jonoh81

I would be interested to know why you think those differences exist, then.

I think for many of those people in question, diversity itself is to be considered a negative distraction. Public schools are now to be considered too "woke".

It's a really weird position to be pointing out the problems in some public school districts while advocating they be increasingly defunded to provide an already privileged population a segregated education.

$15K in the city vs. $15K in the boonies spends vastly differently and to greatly different effect. If you're only looking at the money spent, and not where it's going, then you're really not interested in knowing why there are outcome differences.

You seem to believe that all public schools are violent cesspools, so maybe don't point fingers at others when you clearly have some knowledge problems of your own. And are you really stating that there are no private, religious-based schools that are teaching that? I never stated I was referring to Catholic schools specifically, you made that erroneous assertion. So then you admit there are schools that are teaching those things. And that was merely an example. The conservative worldview is not exclusive to the young earth claim. And yet there are doctors, nurses and other medical professionals who are both of those things. We saw it repeatedly during the pandemic, so this is not the point you think it is. Doctors are not and have never been entirely immune from anti-science positions. And I'm curious, are you saying Catholics don't believe that God created the world? That would certainly run contrary to my experience living in very Catholic Mexico. But it's still creating a more segregated system of haves and have nots because we both know that 100% of students will not have access to private schools even within the best of intentions. There are not enough of them, costs are always going to be prohibitive for many, and performance requirements would keep many out automatically. After all, if private schools can't maintain good records, they lose whatever superior education claims they might have. So you are merely advocating for a system in which the kids with the fewest opportunities would be stuck in schools you are actively defunding even more to fund kids with the most opportunities. Public schools matter because they accept everyone and attempt to provide education and opportunity to all. Private schools will never be about that. They're about leaving many behind. I'd much rather see money going into improving schools for all- and their communities- than in giving yet more handouts to those who least need them. Because honestly, helping as many people as possible is the moral thing to do, supposedly something Christians are actually called to do, right? Or is that just another thing I am off base on?

I'm literally a teacher, and many of my friends work in Columbus City Schools, but yeah, other than that, totally not familiar with public education. And having or not having kids is not by itself an indication someone knows anything about public education or what goes on in schools, either. You have parents out there who truly believed schools were letting kids crap in litter boxes because they were identifying as cats, so you really can't play that card as if it guarantees knowledge. I'm not sure what the article is supposed to prove, either. There are good and bad public schools just as there are good and bad private/charter schools, and that is literally stated in the article. The problems urban schools face are not inherent to public education itself, but rather the conditions they are often subjected to through things like poor funding distribution and a lack of investment in urban communities that exacerbate things like poverty, crime and behavioral issues. And let's be honest, that lack of investment is the result of conservative policies. It's very easy to have good private schools when they get to handpick their student bodies or when they all come from rather homogenous demographics and higher income groups. It's just another form of segregation.

You're attepting to create a correlation you're not proving, though. There could be, and definitely are, lots of reasons those schools could exist the way they do that has nothing to do with what you're claiming.

I know you are referring to me in the so-called "anti-Christian animus", so let me just clear something up. I'm not so much anti-Christian or anti-religion as I am anti religion having influence over people who want nothing to do with your religion. You all took away abortion rights even though most people support them to some degree. You all are attacking trans and gay people because biology contradicts your beliefs. You try to enforce outdated and factually wrong concepts of sex and gender. An increasing number of religious people are now promoting anti-vaccine rhetoric, threatening the lives of everyone. Books are being banned because of your belief systems. Etc. Etc. So I'm not anti-Christian, I just want you all to mind your own business and stop forcing your moral hangups on anyone but yourselves. That includes public education and the current attempts to siphon away money from it so private schools can teach kids the earth is only 6000 years old. You say the Church will never accomplish any of its goals, despite the fact that it already has on several fronts against the wishes of the American public. And saying as much, you basically admit that the Church wants to create some kind of theocratic system that runs contrary to the foundings of the nation, personal rights and to popular public opinion. You are also essentially admitting that the purpose of those schools is to grow a population that will push those positions long-term, not necessarily to provide a more comprehensive education.

What "toxicity" are you referring to, specifically?

How are those things not true of public schools? So the parents of public school children don't care about their education?

Are there any real-life examples where an organization lowered standards and somehow the results were positive?

And let's just be real here... an organization that spent decades covering up thousands of incidents of child abuse and rape has absolutely no business pontificating on what is and isn't best for children. The sick absurdity of it all.

Ironic considering so many of the current political movements in America are about someone who may have died a few millenia ago and has no direct relation to them.

It's not really that Christianity is deeply intertwined with public schools, though in many districts, it's definitely more than a little already and I would argue any mixing is far too much. The issue is that there are constant attempts to mix the two to the point where there's no longer any pretense of a secularist framework whatsoever, and to generally push a Right-wing alternate version of facts, history, rights and more within public education overall (see Florida and other red states). Religious affiliation in the US is in a long-term decline. If anything, it's in outright collapse. And that collapse is especially true of Christian denominations, which previously vastly dominated the political and social landscape of America. That's a very scary look for the people who have long held and maintained power and influence in the country. And instead of taking stock on why that's happening (the oppressive and regressive takes on social issues, rights, science, biology, etc. may need a gander), the Christian Right seems to just be doubling down on what's not working because they generally couldn't care less what other people value or believe (see abortion, LGBTQ rights, etc). Or in the case of education, I would argue one of the primary reasons that Christian parents pull their kids out of public schools- or homeschool- is specifically to be able to religiously indoctrinate them while they're still young and impressionable without any contradictory viewpoints having any influence, which they would have in public schooling. "School choice" is a red herring for people who just want their kids to live in a conservative echo chamber. So it's a two-pronged approach for conservatives here. 1- Make public, secular education more religious, but especially more Christian, and 2- Ensure that private schools and other public-education alternatives are more heavily promoted and financed as a more immediate countermeasure.

I would argue that diverting public money to fund private schools that push specific religious doctrine (and of course they will, or Christian lobbyists wouldn't even be involved) is objectively bad in quite a few different ways.

It's like some of these people are completely unaware that Downtown functioned just fine without abundant, cheap parking lots, and that providing them is what killed businesses and vibrancy, not the lack of them.

Have area housing values plummeted yet, or have they increased because of their new waterfront views?

Yeah, good lord that's bad.

Yes I was. It was surreal because it was the anniversary of '85, and they always have a simulation where offices hold earthquake drills. They had had those drills about 2 hours before. I was at home having lunch and reading about that when the alarm went off. For a split second, I thought it was a mistake and the alarms were mistakenly sounding from the earlier simulation, but almost immediately it started shaking. By the time I opened my apartment door to go downstairs, the power was out and the stairs were pitch black. So I just stayed in the apartment for the duration. The shaking was so strong I thought for sure the building was going to fall. It did end up damaged, with lower apartments have inner walls collapse and many of the buildings columns had cracks. I ended up moving out not too long after that. Helped out at some of the collapses over the next few days. Just a crazy experience. Afterward, they said the actual shaking peaked much stronger than in 1985, but was just much shorter in duration. Otherwise, it would've been so much worse.

It would take redesigning Morse into a multi-modal route with actual thought to transit, bikes and pedestrians. It's incredibly hostile to all but cars right now. As for redevelopment overall, maybe the new zoning standards will push for better long-term.

Now we need to redevelop all that strip mall and in front.

I didn't go down to the block level, but looking at census tracts in 1950, Cuyahoga County's 341 had an average density of 12308.1. Franklin's 98 tracts had an average density of 9,478.4. Looking just at city vs city, Cleveland had 254 tracts in 1950 with an average density of 14,324.9. Columbus had just 61 tracts in 1950, with an average density of 14082.9. So the cities had very similar densities in 1950 in terms of average tract density, but densities in the county show Franklin was overall much less developed. Columbus still had the highest tract density of either city. Tract 33 in 1950 had a density of 110,425.0. It was the location of the Old Ohio Pen. Cleveland's was H009 with 65,066.7.

The dates for the Cumberland are a bit off. It was built in 1895 and lasted until 1976 when it was torn down for parking. Here's a photo of the building from 1897.

I was in Mexico City for that one too. One of the scariest things I've ever experienced. I'll take the tornadoes any day.

And this one for Morse Road.