Look in ad remove programs for spamware, then look at browser helpers, extensions ans add ons and disable them. I really recommend firefox with adblocker, I now administer 60 computers with a program I can see any malware activity and have locked down controls so no new programs can’t change internet settings, etc. It is not perfect, mail filtering sys etc. but a few weeks ago a guy hit a link and got the cryptolocker virus. Had to restore files from backup. I can vnc to any computer at anytime, as needed, but if you want an easy fix try googleing msert, or if you have a clean computer windows defender offline, to create a bootable cd. 2 of my favorite tools when system av fails due to user error.
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen but good lawyers are appointed as defense too. In my youth, pastor’s son and I did pretty much the same thing. He got off and I got nailed. Same judge. I dunno. People are human and while they guard against it, its just natural to judge people by exterior factors, as we discussed before in buying cars. You walk in with a suit on, you get treated different than if your shirt and pants are dirty from working all day.
I don’t think I’m naive but I do think a lot of the issue is cultural heritage that only families and individuals will resolve and not government.
I don’t think anyone ever said the government needed to solve their problems. Where did you read that?
The only point I was making…is that MANY MANY hard working people still live in those neighborhoods and no matter what they do the neighborhoods don’t change. That’s where MANY conservatives only see black and white. They assume that because you live in that neighborhood you’re lazy, don’t have a job, don’t know how to read and write…etc…etc. That’s called prejudging someone…or more common word Prejudice. And then to take it further - many people who live in these area’s are of ethnic background…and therefore the same conservatives think that if you belong to that certain ethnic group, you fall into the same category.
I know this is hard for you to believe…but MOST of those people do NOT want government handouts. Most just want the same opportunities as everyone else.
I have a sister-in-law that teaches in one of those areas. And many of the kids parents are uneducated and can’t read or write English. Many of those parents still want their kids to do well in school and support them and keep them out of trouble and they do very well in school. Her husband is also a school teacher, but he teaches in the burbs. Those kids parents are all middle or upper-middle class. And the ratio of kids with supportive parents to non supportive parents is the same as the kids in the slums. So don’t say it’s cultural.
I have cousins who prefer to mooch off the state, so I know there are lazy people out there who game the system, but the problem we have is that some people characterize all poor people as “lazy” or “takers” because they think poor people would be successful if they only tried. The truth is that there are a lot of good people on unemployment and/or welfare who are ashamed to be and would prefer not to be, and these people don’t deserve to be lumped in with the lazy takers who try to game the system. This is why I don’t think across-the-board cuts to programs that help the poor are the solution to fraud. There are better ways to fight fraud than to cut aid to those who need it and would rather do without it if they could.
Many many years ago a computer company called CDC had a novel idea. Let’s build plants in areas that are depressed and offer jobs and training to the people who live there. At the time they were making the fastest computers in the world. At least until Seymour Cray left and started his own company (Cray Computers).
So they setup several manufacturing in inner city areas around the US. The result was drastic decrease in crime, more kids finishing school, much higher increase in kids from these areas going to college. It’s amazing what will happen when given the same opportunity and hope that many of us take for advantage.
@"Rod Knox"
You touched upon the very heart of the problem of poverty and opportunity.
" The rule is that people tend to remain where they are unless and until they recognize a significant opportunity that they consider within their means to accomplish."
In the US, there isn’t a big problem with opportunity as some people would argue. The problem is that opportunities are not taken, or believed to be impossible.
Growing up my family was well enough off, but I had lots of friends that were not. Two friends had very similar situations to each other (many siblings, separated parents, very low income parents) but one of them dropped out of high school and the other got a degree in chemistry. One person felt they had the opportunity and the other didn’t, even though both had access.
Maybe there were other differences between them? One might ask. Well the friend that went to college and is now working in research - this person has both older and younger siblings who decided not to go to college and are still stuck in the poverty “cycle”. They had the same opportunities, but didn’t view them as attainable or worthwhile for whatever reason.
In the US, there isn't a big problem with opportunity as some people would argue
I completely disagree with that. You say you were well off, but had friends who weren’t. Then one of you were living in the wrong neighborhood. I take it you didn’t go to an inner-city high-school. If you did then I have to ask why - if your parents were well off that you lived there?
Many inner-city schools…the kids first priority in school is not to get hurt or killed. Yes - while there have been isolated occurrences of multiple killings in rural high-schools…many inner city schools see violence daily. Rural high-schools - not so much.
@MikeInNH You “completely” disagree? Seems that you are only saying the problem exists in inner city schools, but aren’t disagreeing with the rest.
No, I didn’t go to an inner city school, but we were sandwiched between two of the most dangerous cities in the state, so I wouldn’t say violence was low.
Furthermore, fear and violence are bad for education, but they don’t pose a huge block to education. Outside of cities, violence is called bullying, but its still the same thing. I’m sure there are many millionaire tech-CEOs that went to school daily worrying if someone was going to break their nose. They made it.
What do you mean “one of you were living in the wrong neighborhood”? Are you suggesting that middle-class people and poor people can’t be friends? Or that friends have to live immediately next to each other. Its perfectly easy to hop on a bicycle in a good part of town, ride a mile, and be in a bad part of town, with the same people that go to school with you.
If I remember right, Control Data was in an industrial part of town, along with lots of other metal stamping and manufacturing businesses. As everything aged, they tended to move on to new facilities as the businesses grew.
I remember having a converstation with someone who was complaining about the lack of opportunity and jobs in the inner city of Minneapolis. I commented that there were 70,000 cars a day coming into the downtown area from the south alone. Certainly there were no lack of jobs in the inner city. Of course it was a mismatch of high paying finance and management jobs for highly qualified people and a lack of menial jobs for those with low qualifications.
Back to those guys working outside Autozone, to be hired at dealership for the $50K plus jobs, you need to be able to read technical manuals, operate computer equipment, follow trouble-shooting charts, demonstrate the ability for continuous training by having a diploma, and wear a shirt among other things. If you are that good, why work in the parking lot in the hot sun?
Are you suggesting that middle-class people and poor people can't be friends?
It’s possible…just not likely. Since you didn’t go to the same school…then it’s very difficult to meet.
Seems that you are only saying the problem exists in inner city schools, but aren't disagreeing with the rest.
Sure there’s problems in rural schools…but NOTHING compared to inner-city schools. In some cities - not even close. The closest city I grew up to had the distinction of having one of the first high-schools in the nation with metal detectors. And this was back in the 60’s. How many rural schools do you know today that have metal detectors? There aren’t any in NH. Not even sure there any in Boston.
Sounds to me like your schools were very good compared to schools in Detroit, Chicago, Buffalo, Syracuse.
Outside of cities, violence is called bullying, but its still the same thing.
Um…NO. My kids saw bullying in middle schools here in NH. Sorry…but that isn’t even close to the violence kids see on a daily basis in many inner city schools. The inner-city grammar school my sister-in-law teaches has about 50 violent incidents a year. Not calling someone a name…but drag out fights where someone gets injured. Sometimes where they need to call an ambulance. Sometimes where a weapon is used (knife or rocks). My kids middle school - I think there were 2 fights over the 8 year span my kids went went through that school. Don’t tell me it’s the same.
I'm sure there are many millionaire tech-CEOs that went to school daily worrying if someone was going to break their nose. They made it.
I take it you really don’t know any of these tech CEO’s. While sure the might be some (although very few). I’m sure they were a cut well above the rest. What about the average student…the one who doesn’t play a sport…or who just does C in school. Those are the ones who struggle the most. The ones I know and have worked for…all came from upper-middle class families who’s parents had college degrees.
There’s a nice private school in Lawrence MA called Central Catholic. It was a little too far for my kids to attend. I do know a couple families who sent their kids there. It is right in the middle of the worse part of the city. And Lawrence MA is a very poor - high crime rate city. The school accepts a good number of kids from Lawrence MA to the school - most with scholarships. Tuition is over $10k. Those kids far exceed the local inner-city high-school. Most going to college.
<b>"Um...NO. My kids saw bullying in middle schools here in NH. Sorry...but that isn't even close to the violence kids see on a daily basis in many inner city schools. "</b>
Well then the bullying where you live is very light - what I am calling suburban bullying is much much closer to inner city violence than it is to what you consider bullying. When I say bullying, I am talking about people going to school, not knowing if the kid in their second period class is going to turn around and start wailing on them, or if in fifth period gym somebody is going to slam their face into the volleyball pole. These students can still flourish.
Violence can have a negative impact on education, but it doesn’t stop opportunities.
Poverty can have a negative impact on education, but it rarely stops opportunities (except in some cases where the student has to work to support their whole family)
But why is poverty such a cycle. Is it because people actually can’t get to these opportunities, or is it because they think these things aren’t worth the effort or they are out of their reach?
It is because success is viewed as unachievable / because the effort required is deemed too much for the reward. In the overwhelming majority of situations, the poverty cycle is maintained by choice, not forced. FYI I am speaking here to children’s opportunities, not regarding adults who have fallen on hard times.
Don’t give me examples of people who DIDN’T take an opportunity, provide examples of these people who COULDN’T because there was no opportunity in the first place.
Violence can have a negative impact on education, but it doesn't stop opportunities.
Well I’d love to know the rural school that is NOT putting a damper on bullying/violence in schools. It’s a lot harder to control with many inner city schools especially in big cities where the graduating class is over 1500. The school districts in NH have a ZERO tolerance for violence.
Don't give me examples of people who DIDN'T take an opportunity, provide examples of these people who COULDN'T because there was no opportunity in the first place.
It’s IMPOSSIBLE to prove a negative. Sorry…but you can’t.
You keep making assumptions that are NOT based in reality. I don’t know of any rural school in NY, CT, MA, VT, MA or NH that has the same inner-city violence in schools that you describe.
While you may have a specific belief in how you THINK the school system works…The study of violence in school and how it negatively effects education has been well studied over many decades. To think it doesn’t effect our childrens education is naive.
Just some stats from around the country that you say don’t exist.
I’m not talking rural, I’m talking suburban - Redacted, Redacted, Redacted - all in Massachusetts, all with the kind of school violence I am describing.
Just because you’ve never seen violence in the suburbs, that doesn’t mean it isn’t a reality.
Are there any other assumptions that you think aren’t based in reality?
But to the point at hand, what is it about poverty and violence that you believe stops these opportunities absolutely? I really do want to know what your reasoning is, not just the opinion itself.
When two people, both equally poor, both going to the same school, both fearing the same violence, but having two different families, can become so drastically different regarding success, that suggests to me that the families and mentalities of these people are the factor at hand.
Yes, it is easy to show correlation through statistics, and we can easily find that children of lower income homes are less likely to go to college, but that doesn’t provide the root cause.
I attended a rural school that housed grades 1 through 12. We didn’t live on a farm, but had a house on an acre that was all my parents could afford. The school had about 275 students from first grade through 12th grade. The school district for the city of 65,000 near where we lived didn’t have space for all the students, so the rural school I attended was paid to take three bus loads of students from the roughest part city’s school district. Some of these kids from the city[s school district came from broken homes. Some didn’t have the lunch money, but our rural school made sure they were fed and didn’t go hungry.
The effect of the farm kids on the kids from the city’s worst area was amazing. The work ethic permeated all the students in the school. I recently asked one woman who had been in my class about her brother who was older than we were. I was told that he was a retired teacher from one of the best schools in a large city.
Now the school didn’t have a lot of offerings, but what was taught was taught well. There was strict discipline in the school and the only administrative staff consisted of the principal, who also taught a civics class, an assistant principal who was a teacher that had a one class load reduction to act when the principal wasn’t available, a secretary, a janitor, and a part-time matron to clean the women’s restroom.
The time period was the late 1940s through the 1950s. The high school students were to act as role models for the younger students. Maybe we need to go back to smaller schools that encompass grades K through 12.
Mike, I was never saying that violence isn’t a problem. I was saying it is a problem outside of cities too. And the whole point I am trying to make is that family interactions play the largest role in whether a child succeeds or not. I notice in your cause and effect links they discuss how family violence leads to violence at school but say nothing about poverty leading to anything.
But to the point at hand, what is it about poverty and violence that you believe stops these opportunities absolutely?
That was outlined very well in the several articles I posted. I suggest you read them.
When two people, both equally poor, both going to the same school, both fearing the same violence, but having two different families, can become so drastically different regarding success, that suggests to me that the families and mentalities of these people are the factor at hand.
Of course some people handle violence differently then others. Never said differently. But the kids who go to schools how are NOT exposed to violence…have a much greater opportunity to succeed then those who are exposed. Just because you can show an example of someone who did well growing up with violence…does NOT mean that all kids can.
Again…I posted many good articles about violence and how it effects learning…and how rural schools or suburban schools are not faced with the same problems as inner-city schools. I showed you an example of my sister-in-law who teaches inner-school grammar school and her husband who teaches suburban High-school. The grammar school has more violence then high-school.
I think we are getting caught up in vocab here. What do you mean when you say opportunity? When I say opportunity, I mean that if they put in the effort, they can succeed. This is true despite violence or poverty - If they put in the effort, they can succeed.
I believe we are for the most part in agreement except for where we call the problem.
We can both agree violence leads to lower self worth which means the student will be less likely to chase these opportunities.
Similarly, poverty leads to lower self worth which means the student will be less likely to chase these opportunities.
I’d also add poor home environment can lead to the same and the same.
All in all, its the lower self worth that is a blocking factor to students being able to succeed. Add in that a good home environment can lead to the ability to overcome these obstacles that lower self worth, whatever they may be. It seems that the home environment seems to play a much larger role in the success of children than anything else.
Also, these articles are mostly about violence, not so much poverty which is where we are disagreeing on. Still they showed the same prevailing theme of lower self worth.
In case we are still at odds, here’s a quote from one of your articles that supports my side.
“Urban youth often turn to gangs and the drug trade for protection, friends, and job opportunities due to lack of parental authority.”