he didn’t call for regulation, for a charter moratorium, for an end to charter welfare slush funds, or for an end to annual testing. If anything, he just said public school is ineffective at bettering people’s lives, which is only half true and dangerous. A better argument would be to remind people of the true purpose of public education, its foundational relationship with democracy and progressive reform. He should study Mann and Dewey. And pay much higher taxes.
I’m grateful that Hanauer recognizes the fallacy of magical thinking. Phony reformers have blamed the schools for society’s ills. I can’t count the number of times I heard Wendy Kopp insist that if we “fix the schools,” we can end poverty. Hanauer boldly said, no. That’s not true.
I heartily agree with that, Diane.
LCT: “the greed it took to become billionaires”: wrong! Our laws allow them to become billionaires. Our laws SPAWN billionaires. Laws/ deregulation/ defunding of the few public-protective laws we have left, in bipartisan consensus for nearly 40 yrs by representatives WE elected. It’s a cop-out to assign greed/ morals/ etc to the very wealthy & makes it sound as though we the people are helpless & must grovel at their feet for favors.
Bethree, don’t blame the collective US for the corruption of laws and the tax code. The 1% have spent many millions to buy members of Congress like Mitch McConnell and others to protect their interests and to increase their wealth and lower their taxes.
Yes, the one-tenth of one percent has spent decades stealthily and not so stealthily subverting the laws the benefit them through organizations like ALEC, et al. For instance, Betsy the Brainless belongs to ALEC and she is where the Koch brothers wanted here, in a position to do as much damage to public education as possible.
Bill Gates left ALEC to start his own group of manipulating vampire millionaires and billionaires who he talks into feeding money into his Gates Foundation tax shelter that he uses to subvert the public sector among other things.
The Walton family seems to be a wrecking ball tribe all by itself.
And that is only the tip of the greedy, power hungry vultures’ pyramid of schemes.
Lloyd Lofthouse Yes, and like The Mob, the more discerning one’s stay behind the scenes–and by “discerning,” I mean they “know what’s good for them.” CBK
Yes, “good for them” but probably bad for everyone else.
Lloyd Lofthouse Yes, hence the ” . . . . ” CBK
Hanauer, himself, says his wealth really was an accident. He knew Jeff Bezos and thought his crazy idea had a chance and invested on the ground floor. He had no idea what would happen and probably expected to sell pillows for a long time. A happy accident for him. He has also been saying for a long time that the scales have been tilted way too much toward the wealthy and need to be recalibrated. I am so glad that Diane has made contact with him. I believe he could be an important ally, one who is ready and willing to listen. I think we all could learn a lot from each other.
As always, thank you so much for your work, Laura!
Agreed, Laura is a great treasure. What a careful thinker and researcher she is!
Laura I hear that and applaud your skepticism, even it if it should be temporary (that’s your call).
The “however” that comes forward for me, however, is that, if LIKE Diane, our billionaire actually has experienced a moral-political conversion of sorts, UNLIKE Diane, he is more like Jefferson who “woke up” to slavery and found himself on the wrong side of it, even in his personal life, and in a culture where even the slaves accepted, and HAD accepted, the status-quo for many decades if not centuries.<–and THAT in the midst of massive and complex change. I think he also understood how slow change is the only way to avoid violence–though in our time, that idea comes up against MLK’s right assertions that delayed justice is no justice at all (in my view).
What I like about our billionaire’s and others’ wake-up situations . . . of the complicit wealthy . . . is the recognition of the need to change the whole meaning of “capitalism” (rather than to turn to a formalized socialism<–so it may be partly out of fear?); and to bring our basic understanding of capitalism from the abstract (me and money/wealth-only) to the concrete, that is, that we ALL live here together; and, regardless of a totally “gated” life, YOU and your accrued wealth have always depended on that fact and are obliged to honor it.
But I certainly hear you and appreciate all of your contributions to this site; and to the good education that you bring to all who read it. CBK
Several years ago, Hanauer gave a TED talk suggesting the need for a raise in the minimum wage. I used to introduce the French Revolution with its beginning because he used historical parallels to form his arguments and I wanted the students to see that in action.
Like Laura above, I feel suspicious of a billionaire that cusses billionaires, but I am in agreement with the idea that material wealth has a lot to do with whether folks learn. That is just the common sense that Maslow made in his triangle– diagramed hierarchy of needs that lead to self actualization.
The trouble is that just paying people more will not get them more learnin.
Paying people more gives them a chance to eat better, get routine medical care, and be less stressed out.
dianeravitch Yes. . . . and to think beyond just survival. The teaching equivalent is to teach to a homeless or abused child. If the basics aren’t there, it’s like asking them to walk on water. CBK
I would not argue against that. What I was thinking of is the number of people with a good education on paper who voted for trump.
Trump did have some college-educated voters. According to this site, link below, it was 36 percent to 57 percent for Hillary Clinton.
Breaking it down by race:
For non-college grads, Among Whites, Trump had 64 percent and Hillary had 28 percent.
For nonwhites that were college grads, Trump had 27 percent to Hillary’s 68 percent.
For nonwhites without a college education, Trump had 18 percent to Hillary’s 77 percent.
https://www.people-press.org/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/
And with that info, it is obvious that Texas is in play and might very well be a battle ground state.
“Hispanics, already a major group, are expected to become the majority by 2020, while the population also grows older as the baby boomer generation ages.”
http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/texas-population/
The tipping point for Texas was this year, 2019.
“Although the majority of the U.S. population today is still white, nonwhites account for more than half of the populations of Hawaii, the District of Columbia, California, New Mexico, Texas and Nevada.”
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/Voices/2019/04/30/US-will-be-majority-minority-in-next-25-years/2971556626784/
If Democrats somehow get most if not all minorities to vote in Texas, that state could turn blue in 2020.
Factor in the patriarchy/authoritarianism promoted by religions like the Catholic faith. The Hispanic population wouldn’t be the first to vote against their own interests.
Roy Turrentine A great qualifier: Having an education “ON PAPER.” Indeed. CBK
.
Charles
If you don’t like education, try ignorance.
Your contempt for public schools is loathsome.
Do you think that charter crooks and fundamentalist preachers are better educators than certified teachers?
if you think that I have contempt for public schools, you are wrong. I live in an area, with some of the finest public schools in the nation. There are also terrible public schools in this area, across the river in WashDC. The area where I live , is truly a “Tale of two cities”. It is the best of times, and it is the worst of times.
If you think that I do not like education, you are wrong.
If you think that I have contempt for public schools, you are wrong there too.
The public schools in Fairfax County, VA, where I live are some of the finest in the nation. The public schools across the river in WashDC are uniformly terrible. (WashDC has one of the lowest public school utilizations in the nation). And Prince George’s County Maryland parents sneak their children into WashDC schools, on an “underground railroad”.
It is truly a “Tale of two cities”. Sad.
Charles,
You alternate hateful comments with “who, me?” apologies. Sorry, it doesn’t wash. You hate public schools, and you are contemptuous of teachers. Sad.
Charles
Your ” . ” comment is completely on point.
Poet-
Charles has never had a more cogent argument.
Poet and I are responding to Charles’ 3:33 post
To Linda, above, at 12:01 PM–yes, I heard that, too.
And–if you hadn’t seen it as I’d added it on so late, find my comment–w/a real link this time!–at the bottom of the post “NBCNews: Democrats Turning Against Charters.”
The Iowa Des Moines Register reports that their caucuses are going online!!
Some further thoughts on Hanauer’s article and website and praise for innovation and entrepreneurial solutions to social and civic problems.
There is a new acronym for a population that corporations love: ALICE.
It stands for Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed.
It is popular among non-profits because the working poor are brought to the attention of many.
But, if you look at who has rushed in claim this population as worthy of attention, it is the United Way and its National Advisory Council where corporations who have helped to produce this demographic group are now looked to as if they should be in charge of “developing best practices and building innovative impact strategies to stabilize ALICE households and our broader economy.“
The fee for a seat at the ALICE National Advisory Council table is $25.000. per year. The initial members are the Aetna Foundation, AT&T, Atlantic Health System, Deloitte, Entergy, Johnson & Johnson, KeyBank, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, OneMain Financial, RWJBarnabas Health, Thrivent Financial Foundation, Union Bank & Trust, UPS, and U.S. Venture. These members are eager to offer “impact strategies” for ALICE households. Beware of impact strategists who target human beings.
ALICE has compiled an elaborate series of metrics to support the case that this population deserves much more attention. The American Community Survey is only one of many sources of data.
I looked at the elaborate metrics for ALICE. These areposted at the website under Methodology. I looked at an Ohio report on the ALICE population, and then for Hamilton County where I live. There were no surprises. It is clear that the metrics produce portraits of problems in securing income stability in households of varied sizes and characteristics… but the stats do not address the problems they describe.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qtsxjcjs7gerd0p/19National_ALICE_Advisory_Council_2.14.19.pdf?dl=0
In fact there is some evidence that these measures will become the basis for profit-taking from social welfare and education programs.
The ALICE measures are similar to those put forth by the Robinhood Foundation and by economist James Heckman. The measures are being used to market financial products, known as social impact bonds also pay for success contracts.
Here is an early example of the way profits are made and how quickly United Way was implicated in a preschool program. https://apolitical.co/solution_article/utah-preschools-give-investors-a-healthy-return-but-do-kids-lose-out/
Here is how the Robinhood Foundation calculated the economic value of a “high quality’ preschool program at more than $50,000 per child, but with no intention of making that kind of investment.
Click to access Metrics-Equations-for-Website_Sept-2014.pdf
And here is a graphic depiction of the “return on investment” calculated by Nobel economist and major promoter of private financing of public services, James Heckman.
https://heckmanequation.org/resource/the-heckman-curve/the
For a sobering look at the way ALICE metrics will be transformed into financial products and with the full cooperation of United Way, please see https://wrenchinthegears.com/2019/06/09/what-about-alice-the-united-way-collective-impact-libertarian-charity/
I am not rushing to praise the apparent conversion of a billionaire who seems to be enchanted with innovation and entrepeneurship as panaceas and as if profits did not matter.
Laura,
If United Way has chapters that have been co-opted by profit takers, (AWrenchintheGears.com), the organization should expect huge backlash. No charity should undermine democracy nor facilitate the rich in taking a rake off the top of money intended for the vulnerable.
R.I.’s short cut to masters degrees in education about which Diane
posted was offered by United Way. Some U.A. chapters promote charter schools and, in Utah, U.A. was linked with Goldman Sachs in the abominable Wall Street contrivance-social impact bonds.
United Way in LA got pots of money from Gates and advocated for using invalid VAM to evaluate teachers, joining the NCTQ in pushing anti-teacher Policy
NEA and AFT have an a responsibility to expose United Way. Have they done so?
Brian Gallagher, President/CEO, United Way Worldwide, 2017 compensation, $1,087,498. The salary information . . . was calculated by adding the IRS Form 990 categories of “Compensation,” “Contributions to employee benefit plans,” and “Expense accounts and other allowances. –Charity Watch
Nice gig if you can get it.
What a soul is worth.
“corporations who have helped to produce this demographic group are now looked to as if they should be in charge of ‘developing best practices and building innovative impact strategies to stabilize ALICE households and our broader economy.’“ I agree this is outrageous & excellent cause for skepticism of those corporate efforts… but I sure would like to keep our eye on the ball.
How is it that “corporations helped to produce this demographic group”? Only because our laws allow corporations to accrue such overweening, massive assets that they have the clout to warp our social fabric . Corporations do as corporations do & nothing curbs their outsize affect on society until we the people get politically active and pressure our representatives to make the legal changes necessary to rein them in.
Leave things as they are while whining about it? It always reminds me of that scene in “Network” where the honchos sit Howard Beale down & explain that Saudis sucked up all our assets & now must be allowed to buy them all back, because money out, money in. That’s where we are right now, w/big corporate $ looking to invest back into society [& reap profit]
Imagine, just for a moment, that you are a techie who has had ideas that made you into a billionaire. With that kind of money, the world is your oyster. You have the time and resources with which to make your life and those of your loved ones radically wonderful and interesting. This experience would incline you, I imagine, to a view of the world in which radical change, or disruption, envisioned by individuals can make things pretty rosy in fairly short order. So, it is no surprise that we have so many techie “thought leaders” with radical, neoliberal plans for social engineering. And it’s no surprise that there is an entire industry, now, of court singers for the new neoliberal oligarchy–folks who write papers and books about how everything is getting better for everyone because of the ideas of a few. Given all this, I think that it takes being pretty woke and attentive to the evidence for such a person to recognize that Ed Deform has been a disaster. It’s much more common for people to cling to their own bad ideas even after they have been dramatically disproved.
I must say that I am impressed by Mr. Hanauer ‘s ability to do this. Bill Gates claims to be a fan of “Big History.” Well, here’s a little lesson we can learn from taking a long historical view: time and time and time again functioning societies started tending more and more toward wealth and income inequality and concentration of ownership and power, and those with all the power patronized folks who were willing to tell them, in writing, art, and song, that everything was rosy and getting better all the time, even as a storm gathered around them. And time and time and time again, the rich ignored the storm until it broke over their heads. Or, to change up the metaphor, they kept pushing their toy until it broke. Mr. Hanauer is clearly not such a fool. He sees what’s happening, and he finds it disturbing. He’s learned the lesson.
So, here’s the question: are we at an inflection point, a phase transition, when the wealthy will, for the first time in history, recognize how dangerous to them and to everyone else all this concentration of wealth and income and power is? It’s extremely heartening to me to hear some of the very wealthy around the world starting to say, Houston, we’ve got a problem.
So the wealthy are realizing that the commoners are gathering the pitchforks and torches…..so what, when they have access to the “big guns”. I’ll believe what he says when he starts “walking the walk” because “talk is cheap”.
Well, I think he’s doing an important service in trying to explain to other members of the oligarchical class about how stupid they are being. I’ll put it this way: if Bill Gates decided, tomorrow, that he was going to be a novelist, any crap he put between two covers would be published. These people have the resources and fame to get stuff done. If that means that we will see minimum wage laws tied to the COL and Medicare for All because they would rather have these than pitchforks, I’m completely down.
I admire him because he admitted error. That is hard to do.
As Bob Shepherd writes, he is in a position to talk to Gates and other billionaires. They don’t listen to me. There’s a good chance they will hear him.
The argument in favor of public education falls on deaf ears because wealth concentration is driving the rich to cannibalism of workers and their children.
The Hoover Institute, financed by and for the wealthy, sends a person out on the talk circuit to lament the loss of American democracy. The response from the richest 0.1% is campaign donations to corporate Democrats running against progressives in primaries.
The valor that keeps Diane in the fight is not wasted. And, if Hanauer makes a compelling case for a strong middle class with public education as its foundation, some will be convinced but, Gates and Z-berg lack the inner nobility that makes them people who put aside personal interest and that enables empathy.
Do you think they will arrive at that enlightenment before the commoners do? I’m right now observing that calls for breakup of Facebook & Google have hit the floor of Congress, in the wake of severe reining in of their data use in Europe… It probably won’t amount to much more than a warning for the moment, but public appetite may be being whetted… I’m also noticing that the Sprint/ TMobile merger is in jeopardy…
75% of likely 2020 voters want taxes on the rich. Both Congress and the President ignore the call. Watching the response of Hong Kong’s legislators to a protests by hundreds of thousands of people, “We don’t care what you want”, should provoke Americans to evaluate their oligarchy.
One thing that impressed me in Mr. Hanauer’s article is that he seems to grok that there are multitudinous ways in which being poor presents obstacles to academic success. Poor kids spend a LOT of time really stressed out–watching Mommy worry; a lot of time trying to figure a way to fix what can’t be fixed by them; a lot of time simply trying to numb the pain via some kind of escape. And they aren’t talked to as much when they are little and go into school with enormous linguistic deficits that are interpreted as cognitive deficits. And they often have some pretty dangerous role models around them–folks who are thriving in the underground economy. And they often have a lot of built-up anger. And they often lack proper sleeping arrangements and clothing to keep them warm and eyeglasses so they can see and decent medical care. And all of this stuff and much more affects academic performance. We will not make major progress in K-12 education in the US until we fix these systemic economic issues. You can’t “fix education” without fixing poverty. And Hanauer gets that, though, as he points out, it’s not something that the wealthy want to hear–that they are going to have to give things up to make real change.
“Whenever i talk with my wealthy friends about the dangers of rising economic inequality…”
I bet the talk inevitably turns to pitchforks and guillotines.
Since you mention pitchforks: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014
Good link! I see he has a podcast called Pitchfork Economics.
” I see he has a podcast called Pitchfork Economics.”
Yup. A simple search turns up lots of information. He sounds like the genuine article.
I have a lot of faith in the young people today. I hope they lead the way out of this essentially terrible decade….really, it’s actually 20 years almost since 9-11.
Right now….so many young people fighting for democracy in Hong Kong. This is the same fight that needs to be waged worldwide. https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2019/jun/12/hong-kong-protest-demonstrators-and-police-face-off-over-extradition-bill-live
Since most if not all of the young people in Hong Kong that are protesting have never lived in a Democracy, how do they know they are fighting for Democracy?
Maybe they are really fighting for something else than the misleading definition most Americans think Democracy is.
Are Americans really free when the U.S. has the largest prison population in the world?
Are Americans really free when we can’t stop corporations from spying on us 24/7 (planting spy cookies on our computers linked to the internet, our smartphones, our tablet,s our laptops, our smart TVs, et al. and they those corporations sell that information and we are tracked cradle to grave?
Is having the choice of joining any religion we want really freedom?
What is freedom?
I do not have a circle of billionaire friends to chew the fat with. I have thirty years of experience teaching in high poverty urban areas. I would like to recommend that these so called experts defer to the communities living in chronic economic stress for their input and imbibe a large dose of humility.
I would like to recommend that people like Bill Gates, Laurene Powell Jobs, Marc Zuckerborg and other billionaires confine their unapproved, Nazi-like “experiments”* to their own children and grandchildren and leave other people’s children alone.
*which are not really experiments in the scientific sense at all because they contain none of the critical elements like a null hypothesis, control group, etc that real scientific experiments include.
Very well said, SomeDAM
wealth buys power – the more money you have, the more power it buys. Power changes the way you see the world; the way you think.
Lord Action Quotes:
“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority.”
“Despotic power is always accompanied by corruption of morality.”
“Authority that does not exist for Liberty is not authority but force.”
“Everybody likes to get as much power as circumstances allow, and nobody will vote for a self-denying ordinance.”
“Absolute power demoralizes.”
https://acton.org/research/lord-acton-quote-archive
Extraordinarily well said, Ms. Shure!
“No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It’s not if, it’s when.” –Nick Hanauer
It’s not clear to me that Hanauer actually recognizes that all his “educationism” (charters, firing “bad” teachers, etc) was bad, just that it wasn’t the simple “fix” for America that he claimed it would be.
I think this fellow would have to be interviewed in depth to know what he actually believes about charters, firing “bad” teachers, “personalized” learning, standardized testing, school closures and all the rest.
He has actually said nothing specific about any of them.
It’s good that he recognizes how stupid it is (and he was) to blame poverty, inequality and every other problem American faces on schools and teachers, but I’d like to know what he really believes about his “educationism” before I would conclude that he is now somehow being “scientific” about his approach.
The biggest problem is that anyone EVER listens to people like Hanauer. He may have made a lot of money, but that does not mean he is smart about things like education.
Oh, and I believe that people like Hanauer should be held personally accountable (legally, of course) for all the havoc they have wreaked on students, teachers and communities.
Those “bad” teachers that he refers to firing should bring a class action suit against him and his pal Gates for ruining their lives.
American communities should force Melinda Gates into reparations for her attacks on public education .
Give it a break, Hanauer has been ranting about inequality and empowering workers for quite some time. The surprising thing is that he thought that education was the key to solving that inequality.
As Krugman points out education may never have been a solution to inequality.
Political power, the ability to secure a piece of the pie is. That can be a billionaire greasing a politician or the mob standing in front of the Guillotine.
You as a teacher by definition have bought into” educationism” . It is a fundamental view of enlightened societies that we believe that education moves society forward, that we can change the ethos of a society by educating.
And to some degree we can but perhaps not as much as we like to believe.
Once you have bought into “educationalism” as Thomas Frank describes so well in “Listen Liberal” about this flaw in the Democratic elite. . Then you have bought into the fallacy that education can cure inequality. It is then only a small leap to say that if it isn’t, there must be something wrong in the schools. What you are criticizing Hanauer about is what he thought the cure for the schools should be. You both believed in “educationalism” or one would hope you would not be a teacher.
Hanauer has been one of the few billionaires to admit the system is rigged in his favor. Pointing out not just the inequality but the cause of that inequality being the economic dominance of his class in writing the rules of the game. Gates on the other hand does not. That Hanauer is now admitting that we can not educate our way out of inequality is a good thing.
That he is now admitting that “economic determinism” has far more effect on education than education has on the economic inequality is a good thing.
Joel Herman Some good things there in your argument.
The “however” there, however, is that the term equality is tacitly, mainly or even only, about the economics of living? If we are disappointed that education doesn’t always make for a fat bank account, perhaps we (and so many others, including billionaire intruders on education, and economists) think about education from a rather truncated capitalist-only horizon?
Also, in my own experience as a student, and then as a teacher, I found that the more courses I took (and gave), the more I read about the world, and the more people I came to know, including many teachers, the more I realized how impoverished a capitalist-only “economic equality” viewpoint really is. Often I had teachers in my classrooms who left high-paying jobs in business to teach for much less. There is a lesson in that.
We all need financial security–which in part is what teachers are striking about; however . . . .CBK
Joel-
If your comment relates to my view-
My argument for community reparations is based on (1) economic multiplier effect losses i.e. local education dollars weren’t spent locally (2) taxpayers in states like Ohio were fleeced out of billions by contractor schools that didn’t deliver on contracts (3) tax dollars were misspent e.g. excessive compensation for business owners, funds diverted to foreign nations (4) spending for charter schools produced no long term assets that the community owns (5) state politicians were corrupted by charter operator dollars which were used to influence policies and laws and, (6) pay-to-play dollars denied a level playing field to candidates for office.
Buffet expresses views that bother his fellow wealthy – the same thing Hanauer does.
Do Hanauer and Buffet believe what they say? Are their actions consistent with their arguments? Who are their messages targeted at/ what are their goals?
Catherine King
I fully agree. By saying that education is not the key to ending inequality. I am saying that the central focus of education should not be vocational(Economic).
If education focuses on building the individual as a citizen in society. He/she will develop the skills to understand and perhaps obtain Political / Economic power and at the same time be able to apply those skills to a career.
The trend as you say has been to view education as vocational prep. Diminishing the Arts Humanities and Social Sciences in Higher Ed, while tailoring elementary education to go forward in pursuit of narrow vocational goals, be it a lawyer an engineer or a tradesman.
The direction education was heading in the 60s, Higher Education in particular, was dangerous for “the enterprise system” (Powell) and there has been a half century concerted effort to make sure that it would no longer be. Once group think takes over people forget that the original goal of the reformers was control not increase opportunity. At that point it is easy to believe that one is doing good as Hanauer clearly did. . But as Hanauer points out and Diane for years; the masses are far more educated and yet they have a declining standard of living. We may be able to point to individual success but as a whole the working / middle class is getting killed. Even as wages are rising in this recovery they pale in comparison to late stages of other recoveries. The implication being when we enter the next down cycle workers will be even worse off and inequality will rise higher.
Cathrine King
My long response seems to have been lost in the internet. And I can not re-post it as a duplicate. So let us shorten it to say we agree.
Joel Herman I think your longer response did come through (above). But the sustained efforts over a long period of time to reduce civic culture to a pile of low-life rubble is most effective because it occurs slowly and with little or no self-awareness. (A point that the Putin Russians also know well.) It has manifest in “Trumpism.” Where, just today, we saw through a “window into Trump’s soul” where, first, he may understand that he breached the law, but second, he cares not about it. Rather, he just reveals his complete identity with his “me first” principle, and that principle wrapped in his constant reach for wealth regardless of his own word and oaths of office. CBK
Hi master Guru SomeDAM Poet:
First of all, I love some of your poems which is very witty and to the point that can punch bad deformers’ heart.
Each wise person has his / her own style of criticism. I love them all. I am typical slow and intermittent brain due to too many bad Drugs for two strokes on me.
The bottom line is that i like your suggestion. Yes, why not and why on Mr. sincerity, Hanauer. Is because of his past with Amazon? May
It found its way
Linda
It was not directed at you. If all Hanauer did was raise a public megaphone for the last 6 years. It would be more than most. Hanauer has far more than Buffet attacked the system. Repeatedly explaining how the power dynamic works to make him wealthy. As for Gates that is different.
I want to make it short. It is as simple as Hanauer calls for raising the minimum wage and Gates does not.
Gates is a spoiled brat who would not be a billionaire but for his Government granted monopolies. His education policy has been self serving.
Hanauer has more than enough PR already. There are plenty of individuals with boots on the ground expertise. The effects of poverty on children have been thoroughly researched. Teachers have been devastated by the malicious education reform movement. Hanauer and his cronies should refrain from pontificating about matters which they know nothing.
Quotable quote: “In short, great public schools are the product of a thriving middle class, not the other way around.”
Apparently Hanauer is a responsible philanthropist who reviews results related to his social projects and rethinks donations/ civic engagement in line with observed data. His healthy attitude is unlikely to rub off on villainthropists due to their hidden agendas of union-busting, corp feeding at public trough, & product sales. They may not move off the dime until they hear the mob calling for their heads.
He will have no effect on DeVos but maybe Gates will take note
They are completely different. He will have no effect on Gates.
Agree about Gates and DeVos. Reptiles are limited by their lack of souls.
Vampires … not reptiles.
Healthy attitude? He is helping to support charter schools in NYC! He lists his philanthropic activities at his website. He contributes to Robinhood Foundation which supports three charters, including the Success Academies run by Eva. Robinhood is famous for publishing metrics on the economic worth of every thing and using these metrics to determine where some philanthropic dollars may produce high return in social impact at the lowest possible cost. The metrics include a ” quality of life years” measure and a calculation of the worth of a high quality preschool program at about $50,000 per child…a sum no philanthropist is willing to pay for poor children of color.
Hauser continues to make money by funding startups. I clicked on the links. Many of the startups are designed to produce efficiencies in existing businesses, but a few listed at the website are not. One is a line of cosmetics. Another is an app that lets people choose clothes that imitate the styles worn by celebrities.
Hauser is joining another economist whose ideas he has borrowed and forwarded. The book is progress and the supporting research has been criticized for not having been published in orthodox peer reviewed publications in economics. The best thing about Hauser seems to be that the ideas he is circulating, not entirely his own, are scaring orthodox economists.
Chiara asks 6/11 9:59am: “Since when it is the public’s job to provide them with off the shelf employees trained for their particular sector?” As she says, they used to do it. I’ve had a birdseye view of this, as I worked for a decade in the engrg/constr co where my husband still works 4 decades later (those it’s undergone many name changes).
US corporations managed to put the humongous babyboom college-grad cohort to work, ‘70’s-mid-‘80’s, regardless of “major,” as biz boomed before digital revolution/ globalization—combined w/Reagan-era deregulation—set in.
There were tons of entry-level career-path positions. For blacks/ browns & women too, thanks to affirmative action. Back then they were promoting mail-room & clerical employees to tech positions, recognizing that their experience was equivalent to on-the-job training. I mgd that decade-long corporate career between teaching stints, thanks to a ’72 Katharine Gibbs course called “Entree,” specifically designed to place female 4-yr college grads in jumping-off position to take tech jobs in male-only fields courtesy of shorthand and typing. By ’75 I had a career-path position & was training male newbies w/BA but no job experience (& I was a French major!)
There is nothing remotely like this level of opportunity for my millennial arts-degree sons. Their peers’ experience shows entry-level training-on-the-job is still out there in the huge Manhattan job market, but salaries are modest & entail lengthy expensive commute from multiple-roommate house-rentals– a hand-to-mouth existence. So far they prefer hand-to-mouth via what-they-were-trained-for gig supplemented by Uber, Door-Dash, catering-delivery etc. I reassure them this is the way to go: they, like me [free-lance Spanish for private PreK’s], are providing services that the increasing cohort of rich parents need. Their musical gigs grow slowly, but steadily replace the other gig w/more & higher-pd hrs.
Their only peers who “made it” in timely fashion are in finance/ brokerage (& to a lesser degree, medicine & law)– & all (unlike them) saddled w/a lifetime of college-debt payback. Others who set aside music/ art for trades, thinking it a faster route to home-ownership/ family—incl the ones who relocated to cheaper states—have encountered setbacks in every minor business downturn. [We can credit that to our pro-corp anti-pubgoods crumbling infrastructure.]
So how did this happen? As automation/ globalization/ deregulation set in, entry-level/ training-on-the job positions—the way onto a promising career path for middle-class people– disappeared. Big middle-class-friendly corporations w/entry-level jobs like IBM, Kodak, Xerox etc either folded or retained mere skeletal staffs in US. In the corps that remained (like the engrg/contr corps w/which I’m familiar), computers gradually became capable of filing, sorting, research– & soon obviated the need for formal letters/ paperwork/ copying via internet communication—emails w/attached PDF’s etc. Secretaries/ pool typists/ mailroom staff [wkg/ lower-midclass jobs potentially promotable to tech positions] disappeared. For a brief period, there was room for “admin assts”—glorified clericals w/4-yr degrees—but budget cuts pushed them out as soon as computers could do half their jobs & the rest was tossed in the air [left to the techs]. Simultaneously, killer global competition meant that the work of overhead depts which traditionally hired BA’s from any major [purchasing, traffic, QA, proj mgt, proj devpt—mid-uppermid-class jobs] was folded into small depts staffed w/adv-degree folks [legal, bus devpt] & the leftover work, again, thrown onto the backs of the tech folk [engrs].
There were many losses here: the advanced-degree mid-uppermid class workhorses [engrs, corp lawyers, mba’s] were saddled w/huge add’l supervision—as their newbie subordinates had neither wkgclass folks to do chores nor midclass assistants to guide them– & simultaneously had to assume the inescapable data-entry associated w/the now missing clericals, i.e., typing, sorting, filing, etc related to communication/ documentation. The trumpeted “increased productivity” ‘70’s to present was bought at the cost of wkg/midclass jobs, significantly lower QOL for mid/uppermid workers, & arguably quality of product.
The whole picture is mirrored in the teaching profession,. Pro-corp anti-pubgoods policy downgrades midclass teaching jobs to wkgclass salaries in the growing privatized sector; digital automation/ corp clout fattened by offshored cheap labor incentivizes ever-increasing data demands on pubschs– unfunded mandates, which combined w/state ed-budget cuts caused by corp-starved pub budgets means central-office [lower-midclass jobs] eliminated & teachers [midclass workers] job reqts inflated w/data-entry, resulting in significant lower QOL due to many more hrs’ work for same salaries.
Well, good for him… and KISS: no sh-t!!! We have always known this.
Turn him on to Robert Reich for a start.
Elizabeth Warren is probably the smartest and most able out there now.
Ralph Nader is good on a lot.
Etc.
How he can now best use his money? Good question methinks.
Thanks DR!!! Neal
Love and hi to Deb Meier… the best!
PS— the ignorance of the electorate is appalling— 63 million voting for our NY clown king… looks like education HAS failed in civic ed… social studies…! What would Howard Zinn say… The worst is how public policy is shaped by interests of greed!!! We The People is a joke— $ special interests DO rule! YOU know all this. Thanks! Neal.
I know for sure some vote for the clown because they could not vote for Bernie as a Dem candidate.
BA, that was never a choice.
If people are still voting for Trump, they will never vote for Bernie. And it is insulting to Bernie for anyone to insist that the same people who are drawn to a racist, xenophobic, neo-fascist-enabling, ignorant liar would ever vote for Bernie.
If Bernie had been the opponent, the anti-Semites would have been released and Trump’s supporters would have voted for Trump with even more devotion.
I have forgotten BA’s history, but is it possible that s/he meant that some people voted for Trump, as opposed to Hillary, because Bernie wasn’t the Democrats’ candidate? In other words, they would have voted for Bernie if he had been on the ticket. This scenario doesn’t make much more sense than the other although there did seem to be a number of Bernie people here that could not vote for Hillary, who I doubt could stomach voting for Trump when it came down to it. Of course, did anyone imagine that Trump would turn out to be as incompetent as he has?
To BA (= Bullxxitter Analysis)
R u a troll or work for Russia? How much do you get pay to utter nonsensical post in this blog?
I am sick and tired of Trump advisor or master to allow Russia with military help. OMG, where are those conscientious commanders in US
military? Please talk to all immigrants at old age and educated background plus well manner from all countries under communists to understand. Do not be mistaken those wolves in sheep clothes.
I am soon departing this Earth. I do not want to see HONG KONG AND NORTH AMERICA innocent citizens to become like me = immigrants with so much hard work to survive.
All readers in this blog need to train yourselves to be ready for living with real communists or fascists from bad foreigners = bad wolves in sheep clothes.
Whoever pretends to analyze about good Presidential candidates, then they are working for Trump. Please focus to vote for a person who has worked hard or done good deed for their own community as the good start to vote. Back2basic
To have Nick Hanauer as an ally would be extraordinary. This articulate and succinct Atlantic essay is almost irrefutable in its cool logic, It would take a willful denial (that alas we are all used to) to dismiss the obvious INEQUALITY in the room.
I hope this change of heart means his pocketbook and clear voice will come over to the side of justice and fairness.
A billionaire giving away a couple of millions is like someone earning couple of thousand dollars a month giving five bucks to a beggar on an intersection — that is, peanuts. It is just good PR. Ten years ago good PR was to praise charters, now good PR is to praise public schools. He is smart to have realized this earlier than many other of his ilk.
To the rich class but without peace in mind:
You need to ask why the fable about LION is saved by a tiny mouse that lion id not eat it in the past, not because a lion has sympathy on a tiny mouse but the mouse cannot be full in lion’s stomach.
Likewise, the rich class could not predict when pitchfork and sniper visit them and their loved ones regardless how much security they have and how cunning they can be.
Is it that a peaceful life those rich people with kids love to enjoy their life? I am deeply sorry for their grandchildren in the future with a stunning question that they get killed by no reason to future public= karma comes after all. BELIEVE OR NOT is still a puzzle wonder!
Back2basic