Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
A good idea in theory, and one I support, but what will it really accomplish apart from just being patriotic political grandstanding? Public schools do need to be placing more emphasis on teaching what is actually needed for being productive in the "real world." Will this really help with that?

I think having the citizens knowledgeable about how our government is supposed to work might be a good step for getting our government to actually get to work. While it might not help a graduate get a job and keep a roof over his head, hopefully it will make our democracy stronger.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
If you fail it, it's clear that they report your sorry ass to the worst location on the planet.

Also, I only knew a few of those questions in the video. I'd be going to the worst country on the planet.


That's like France or something, right? If Captain America hates them, I'll follow his lead.

No, I think it's Arizona?

All the failures get deported to New Jersey.

 Grey Templar wrote:
All the failures get deported to New Jersey.

Wait?!?! WTF?!?! I thought that was SOP already?!?!?!

It was, but unfortunately the guy who wrote the shipping addresses mixed up the labels and they ended up getting sent to Congress instead.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
A good idea in theory, and one I support, but what will it really accomplish apart from just being patriotic political grandstanding? Public schools do need to be placing more emphasis on teaching what is actually needed for being productive in the "real world." Will this really help with that?

Well, public schools aren't trade schools; I don't see anything wrong with general education just for the sake of churning out better-educated citizens.

I don't understand how they are being considered the first in the nation...

I had to pass a US constitution test in order to graduate both 8th grade, and another in order to graduate high school (which also included state constitution questions). This was over twenty years ago.

As someone who has to do this in a few years I have no issue with this.

I would like to see it expanded though, and have a mandatory test on the Constitution for all members of Congress prior to taking office, and every election term thereafter.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
As someone who has to do this in a few years I have no issue with this.

I would like to see it expanded though, and have a mandatory test on the Constitution for all members of Congress prior to taking office, and every election term thereafter.

Let’s not single out congress. There are two other branches of our government that should also have to take it.

 Redbeard wrote:
I don't understand how they are being considered the first in the nation...

I had to pass a US constitution test in order to graduate both 8th grade, and another in order to graduate high school (which also included state constitution questions). This was over twenty years ago.

It was a different test than the one immigrants take. Same material, but different pool of questions. For some reason, that's an important enough distinction to spend money on...

Pop-quiz for the legislature: if they flunk the same test the law is void.

 d-usa wrote:
Pop-quiz for the legislature: if they flunk the same test the law is void.

Yup. And a statement of compliance (similar to the UK's Declaration of Compatibility with the European Convention of Human Rights) saying how the law conforms to the Constitution, and does not undermine it.

 Redbeard wrote:
I don't understand how they are being considered the first in the nation...

I had to pass a US constitution test in order to graduate both 8th grade, and another in order to graduate high school (which also included state constitution questions). This was over twenty years ago.

Hey now dammit....never mind because I did the same myself. Watters World just makes me sad

We had one of those things in high school. It was basically just rote memorization of names of senators and the like.

Clearly prepared me for the real world better than more math or science would have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Probably less worthless than the DARE classes that were more important than science was at the time though.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Agree completely. Students should take a mandatory government and civics class along with a class in macro economics and a semester on business.
These are important for every citizen.

Interestingly this actually was required in Ohio to graduate up until, I think, 2002.

We were required to take government, economics, and public speaking as a part of the requirements. All classes with functional use in the "real world."

How far we've fallen in a short 12 years.

Is it not still required in Ohio? I graduated after 2002 and I still had to take government and economics. Didn't have to do public speaking though, my school didn't even offer it as far as I know, and didn't prior to 2002 either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:
We had one of those things in high school. It was basically just rote memorization of names of senators and the like.

Clearly prepared me for the real world better than more math or science would have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Probably less worthless than the DARE classes that were more important than science was at the time though.

I actually learned a lot in my DARE classes.

 Redbeard wrote:
I don't understand how they are being considered the first in the nation...

I had to pass a US constitution test in order to graduate both 8th grade, and another in order to graduate high school (which also included state constitution questions). This was over twenty years ago.

Was it required by State law? Or was it simply a requirement of the Board of Education?

 timetowaste85 wrote:
If you fail it, it's clear that they report your sorry ass to the worst location on the planet.

So If I fail I get into America anyway?

 Da krimson barun wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
If you fail it, it's clear that they report your sorry ass to the worst location on the planet.

So If I fail I get into America anyway?

I don't know... what's the only crime in the US that you won't be prosecuted?

If you fail you simply have to pass an optional physical portion which consists of swimming across a river and climbing fences.

Or cross vast tracks of desert

 Jihadin wrote:
Or cross vast tracks of desert

 Hordini wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
We had one of those things in high school. It was basically just rote memorization of names of senators and the like.

Clearly prepared me for the real world better than more math or science would have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Probably less worthless than the DARE classes that were more important than science was at the time though.

I actually learned a lot in my DARE classes.

I can't remember if I had any drug education programs when I was in school, but is DARE useful at all? I mean 100% of my experiences with drugs have been positive so I have a hard time taking any program that says drugs are bad seriously (obviously it can be but the level of exaggeration

some of these programs have can get pretty out of hand).

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
We had one of those things in high school. It was basically just rote memorization of names of senators and the like.

Clearly prepared me for the real world better than more math or science would have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Probably less worthless than the DARE classes that were more important than science was at the time though.

I actually learned a lot in my DARE classes.

I can't remember if I had any drug education programs when I was in school, but is DARE useful at all? I mean 100% of my experiences with drugs have been positive so I have a hard time taking any program that says drugs are bad seriously (obviously it can be but the level of exaggeration

some of these programs have can get pretty out of hand).

It was definitely anti-drug, but I learned a lot about various types of drugs and their effects and problems abuse can cause. The difference between stimulants and depressants, and that kind of thing. A lot of good factual information in addition to the "drugs are bad" stuff.

OK sounds like a fairly decent program they have clearly taken a stance on the idea of drugs but at least they provide enough info for people come up with their own conclusions (which is a good thing).

Works for me. I tried taking that test once. I did fine except I didn't know any of the Supreme Court justices (which seems like a strange and oddly specific requirement for that exam). Other than that it seemed like basic "American history/Social Studies" knowledge to me.

P.S. On the subject of drugs, I am of the opinion that the government should just legalize everything and slap a "manufacture/distribution" tax on it all. Could help reduce crime associated with drug cartels and lower the national debt at the same time.

You have to admit though its easier to explain someone who is not from the US but bashes the US Government over stupid crap. Its win/win for you

 dementedwombat wrote:
Works for me. I tried taking that test once. I did fine except I didn't know any of the Supreme Court justices (which seems like a strange and oddly specific requirement for that exam). Other than that it seemed like basic "American history/Social Studies" knowledge to me.

P.S. On the subject of drugs, I am of the opinion that the government should just legalize everything and slap a "manufacture/distribution" tax on it all. Could help reduce crime associated with drug cartels and lower the national debt at the same time.

I'd be fine with that personally, if they also did something like how the FDA approves drugs, just to make sure it's not one of the drugs that kills you 50% of the time or something like that.

I always found it interesting how the "socially acceptable drugs", alcohol and caffeine (which is very similar to cocaine from a chemical composition perspective), and cigarets (which are pretty much concentrated death from a chemical composition perspective) are fine but the "non acceptable drugs" aren't. Either ban it all (like Prohibition, and we all know how well that worked) or institute some impartial group to see how bad these drugs actually are for you and legalize things based on that.

 dementedwombat wrote:
Works for me. I tried taking that test once. I did fine except I didn't know any of the Supreme Court justices (which seems like a strange and oddly specific requirement for that exam). Other than that it seemed like basic "American history/Social Studies" knowledge to me.

P.S. On the subject of drugs, I am of the opinion that the government should just legalize everything and slap a "manufacture/distribution" tax on it all. Could help reduce crime associated with drug cartels and lower the national debt at the same time.

While it would eliminate the small time crime, it wouldn't faze the cartels. These things would be taxed out the wazoo, and the Cartels could still provide a cheaper source than legal. Illegal cigarettes and booze still exist. The difference is the Cartels already have infrastructure and logistics for this stuff.

And under no circumstances should things like Meth, LSD, or Heroin be legalized. That stuff is just so abhorrent it shouldn't, and never will, be legalized here.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
Works for me. I tried taking that test once. I did fine except I didn't know any of the Supreme Court justices (which seems like a strange and oddly specific requirement for that exam). Other than that it seemed like basic "American history/Social Studies" knowledge to me.

P.S. On the subject of drugs, I am of the opinion that the government should just legalize everything and slap a "manufacture/distribution" tax on it all. Could help reduce crime associated with drug cartels and lower the national debt at the same time.

While it would eliminate the small time crime, it wouldn't faze the cartels. These things would be taxed out the wazoo, and the Cartels could still provide a cheaper source than legal. Illegal cigarettes and booze still exist. The difference is the Cartels already have infrastructure and logistics for this stuff.

And under no circumstances should things like Meth, LSD, or Heroin be legalized. That stuff is just so abhorrent it shouldn't, and never will, be legalized here.

Aye, illegal versions of legal commodities will always exist, but hopefully by legalizing it we would reduce the effect of such commodities and, hopefully, reduce the horrible things these cartels do by result (admittedly I have not thought about this deeply so I could be quite wrong). Also that argument about abhorrent drugs gets into the whole issue of personal freedoms vs responsibility to the state. I am personally of the opinion that most things should be legalized and people sort out the consequences themselves, but again this may not be the most practical stance when it is brought under strict scrutiny.