It has 16th place in a list of best-educated countries. The United States is in 17th place. Here is the list starting with Finland, the best-educated country in the world:
So, my question for you is why can't the richest country in the world come in ahead of Belgium, Poland, and Canada?
One man thinks he knows...
Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant suggested on Tuesday that a decline in American education was precipitated by the mass entry of mothers into the work place.
Bryant's remarks, which came during a Washington Post event, immediately stirred controversy amid a recent broad discussion over women's roles as family "breadwinners."
At the Washington Post event, Bryant was asked why he thought the country's educational state had gotten "so mediocre."
"I'm going to get in trouble. You want me to tell the truth? You know, I think both parents started working," Bryant said. "The mom is in the work place."
According to the Post, Bryant immediately tried to clarify his remarks, saying that "both parents are so pressured" in modern family situations. (source)
Now, it's hard to talk about this subject without women getting their backs up because they know that a lot of people are happy to blame one more bad thing on the improvement of the lot of women over recent decades. I heard one female commentator say that Finland has an even higher proportion of families with two employed parents and yet they have a better educated populace than the United States. I wonder, however, how many Finlandish families have latchkey children? Perhaps Finnish children do not leave school for an empty home but instead have some sort of free childcare for the younger children and perhaps activities for the older children.
Anyway, on what do YOU blame the poor performance of American schools.
Doesn't sound racist to me.
I have been banned from forums for saying Jews are not a race and recommending The Invention of the Jewish People. Dawkins' board for one. In fact they even ended the ability of members to post new topics.
At times I bill myself as the most banned user in the known universe. Of course I do have a tendency to stomp on sore spots when I find them. Which leads to my tale of Sean O'Clast, Icon Smasher.
I suppose that depends on your behavior - my research indicates that Jews are directly descended from Amorites, a people living in Syria around 2000 BCE. That would certainly not make them a race unto themselves, but a part of the vast number of Semite tribes in the middle east.
On the map below, orange represents Semite concentration:
Unfortunately for the "theory" Amorites are an imaginary people found only in Septuagint fiction aka the Old Testament. Simple hint, any group ending in ITE is fiction for example Israelite. The closest to reality you will ever get is fake archaeologists who work bible stories into the region despite the total absence of physical evidence.
"Amorite" is a slightly more modern name for the Amurrites, followers of the god, Amurru, aka, "El Shaddai," the first god worshiped by the Jews before he was evolved into what became known as, "Yahweh."
The Amorites, or Amurrites, gradually took over the entire territory of Mesopotamia from the Akkadians, who took it from the Sumerians. The Amorites governed from about 2000 BCE to roughly 1500 BCE. Hammurabi was an Amorite.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information, Matt.
I have never heard of any god Amurra nor apparently has google. Care to enlighten me? However El Shaddai is also only found in Septuagint fiction just as the Wizard is only found in Oz.
"the land of the MAR.TU (Amorites)" is the closest I can find and it is a good example of the fake archaeologist crap. Lets call the Mar Tu Amorites. Why? The bible tells me so.
Similarly I have come across fraud openly connecting El Shaddai with the Ugarit gods. Read a little further and learn only the god El is mentioned. Shaddai is found only the the Septuagint.
Possibly that's because you're spelling it wrong, it's Amurru. Early on, the Amorites divided, some remained plains nomads, while the others developed an agriculture and ultimately built cities. Some surrounding cultures referred to the nomadic group as Ammurite, while calling the city-dwellers, Martu - truth is, they were of the same stock.
RE: "Shaddai is found only the the Septuagint." - sorry, it's found in the history of the Amurrite people, totally independently of the Torah, Septuagint or the Vulgate.
I respect the fact that you hold very strong opinions, Matt, but I have studied the Amorites for far too long to simply take one person's word that all of my work has been for nothing.
This might keep you busy for awhile:
Ya got me there. Five sources anonymous, crackpot or both. I cannot compete with that.
I'm 66. When I was very young, "race" meant white/black/oriental (the latter, renamed "Asian," included Native Americans, who were called "Indians" back then).
Then, the deluge. All of a sudden race wasn't based on skin color but came to language groups (Hispanics, for example), national ethnicities, even religions (because, as one geneticist once said, "there isn't a dime's worth of difference between a Middle Eastern Jew and an Arab, genetically speaking).
"Race" has become so all-inclusive anymore that it hardly means anything at all due to nor really making a relevant distinction. It's kind of like "thing" in that regard.
I strongly hold the position that there is only one race.
Then, as I said, "race" really stops meaning anything. It's a word in search of a distinction.