How frightening far we've fallen - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

Fogbuster · 02-12-2009, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patters

Reagan signaled a cultural shift. Under Kennedy, the sciences became increasingly important and that was pretty much embraced in education policy and national policy through Carter. But, under Reagan, we shifted from science to business and religious groups gained a lot more influence. Regardless of Bush's personal beliefs (and Clinton's too), the influence of science decreased as the influence of religious groups increased and business fields began attracting talent that would have otherwise have gone into the sciences.

Reagan was the "result" of Americans' desires where they wanted to go; he was never the "cause".

After 4 years under one or the very worst presidencies in American history, after seeing gas lines a mile long, gas rationing, stagflation -- where there was record inflation with simultaneous zero economic growth -- and then, to top it off: to have the rag-tag Shiite fanatics take over Iran and then capture the entire United States Embassy, holding some 54 prisoners for 444 days, the American people wanted out of Carter and the failed Dem presidency in the worst way. Reagan just happened to be there. He looked good, sounded good, so he was chosen, chosen by the American people.

//

***Patters*** · 02-12-2009, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stokes

Science is a business, and the business-friendly policies of the 80s through today allowed for some of the greatest scientific achievements known to man by American researchers and American companies. The "Age of Reagan" was also the dawn of personal computing as well as biotechnology. Scientific research of all kinds has been well funded throughout our recent history. Any cuts were small and at times when other offices were being cut as well.

I guess the other part of it is let's assume there was a cultural shift (what would that same poll you posted have been in 1960? 1970?), do you blame the government for it or the people? And again making an assumption and saying it was the people, what should the government have done? More money? Strong statements ridiculing creationism?

I'm not saying the age of Reagan did everything bad. There are certainly a handful of things I agree with Reagan about. But, while business has been good to many aspects of science, the general education of the public has lagged. This involves support, as we did after Sputnik awakened us from our stupor, for more public education and more grants to the sciences. I think it's just a matter of time before some threatening breakthrough in another part of the globe takes place and we suddenly realize how far behind we are in the sciences.

Stokes · 02-12-2009, 10:59 AM

Patters, just had a thought that maybe I was misinterpreting you, maybe what you were saying is that you hope the election of Obama signals another cultural shift to a more secular, I guess you might say enlightened age, not that the government was going to effect the change you were hoping for. That idea I could understand (but probably still disagree with!).

Stokes · 02-12-2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patters

I'm not saying the age of Reagan did everything bad. There are certainly a handful of things I agree with Reagan about. But, while business has been good to many aspects of science, the general education of the public has lagged. This involves support, as we did after Sputnik awakened us from our stupor, for more public education and more grants to the sciences. I think it's just a matter of time before some threatening breakthrough in another part of the globe takes place and we suddenly realize how far behind we are in the sciences.

We are still THE world leader in much of the science I am familiar with. Other countries (particularly in Europe) are starting to catch up, but that is due to them placing the same focus on science that we do, not us lagging behind them. It would be difficult or impossible for us to jump out ahead again as we were before, just like in other sectors we had to adapt to increasing international competition (autos, manufacturing, etc.). A focus on the sciences is a good thing definitely, but increased funding may not have the profound effect we would be looking for.

***reflexblue*** · 02-12-2009, 11:03 AM

You old fool gas line started in Nixons time. Stagflation/Nixon. Yeah that was really a rag tag militia.......its still in power and has more influence in the region than we do. As for Carter I recently looked up the hx of his presidency. Hes not nearly as bad as you people make him out to be. For one he brought some sembalance of peace to the ME getting Egypt and Israel to sign the Camp David Accords. Thats more than George "Bonzo the chimp" Bush did.

***Patters*** · 02-12-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reflexblue

You old fool gas line started in Nixons time. Stagflation/Nixon. Yeah that was really a rag tag militia.......its still in power and has more influence in the region than we do. As for Carter I recently looked up the hx of his presidency. Hes not nearly as bad as you people make him out to be. For one he brought some sembalance of peace to the ME getting Egypt and Israel to sign the Camp David Accords. Thats more than George "Bonzo the chimp" Bush did.

Carter was certainly better than Bush. He deserves great credit for his role in the Camp David peace accords and for making human rights a real part of our foreign policy (at least until Bush came along). Also, his economic policies weren't the greatest, but by the end of his term he managed to get the economy moving in the right direction, which is more than Bush did.

Stokes · 02-12-2009, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patters

Carter was certainly better than Bush. He deserves great credit for his role in the Camp David peace accords and for making human rights a real part of our foreign policy (at least until Bush came along). Also, his economic policies weren't the greatest, but by the end of his term he managed to get the economy moving in the right direction, which is more than Bush did.

Human rights were only a part of his foreign policy when it suited his needs. The policy of detente ignored the suffering of those living under communist rule. Reagan was the one to really push for human rights for large portions of the globe.

The economy was not moving in the right direction in 1980.

Nixon's admin did much of the heavy lifting in the ME peace agreement, believe it or not.

Stokes · 02-12-2009, 11:14 AM

Wanted to post this, its math and science scores from 2008 in a cool interactive map. What it shows me is that we're right in line with Europe for both and Asia in science, but lag behind Asia in math. Be interesting to find the historical numbers and see if in fact it has been a case of other countries catching up to us vs. us falling back to the pack, which is what your theory should show us Patters.

World math and science scores - Boston.com

***Harry Boy*** · 02-12-2009, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reflexblue

You really are a festering sore on the azz of humanity

Softly And Tenderly
Jesus Is Calling
Calling For You And For Me
Beyond The Portals
He's Waiting And Watching
Watching For You And For Me

Smite the scumsucking Pelosi Bastards Dear Lord Smite The Son Of A B!tches Good, For They Know Full Well What They Do, Burn Them Oh Sweet Lord Savior Jesus Christ Burn Them In Hell, Oh My God.

Fogbuster · 02-12-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patters

Carter was certainly better than Bush. He deserves great credit for his role in the Camp David peace accords and for making human rights a real part of our foreign policy (at least until Bush came along). Also, his economic policies weren't the greatest, but by the end of his term he managed to get the economy moving in the right direction, which is more than Bush did.

Carter was so much "better" that some 18 countries went communist during his presidency, including Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, and Nicaragua. Carter was the worst president in American history for his total ignorance as to the actual design, purpose, strategy and tactics of communism. He almost gave America away on a platter to the Soviets. Totally incompetent.

//