Alas… NAKED TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hello blog,

It’s been such a long time since the last post.  What’s crackin?????

…

What? You’re calling child protection services on me??  On grounds of … neglect???

Okay, whatever.

Alright. So WordPress has this nifty feature that allows the user to check what searches have led them to the site.  Here’s my list:

“jpoelman wordpress,  jpoelman,  vania liu evhs,  alicia xiong mit,  alicia xiong at mit”

LOL!!!! IF YOU HAPPEN TO BE ONE OF THOSE STALKERS, SORRY – I’M A BOY!! LOL@U!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

—

Many thangs have happened since el ultimo posto.  For example, Stanford football straight up beat down (thas right – straight up beat down) Oregon and U$C; those were two very heartwarming weeks indeed.  Something else happened last week against a minor school from the East Bay.  Moving on, a butt-whooping is on the menu for Notre Dame next week, and I hope to obtain pictorial evidence to prove as much.

Regarding that school from the East Bay, I do have something to say on the debate between “public” and “private” school.  Being raised in public skoo myself, and being proud of my “pub” status, it shook me to go to a private school and no longer have that populist swagger.

No one would argue that forcing the general taxpayer to subsidize someone else’s child’s education is an ideal, let alone fair, situation.  Despite this, free public K12 education provides enough of a public good that it is a reasonable, even necessary burden on society to provide that service.  Private school enrollment is necessary at this level when public schools fail to provide a safe environment or an adequate academic experience.  Children who go to private school at the secondary level are thus seen as escapist and out of touch with the real world.  The considerable financial requirements of private school, which exclude it from the reach of all but upper-middle class households, further adds to this perception.  In fact, I would argue that the price and inaccesability of K12 level private school does much to push this perception into the realm of reality.  As a result, the social life and student body makeup at private high schools vis a vis public high schools are often markedly different.

In college, the situation changes dramatically.  Students are matched to schools that are at a suitable level for them academically, and college campuses are typically safe places (save a certain school in the East Bay).  Thus, choosing a private school is in no way a form of escapism or a retreat to a cuddly utopia.  The financial burden of private school tuition is highest on upper-middle class households, and typically lowest on the lowest income households, often to the point where private school is the more attractive option for low income households.  Finally, as a university education is not an inalienable right, there is no legitimate moral argument to suggest that taxpayers should be obligated to subsidize its cost.  How a taxpayer funded education is morally superior to a self-funded education is beyond me.

Where we arrive then, is that a public university education is not inherently superior to a private school university education in terms of exposure to the “real world” or any other intangible benefit that comes from interacting with people from various backgrounds.  This is especially true in light of the social stratification that occurs naturally as a result of the varying academic strength of different colleges.  Secondly, a public education is not morally superior to a private institution just because state residents are forced to subsidize it.

I am not out to argue the merits or demerits of having a public university system.  At its best, a taxpayer funded university efficiently provides an affordable education to the residents of its state.  The University of California is one of the best universities in the world, and I would be honored to be a student at one of its campuses.  Likewise, the Cal State and Cal Poly systems are a vibrant consortium that turns thousands of well-educated, well-adjusted individuals loose on the state of California each year.

I am simply stating that gaining some sort of strange pride from attending a publicly funded university is unfounded.  Simple school pride is a healthier substitute.

—–

When I first began to question the supremacy of public school education, I had to question myself too.  “I’m a public school kid.” What does that even mean?  Guts?  Cunning? Street-smarts?  Humility? Not being Caucasian?  For California high schoolers, I still thinks it means those things (except the Caucasian part), though far less then I’d probably thought.

Then, in college, being a public school kid suddenly means… almost nothing at all.  As a typical California public school graduate, I likely wouldn’t fit in at private Amherst College, but I probably wouldn’t fit in at public University of Virginia either (Can you say polos and khakis?).  In fact, the student bodies themselves of Stanford and Berkeley are surprisingly similar bunch personality-wise (Stanford students aren’t always smug and Berkeley students don’t always have a chip on their shoulder).  Ethnically, we have more African Americans and Caucasians, Berkeley has more Asians and Hispanics… a wash, really.

—-

DRAT!

Looks like this entry became serious.

Well, I hope it was worth reading.

I’m hoping to update regularly throughout Thanksgiving and Christmas break.  Mostly about hot babes, drugs, and hip-hop – the three things that sustain me.

OCHOCINCO OUT!