2022 Membership Numbers

[Tired_Eagle_Feathers]

16 minutes ago, qwazse said:

You've revised the definition of equity. Equity does, in fact, take into account that some of us came into the world with an inability to give "it the old college try." For example, when I was getting manipulated by my school district to pay more taxes than my neighbors did because I had just arrived and lacked the privilege of a lower home assessment due to a rising market, I could ask for an equitable decision in spite of the letter of law that was written in favor of long-time residents of the district. The judge saved me thousands.

Equity lets someone who has come lately to the game take their swing. Not merely because seasoned players might have an unfair edge, but because the newbie might bring something to bat that could be a blessing to us all who love free markets.

Like I said, "If your idea of equity/equality means that everyone has the right to participate in something and give it the old "college try" with whatever they came to the game with, then sure, that's my idea of equity/equality."

It's your responsibility and (and your parents, and their parents before them) to build up generational excellence to gain the advantages thereby.  It's not anyone else's responsibility to take a handicap to make someone else equal in the starting lineup.  The whole point of building generational excellence is to make sure that you get a head start in the race.

I have no problem if someone who has come lately to the game gets to take their swing.  That's equity.  What's not equity is giving an advantage to them or handicapping everyone else to try and force some equal starting line.

Everyone gets dealt a hand of cards in life.  Equity means having an equal opportunity to use what you've got the best you can.  It doesn't mean giving everyone the same deal of cards.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Tired_Eagle_Feathers

[fred8033]

22 minutes ago, qwazse said:

For example, when I was getting manipulated by my school district to pay more taxes than my neighbors did because I had just arrived and lacked the privilege of a lower home assessment due to a rising market, I could ask for an equitable decision in spite of the letter of law that was written in favor of long-time residents of the district. The judge saved me thousands.

you can do that !!!!!   WHAT !!!!    ... Dang ...      Wish I knew that years ago.   ... When I lived in CA, I rented but always felt sorry for those who just moved into the city.  AND, I felt jealous of a few co-workers who slowly over years acquired their house from their parents without a registered sale.  

It is amazing how tax assessment is used against people.  ... Locally (outside CA), I know several people who have that "knack" and have had their home assessments knocked far down below the real market value.  ... Same several people that says we don't pay give schools enough money.  But their home is taxed at 2/3rds of it's market value where as most of us are taxed right at 99% of what we can sell the house for.   ...   Really good at managing their money by saying others should pay more. 

 

 

Edited May 10, 2022 by fred8033

[fred8033]

10 minutes ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

Everyone gets dealt a hand of cards in life.  Equity means having an equal opportunity to use what you've got the best you can.  It doesn't mean giving everyone the same deck of cards.

Agreed.

I agree the wrong focus is now on equity of outcome because there is no way to judge equity at the start.  If a person gets X extra every year for 12 years of primary school and then 4 years of college and then the rest of their career, is that equitable?   ... You can never answer what is equitable because you never know how much was already given and if it will be enough to make a difference.  

 

[InquisitiveScouter]

[Owls_are_cool]

5 hours ago, Scouterlockport said:

I think you are missing the point on the important of the class room badges. Sadly most of the new jobs/careers are in office spaces we need to prepare our kids for this new economy.

I have a really good job in IT, but I do not have a computer related degree or certification. 1) I grew up on a dairy farm where I learned work ethic, problem troubleshooting and solving, and how to be productive when tired or sick. 2) During study hall in the 80s, I went to the computer lab and started writing computer programs. I was really good at finding subject matter experts that I can learn from. 95% if the stuff I have learned on IT was done outside of the classroom. Training is expensive. Employers love employees that can teach themselves new skills and use them to further the unit. 3) Classroom work does not teach supporting customers. This is where work ethic comes in. I monitor chatrooms where customers notice problems and I usually have a solution in place before the trouble ticket gets to me. 

If you want to make scouting irrelevant, then replace more and more outdoor activities with classroom work type merit badges. If you want scouts to learn interpersonal skills needed in the workplace, then put them in a stressful camping situation where some of their troop are not pulling their weight.  

[Wyobkr]

17 hours ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

 

 

I was extremely dismayed to discover that BSA had created a DEI group, and have considered pulling my son out of Scouting because of it.  Especially when they started pushing the new Eagle-required merit badge.

DEI at face value sounds great.  Who could be against diversity, equity, and inclusion?  The co-opting of these terms has been ingenious.

I believe DEI is sinister.  Diversity inevitably starts having metrics.  Metrics that presuppose some kind of quotas that should be met.  This invariably results in punitive measures taken against whoever is not in the favored class.  It's today's Affirmative Action.  It always ends up discriminating against someone in the misguided attempt to help someone.

Equity is the most sinister.  Equity of what?  Equity of opportunity?  Equity of outcome?  Most usually, "Equity" is code-speak for "equity of outcome".  And if the outcome isn't in favor of the favored group, then a thumb is placed on the appropriate scale to achieve the desired outcome.  This naturally comes at the expense of those groups who don't get the thumb on their scale.  It is decidedly Marxist in the literal sense - "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs."  In any case, chasing "equity" is a fool's errand.  You can never assure equality of opportunity as there will always be some people who have better parents than others.  And you can never assure equality of outcome because not everyone has equal talent, ability, or ambition.  Attempts to enforce equity always come at someone else's expense.

Inclusion is the only part of DEI that is reasonable.  I have always thought Scouting was inclusive.  With the exception of the religious angle, I always thought of it as one of the most inclusive organizations I have ever known.

If we are to truly have equity, then our neighboring council needs to pay our council so that our camp can have both a lake and a swimming pool.  They have them, so we need them too so that the outcome is all the same.  So shall we ask council x to pony up for council y?  And shall I ask all of the scouts in a unit to contribute to support the less fortunate?  Every one of the scouts should be able to afford the $4,600 to go to jamboree next year if we redistribute the resources, right?  Go explain that one in the new merit badge.  

[qwazse]

7 minutes ago, Wyobkr said:

If we are to truly have equity, then our neighboring council needs to pay our council so that our camp can have both a lake and a swimming pool.  They have them, so we need them too so that the outcome is all the same.  So shall we ask council x to pony up for council y?  And shall I ask all of the scouts in a unit to contribute to support the less fortunate?  Every one of the scouts should be able to afford the $4,600 to go to jamboree next year if we redistribute the resources, right?  Go explain that one in the new merit badge.  

You are describing "true" equality. Not equity.

Equity is: our camp only has a lake. But a qualified supervisor can safely arrange an aquatics area so that scouts can still master aquatics in order to forestall death and -- as a byproduct -- earn aquatics awards.

[Wyobkr]

3 minutes ago, qwazse said:

You are describing "true" equality. Not equity.

Equity is: our camp only has a lake. But a qualified supervisor can safely arrange an aquatics area so that scouts can still master aquatics in order to forestall death and -- as a byproduct -- earn aquatics awards.

Take a look at some of the resources that were presented in the references as the new merit badge came out.  One showed a graphic of 3 people trying to pick apples.  The tall one had no box, the shorter had a medium sized box, and the short one had a tall box so they all could get the apple.  That is what counselors were to teach per BSA's own references.  That means everybody gets the lake.  and everybody gets to go to jamboree.

[qwazse]

12 minutes ago, Wyobkr said:

... And shall I ask all of the scouts in a unit to contribute to support the less fortunate?  Every one of the scouts should be able to afford the $4,600 to go to jamboree next year if we redistribute the resources, right?  Go explain that one in the new merit badge.  

Again, equality is "everybody goes to Jambo." However that event is not merely some prize for scouts with a fortune ...

If your scouts agree that your troop would be best represented at Jambo by a scout with little means, then yes the equitable thing would be to support him/her. The expectation should be that that scout would more likely return with enthusiasm and novel ideas to benefit his/her fellow scouts.

More importantly, if one of us only had $500 to spare for jambo, and there was a potential ASM who was qualified but limited in funds to go, equity dictates we give what we have to make sure our scouts are tended to by who we trust the most.

[qwazse]

8 minutes ago, Wyobkr said:

Take a look at some of the resources that were presented in the references as the new merit badge came out.  One showed a graphic of 3 people trying to pick apples.  The tall one had no box, the shorter had a medium sized box, and the short one had a tall box so they all could get the apple.  That is what counselors were to teach per BSA's own references.  That means everybody gets the lake.  and everybody gets to go to jamboree.

No, the image means we give everyone the tools needed to pick the maximum number of apples so that the cobbler gets in the dutch oven before nightfall. It's about free markets, pure and simple.

It means some people get a lake, others a pool, others travel to a nearby park/college with qualified supervision, but all learn how to forestall death.

[Wyobkr]

40 minutes ago, qwazse said:

No, the image means we give everyone the tools needed to pick the maximum number of apples so that the cobbler gets in the dutch oven before nightfall. It's about free markets, pure and simple.

It means some people get a lake, others a pool, others travel to a nearby park/college with qualified supervision, but all learn how to forestall death.

I am not sure what country you are living in.  Giving something is not free market.  That is wealth redistribution. 

[Tired_Eagle_Feathers]

47 minutes ago, qwazse said:

If your scouts agree that your troop would be best represented at Jambo by a scout with little means, then yes the equitable thing would be to support him/her. The expectation should be that that scout would more likely return with enthusiasm and novel ideas to benefit his/her fellow scouts.

More importantly, if one of us only had $500 to spare for jambo, and there was a potential ASM who was qualified but limited in funds to go, equity dictates we give what we have to make sure our scouts are tended to by who we trust the most.

Let's not conflate charity - voluntary giving, with forced giving.  Our troop has funds to help kids who may be financially unable to do things.  This is totally different from the aims of DEI as I have seen it elsewhere where the objective always ends up enforced equality that comes at an involuntary cost to others, and usually results in demonstrable negative effects for the non-beneficiaries (driving everyone towards mediocrity).

DEI groups always seek to justify their existence.  This means right away they start tracking numbers so they can point out inequities.  And then the follow-on is stacking the deck to make the numbers come out to however someone thinks they ought to be in the name of "equity". 

There's a saying in Japan: "The nail that sticks out gets hammered down."  DEI usually ends up being the hammer.

[mrjohns2]

20 minutes ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

DEI groups always seek to justify their existence.  This means right away they start tracking numbers so they can point out inequities.  And then the follow-on is stacking the deck to make the numbers come out to however someone thinks they ought to be in the name of "equity". 

Lots of assumptions on how the BSA will end up doing it. I have been in other orgs who didn’t do it how you describe. 

[Tired_Eagle_Feathers]

35 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

Lots of assumptions on how the BSA will end up doing it. I have been in other orgs who didn’t do it how you describe. 

Time will tell.  Every DEI I've ever encountered does these things.  It's why they exist.  I just can't believe this woke stuff has penetrated the Boy Scouts of America of all things.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Tired_Eagle_Feathers

[Eagledad]

12 hours ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

Time will tell.  Every DEI I've ever encountered does these things.  It's why they exist.  I just can't believe this woke stuff has penetrated the Boy Scouts of America of all things.

My hope is National's motivation to appear progressive will be diluted by the common sense of the volunteers.

Barry