And this is why instead of a large city of Birmingham, you have a large amount of spun off mini-cities in the area each with their own schools and municipal infrastructure (Hoover, Mountain Brook, etc). Of the many friends I know that live in Birmingham, none of them actually technically live in the city of Birmingham.
The separate school districts of Birmingham suburbs aren't exactly due to corruption... many of them emerged in the 1950s-70s as a way of evading desegregation.
How is something that seems so obvious and trivial patentable? In the physical world this seems like patenting doorknobs that rotate to the left versus the ones that rotate to the right that everyone was already using.
great vids. the often overlooked flip-side is that cops Don't Like uncooperative people, so you could save yourself a pricey court appearance by cooperating when innocent.
True story: traffic cop pulls me over, turns out im doing something wrong and he could have me towed. cop asks to search my car for drugs and weapons. "Do I have the right to refuse this search?" Cop responds that I do, but heavily implies that he will have me towed if I refuse. I consented, he found no drugs or guns, I was allowed to drive away.
True story: I was driving home after a long day out with friends (hiking with some, dinner with another). Started feeling very sleepy, pulled off the freeway to take a nap. Woke with a flashlight in my face and highway patrol knocking on my window.
Exited the car, locking it. Identified myself and presented ID. Refused consent to search the vehicle: "I don't consent to any search". Officer implied strongly that he could get a warrant (it's around midnight). "You do what you've got to do, I don't consent to a search".
Got breathalyzed (I could have refused this but that would have required a trip for a blood draw), which was clean (hadn't consumed any alcohol for hours). Eventually allowed to go on my way.
Later realized I had a couple of prescription painkiller pills given by a friend (for severe pain I was experiencing at the time) which probably wouldn't have been a good thing to turn up in a search. The This American Life drug court segment relates a story that could have been very similar to mine.
Given the premise of the original article, electing not to assert your rights isn't particularly safe.
Note that when I did assert my rights, I really didn't have any reason for doing so other than that they are my rights. It was literally a couple of years later that I made the association between the stop and the possibility that I may have been carrying what were technically illegal drugs.
One of the guides in a documentary on it said that if Everest was at sea level, you would take your kids to summit it. But the altitude makes it a completely different animal. I wonder what the statistics are on frostbite and amputated body parts (fingers, toes). All of the documentaries I've watched seem to include a pretty high rate of some kind of frostbite in many of the climbers.
If your lease was not up for renewal, you probably could have gotten out of your lease by refusing to sign it. Refusing to sign it and taking your business elsewhere is one of the best ways to let them know that you won't stand for this type of thing. And then spread the word to anyone that will listen about why you don't recommend doing business with that establishment.
Refusing to sign it and taking your business elsewhere is one of the best ways to let them know that you won't stand for this type of thing.
Although this is probably the best way to let them know, unfortunately real world constraints often mean that there are a very small percentage of people who are in a position to truly have a choice between not renewing their lease (in this example) and renewing it. Therefore, a company who is only being affected by those people who don't like their policy and have a choice to follow through will likely receive very little feedback. This is why, I feel, although on paper it works, in real life unfortunately one must insist on other ways to get our point across, including the ones mentioned in replies to the OP.
When it comes to proposed US laws, the simple way to tell if the law is good or bad is as follows. If the name makes it sound like it is good for you, then it is definitely bad for you and should be voted against.
True, so we really shouldn't limit it then since it is the public's best interests. We should stop all motorists periodically and check them for warrants, license, insurance, impairment level, maybe take a DNA sample in case they have committed a crime but haven't been caught yet. Probably should also allow searches of people's home and property in case there is criminal activity going on too. Probable cause is very overrated.
That is one thing I never understood. There are less requirements to teach at the college level than to teach high school. Most people don't realize that most college teachers have never actually had any education courses, they just happen to have attained advanced degrees.
I think that the requirements should be lowered for K-12 teachers.
The reason things got so bad is that there are a lot of education majors that go into K-12 education because it's easy. These are people that couldn't pass introductory science courses, let alone teach them to undergraduates. And there are lots of them, so they try to differentiate between themselves by getting masters degrees in easy (as opposed to chemistry or physics) fields such as education. Over time, this must have ossified to the point we are today, which is that this puffed-up "educational" arms race between teachers has translated into an institutional requirement.
One of the reasons I didn't respect many of my grade school teachers is that they didn't actually know anything, and I could tell.
I think one thing that would help is that teachers should actually have a real degree with a minor in education, instead of the other way around, and that the pay would incentivize away from teachers just picking communications and getting away with that.
Imagine if your history teachers had a history degree, your english teachers had an english degree, your kindergarden teachers had a sociology degree or (a more rigorous) early childhood development degree, and that the pay was competitive, if not more than what they would expect otherwise (for english and history majors, this wouldn't be so hard) Right now, teachers have every incentive to get in the 5 year Masters program in education and not learn anything about what they are teaching, but learn how to teach.
I agree with the end you have in mind, but I don't think that legal requirements should (or could) be used to make it happen. What we're talking about is inevitable if we separate the government from education completely.
In a free education market, parents would be free to ask a private school's administration, "What does your math teacher know about math, and what credentials does he have to prove it?"
