I think not. We have public education for a reason. If you lock out the lower income families (or force them to beg for help) how the heck are we going to not end up with a generation of criminals and imbeciles?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703864204576313572363698678.html
Yeah, there should be at least a $25k income exemption from them. The issue is if the public won't pass bond issues to pay for it. Then they have to go to the parents themselves. You have to admit this is a much more direct method of allocating the cost of education.
I think public school should be no extra charge for families of any income level, but maybe that's just me. Even extracurriculars ought not have a charge (save perhaps for equipment consumed by the student such as mouth guards and shoes in the case of football), as they have been shown to lower juvenile delinquency and improve grades.
If they don't charge then they don't do. So its fine if they want to cut things. but you can't have half the class doing this or that and the other not. I guess they should have a vote whether to cut programs or pay the fees.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on May 26, 2011, 09:34:12 PM
If they don't charge then they don't do. So its fine if they want to cut things. but you can't have half the class doing this or that and the other not. I guess they should have a vote whether to cut programs or pay the fees.
So there's paying for field trips, which is one thing. Then there's paying for advanced placement courses, which is definitely another.
If we've moved to the freemium model of public education -- the no frills version is free, while every upgrade is charged a fee -- then we're foobared.
EDIT: All that income inequality stuff I keep talking about? This is it, creeping in.
Whatever happened to "if you bring candy to class, bring enough for everybody"? Or was my elementary school in right-wing-central Fort Smith a bastion of pinko commies?
Quote from: nathanm on May 26, 2011, 08:49:56 PM
I think not. We have public education for a reason. If you lock out the lower income families (or force them to beg for help) how the heck are we going to not end up with a generation of criminals and imbeciles?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703864204576313572363698678.html
So who should pay?
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 12:08:57 PM
So who should pay?
Pretty much everyone. I think the list of who should be exempt from paying will be shorter.
My basic education through grade 12 was mostly without fees. I remember selling pretzels in elementary school but there was no minimum as I remember. Later in high school, there were class dues which were mandatory. I think the dues went to such things as the yearbook and the class present to the school at the end of the senior year. Summer reading assignments in high school were paperback but we had to buy them. Major books for classes like math, English, science, social studies.... were provided by the school. We were not allowed to write in them and had to put dust covers on each one, usually made from grocery store bags. Chemistry lab may have had a lab fee for breakage. I wasn't involved in sports or music (band, choir etc) so I don't know what may have been involved there.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 12:08:57 PM
So who should pay?
ALL taxpayers. It doesn't matter if you have kids in public school or not. It should never have come to this. If this is how it's gonna be, then raise taxes now!
Personnel costs—which amount to about 80% of expenses in many school districts—have driven some of the increase, along with increased costs for utilities and technology. The average salary for a public-school teacher nationally has jumped 26% since 2001, though that growth didn't quite keep pace with inflation.
There ya have it.....
Quote from: Breadburner on May 30, 2011, 01:28:45 PM
The average salary for a public-school teacher nationally has jumped 26% since 2001, though that growth didn't quite keep pace with inflation.
I wish my salary had jumped that much. Mine is more like 20%.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 12:57:36 PM
ALL taxpayers. It doesn't matter if you have kids in public school or not. It should never have come to this. If this is how it's gonna be, then raise taxes now!
I spend roughly $30K/yr to educate my children in a private school and thousands more in tutors/fees etc. because I do not trust the public school system to properly and competently do its job. I'm tapped out. How much do you kick in?
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 02:54:19 PM
and thousands more in tutors/fees etc.
Sounds like your expensive private school isn't doing so well either.
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 30, 2011, 03:40:34 PM
Sounds like your expensive private school isn't doing so well either.
Only when it comes to the history/humanities curriculum. My wife and I are notorious for throwing nuclear weapons at even the slightest problem, which is why when there was a bump in the education road we hired tutors. We really want the very best for our kids.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 03:48:44 PM
We really want the very best for our kids.
So do a lot of other parents that couldn't go $30K under any circumstances. I believe the public school system is vital to our nation and needs to be repaired. Everyone benefits in the end from an educated population.
My grandfather worked in the coal mines when he first came to this country. He took ICS courses and became a tool and die maker. He did well enough to let dad and his brothers live free at home while they worked their way through college. My dad was able to pay 1/2 of my college and a good chunk of my brother's and sister's college expenses. (I have airplanes instead of kids.) Let's fix the public schools so some other kids have a shot at not being a burden on society. They can become taxpayers instead of tax burdens and you won't have to pay as much taxes as the tax burden would be distributed among more payers.
Some of them might even grow up to be conservatives. ;D
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 30, 2011, 04:07:54 PM
So do a lot of other parents that couldn't go $30K under any circumstances. I believe the public school system is vital to our nation and needs to be repaired. Everyone benefits in the end from an educated population.
My grandfather worked in the coal mines when he first came to this country. He took ICS courses and became a tool and die maker. He did well enough to let dad and his brothers live free at home while they worked their way through college. My dad was able to pay 1/2 of my college and a good chunk of my brother's and sister's college expenses. (I have airplanes instead of kids.) Let's fix the public schools so some other kids have a shot at not being a burden on society. They can become taxpayers instead of tax burdens and you won't have to pay as much taxes as the tax burden would be distributed among more payers.
Some of them might even grow up to be conservatives. ;D
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the need for public schools. I just don't want to keep throwing money at a broken system.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 02:54:19 PM
I spend roughly $30K/yr to educate my children in a private school and thousands more in tutors/fees etc. because I do not trust the public school system to properly and competently do its job. I'm tapped out. How much do you kick in?
That is a choice for you to spend that much on school. My family cannot afford private school, it is not a choice for us. I and my siblings must attend public school after kindergarten. My mom even teaches at a private school, which after kindergarten, I had to cease attending, because it was too expensive. That is with the discount we recieve. So yeah, you should have to pay for my school even if your kids do not attend it. Because we cannot afford to pay $4000-$5000 a year for school without cutting back in other areas. Spreading the extra costs out over thousands of people lessens the burden on public school families, and doesn't create one for anyone else.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 06:31:45 PM
I just don't want to keep throwing money at a broken system.
I don't want to throw money at a broken anything. Somehow it needs to be fixed. I don't know how to fix it but I am reasonably sure that pulling money away and giving it to private schools (vouchers) is NOT the answer.
I'm glad for you that you can give your kids the finest. We all need to make sure every kid gets something acceptable.
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 30, 2011, 06:46:57 PM
I don't want to throw money at a broken anything. Somehow it needs to be fixed. I don't know how to fix it but I am reasonably sure that pulling money away and giving it to private schools (vouchers) is NOT the answer.
I think you and I have had this discussion/disagreement on vouchers already. That's okay.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 06:42:44 PM
That is a choice for you to spend that much on school. My family cannot afford private school, it is not a choice for us. I and my siblings must attend public school after kindergarten. My mom even teaches at a private school, which after kindergarten, I had to cease attending, because it was too expensive. That is with the discount we recieve. So yeah, you should have to pay for my school even if your kids do not attend it. Because we cannot afford to pay $4000-$5000 a year for school without cutting back in other areas. Spreading the extra costs out over thousands of people lessens the burden on public school families, and doesn't create one for anyone else.
Could you explain why I "should have to pay for [your] school even if [my] kids do not attend it"? As I read your post, you sounded as if I should pay for it just because your family cannot afford private school.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 07:06:00 PM
Could you explain why I "should have to pay for [your] school even if [my] kids do not attend it"? As I read your post, you sounded as if I should pay for it just because your family cannot afford private school.
No, but you shouldn't be exempt from certain taxes just because your children do not attend public school. If you are unhappy that you still have to help fund public schools even with your kids in private, then you sir need to lower your ego. If all the people with children in private schools suddenly recieved a tax break, then the schools would be forced to majorly cut back or close. In that case, 75% of children would not recieve an education. Which would you prefer, paying a few extra dollars a year, or saving that money and living in what would become a third world country?
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 07:06:00 PM
Could you explain why I "should have to pay for [your] school even if [my] kids do not attend it"?
Because in the long run, it's good for both you and your kids. JMO, and probably a few others.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 08:08:56 PM
No, but you shouldn't be exempt from certain taxes just because your children do not attend public school. If you are unhappy that you still have to help fund public schools even with your kids in private, then you sir need to lower your ego. If all the people with children in private schools suddenly recieved a tax break, then the schools would be forced to majorly cut back or close. In that case, 75% of children would not recieve an education. Which would you prefer, paying a few extra dollars a year, or saving that money and living in what would become a third world country?
Are you presently paying
any dollars to educate other people's children? If not, kindly close your noise hole. And where do you get the idea that my opinions about tax policy or paying for public education is ego-driven? In my opinion, our public school system is nothing but a corrupt and hopelessly broken cartel. What it needs is a competitor and viable alternative to force these failures to improve or face extinction. Period.
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 30, 2011, 08:22:34 PM
Because in the long run, it's good for both you and your kids. JMO, and probably a few others.
I know that. But in reading his post, he made is sound like I somehow owed him an education because he cannot afford a private education.
My number one hope and prayer is that guido's kids don't become burnout shells from the pressure.
(ZYX; you forgot that guido IS special. And SHOULD be exempt from what applies to the rest of us.)
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 08:43:59 PM
I know that. But in reading his post, he made is sound like I somehow owed him an education because he cannot afford a private education.
He is prone to a bit of exaggeration as most of us can occasionally be.
Hey! Red, don't leave me out on that!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 30, 2011, 09:14:47 PM
Hey! Red, don't leave me out on that!!
I think I included you when I said "most of us". I was trying to think of someone who didn't but figured there might be someone. Certainly not you.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 30, 2011, 08:48:20 PM
My number one hope and prayer is that guido's kids don't become burnout shells from the pressure.
(ZYX; you forgot that guido IS special. And SHOULD be exempt from what applies to the rest of us.)
What "pressure" are you referring to? Oh, that's right, I forgot that you know more about me and my family than I do. And get over your dooshy suggestion that I want to be treated differently than others. If I were like you and others in your place, I would pay the same in taxes. Do you pay the same rate or amount of tax as I do?
Right now, I have to pay to educate my children because our public schools SUCK, as well as pay to educate other people's kids in a SUCKY school system. Now, if you have any suggestions to improve the situation, or if you think that competition in education is a bad thing, I am listening. Otherwise, go troll another thread.
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 30, 2011, 09:11:30 PM
He is prone to a bit of exaggeration as most of us can occasionally be.
Perhaps. I think this is the young man that is still in school in Bixby. I really do care about the education (and overall well-being) of all children because they live in an environment not of their choosing and they can do little to change it. Our public schools are FAILING our kids, and it pisses me off that my money is feeding that b~tch.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 09:33:11 PM
Perhaps. I think this is the young man that is still in school in Bixby. I really do care about the education (and overall well-being) of all children because they live in an environment not of their choosing and they can do little to change it. Our public schools are FAILING our kids, and it pisses me off that my money is feeding that b~tch.
Awwwww, how kind. I really could care less what you think of me. You are entitled to help pay for all children's education because you live in America. And please stop with the constant insults to public schools. There are thousands of hard-working teachers who I am sure can't stand to read that.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 10:16:38 PM
I really could care less what you think of me.
How much less?
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 10:34:25 PM
Ha ha, not much. ;D
It's just a pet peeve of mine when people say they could care less when they really mean they could NOT care less.
No wonder we have communication problems. I'll spare you all the rest of the soap box speech.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 10:16:38 PM
Awwwww, how kind. I really could care less what you think of me. You are entitled to help pay for all children's education because you live in America. And please stop with the constant insults to public schools. There are thousands of hard-working teachers who I am sure can't stand to read that.
If you want me to treat you like a snot-nosed, high school punk I will happily oblige you. As for the rest of your little rant, please, please tell me what in your teenager life experiences entitles you to criticize any taxpayer who you rely upon for your education. As for the "hard-working teachers" crap, sorry, I have no sympathy for them after their little temper tantrum in Wisconsin a while back. Remember these pics:
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_NbetoGpm4BuL6-jAMUv-IEvdxtBXDDTipe0xbVU6hUYB7W3-rw&t=1)
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8s3aPm1xM4QEkOdBYP45i1x1cXJSRNstsVi5pg6gjrKJHnn8T)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oi3Hu65KYaU/TWMd8Q00utI/AAAAAAAACYc/krSrjEZZ50Y/s320/wisconsin-protest-sign-swallowed-teacher.jpg)
And then there is this wonderful "teacher":
http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2011/04/katherine-windels-charged-in-bomb-threats-against-wisconsin-republicans/
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 09:25:08 PM
What "pressure" are you referring to? Oh, that's right, I forgot that you know more about me and my family than I do. And get over your dooshy suggestion that I want to be treated differently than others. If I were like you and others in your place, I would pay the same in taxes. Do you pay the same rate or amount of tax as I do?
Right now, I have to pay to educate my children because our public schools SUCK, as well as pay to educate other people's kids in a SUCKY school system. Now, if you have any suggestions to improve the situation, or if you think that competition in education is a bad thing, I am listening. Otherwise, go troll another thread.
I think competition in public schools sucks. At least in the way you mean it -- which is to pit different funding models against one another, and have schools "win" or "lose" funding based on their successes/failures.
And the problem is that, while schools might "win" or "lose" on paper, the ones who take the hit are the students who attend the losing school. So it will perpetuate inequality and lack of access. Imagine having a bright child who is stuck at her (for argument's sake) a middle school for 3 years as it slowly loses funding. Bad choices abound: yank the kid after 8th grade and cast around for another not-sinking school, or tough it out and risk somehow damaging your kid as the funding dries up?
In general, "marketizing" parts of our government is a fool's game. Markets based on competition have all sorts of problems, not least of which is the tendency for success to reinforce itself and crowd out upstarts, but also the disconnect from any other value other than profit -- or in this case, adequate funding. The only way to value something is to assign a dollar amount to it. Intrinsic value doesn't exist. So in a school system that has to value funding, only the things that relate directly to profit (funding) will be emphasized. Things that aren't related, but might have other value -- either to students or to parents or whatever (I'm thinking band, or literary magazine, or drama club, or chess club, etc) -- wouldn't get funded at all. On the other hand, events that guarantee actual revenue streams (football anyone?) would be focused on to distraction.
Some things we do because they are right to do. Not only for social utility, but because they are morally right. I think that we as Americans have come to believe that public education is one of those moral rights.
Okay, now that makes me mad. I will not be called a snot-nosed high school punk. I am one of thirty in my class that was accepted into Tulsa Tech's pre engineering program. I am not a little punk. I work hard in school, even going in occasionally on Saturdays to study if I really have to. I also am involved in sports. Anybody that knows me will tell you that I am NOT a snot nosed little punk.
Off topic I know, but back on topic. Those teachers are from Wisconsin, not Oklahoma. 95% of teachers that I have encountered in my short "teenager life" are hardworking and would HATE to be considered failures. More of the problem is in administration, not teachers.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 11:00:47 PM
If you want me to treat you like a snot-nosed, high school punk I will happily oblige you. As for the rest of your little rant, please, please tell me what in your teenager life experiences entitles you to criticize any taxpayer who you rely upon for your education. As for the "hard-working teachers" crap, sorry, I have no sympathy for them after their little temper tantrum in Wisconsin a while back. Remember these pics:
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_NbetoGpm4BuL6-jAMUv-IEvdxtBXDDTipe0xbVU6hUYB7W3-rw&t=1)
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8s3aPm1xM4QEkOdBYP45i1x1cXJSRNstsVi5pg6gjrKJHnn8T)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oi3Hu65KYaU/TWMd8Q00utI/AAAAAAAACYc/krSrjEZZ50Y/s320/wisconsin-protest-sign-swallowed-teacher.jpg)
And then there is this wonderful "teacher":
http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2011/04/katherine-windels-charged-in-bomb-threats-against-wisconsin-republicans/
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 11:10:51 PM
Okay, now that makes me mad. I will not be called a snot-nosed high school punk. I am one of thirty in my class that was accepted into Tulsa Tech's pre engineering program. I am not a little punk. I work hard in school, even going in occasionally on Saturdays to study if I really have to. I also am involved in sports. Anybody that knows me will tell you that I am NOT a snot nosed little punk.
Off topic I know, but back on topic. Those teachers are from Wisconsin, not Oklahoma. 95% of teachers that I have encountered in my short "teenager life" are hardworking and would HATE to be considered failures. More of the problem is in administration, not teachers.
Don't let Tony put your off..he's the consummate attention whore/faux victim.
In other words, he's a registered Republican.
;D
guido said;
My wife and I are notorious for throwing nuclear weapons at even the slightest problem, which is why when there was a bump in the education road we hired tutors. We really want the very best for our kids.
Throwing nukes at the school. Tutors? Really? So, if they don't get that whole $30k worth of education, by God, you're gonna get it injected somehow... THAT is pressure! On the kids! You are still young, so don't expect you to understand what it does to kids - hopefully you will figure it out before burnout! That is why I said that I hope and pray they don't!
As far as being treated differently, that is not my suggestion - that is the demand YOU have put forward repeatedly. Dooshy? Yep, that's for sure...
Right now, you "have" to pay to educate your children because you perceive there is a lack in the public education system that somehow would hurt the kids. Well, in the past, there have been many references to growing up somewhat 'deprived', so am presuming that there was no private school in your background. (Otherwise, there was absolutely NO deprivation - actually, just the opposite!) If that is true, then your entire success is, by definition, based on the foundations laid by the public school system. Together with your internal drive and motivation, you used that foundation to make your big bucks. So, from that standpoint, and by that standard, the public schools are a raging success.
Right now, I have to pay to educate my children because our public schools SUCK, as well as pay to educate other people's kids in a SUCKY school system.
This statement alone shows the elitist mentality that I mention - "why should I have to pay to educate other peoples' kids"?
I'm betting Holland Hall is no better than Jenks, Union, or Broken Arrow (the Big Three in this area). Those three have the best football teams money can buy, so they gotta be great schools....They have graduation rates in the mid 90%'s when I checked last year. Does Holland Hall beat that? (Personal experience as well as friends/family who have gone to HH or were with people who did, lend NO credence to any notion of "superiority" in long term performance.)
But having had a combined total of two kids and two grandkids go through each of them (the big 3, not HH), they do have issues. The latest kid calls Union "ghetto". Go figure. And that one should know, having experienced the "real thing" for years in a medium sized southern Louisiana town.
Here is a review I found on HH from a parent (alledgedly). Sounds a LOT like what it was when I was in school decades ago. What goes around comes around...
My child has attended Holland Hall since preschool. However, I feel that if you aren't from Tulsa you simply don't fit in. Everyone is from Tulsa and/or were sorority sisters. Most women have never worked, therefore they spend most of their time gossiping or backstabbing. We are impressed with the academics, but disappointed in the lack of parenting and pretentiousness that surrounds Holland Hall. Therefore, we are seeking a more appropriate environment for our child.
Here is another one;
There is a huge workload, and stress is not uncommon, but the college prep received is incredible. It is not the right school for everyone, but for the right students, Holland Hall is an incredible place.
Sounds like pressure to me.
And LaCrosse?? I mean...damn...(said in the same tone as Will Smith in Men in Black.)
And I second it, ZYX, don't let him get under your skin. His "entitlement attitude" is the first thing you get to see in the morning, and the last thing at night. He's entitled because he is special. As detailed here and many other places within the posts.
Quote from: we vs us on May 30, 2011, 11:08:58 PM
I think competition in public schools sucks. At least in the way you mean it -- which is to pit different funding models against one another, and have schools "win" or "lose" funding based on their successes/failures.
Thank you for actually making an argument here rather than rant. My position on vouchers is not about different funding models or about competition in public schools. In my opinion, healthy competition is always a good thing and if private schools can do a job better educating our children than public schools (which they generally do), then why throw up walls to stop poorer kids from accessing them? Is the separation of church and state canard so sacrosanct (in some cases) that we are willing to to sacrifice them in favor of preserving public schools? Right now we have a disgusting public school system that is plainly not working. I want to read posts that posit changes/alternatives please...
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 11:10:51 PM
Okay, now that makes me mad. I will not be called a snot-nosed high school punk.
Then don't act like one. Oh, and I don't care if you are mad or not. Seriously, you slap at me over my caring about children then you whine like one? And a hint, when the forum cop is on your side, you should rethink your position.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 30, 2011, 11:21:29 PM
And I second it, ZYX, don't let him get under your skin. His "entitlement attitude" is the first thing you get to see in the morning, and the last thing at night. He's entitled because he is special. As detailed here and many other places within the posts.
I have an entitlement attitude? Seriously, what in your bong-inspired mind leads you to believe I have espoused that I am entitled to something/anything? Tell me. As for the rest of your post, have you or your children attended HH?
Private schools are fantastic. The one that I used to go to (Riverfield) is very hands on. Worksheets are rarely used. Long recesses, frequent fieldtrips, and many hands on projects make learning fun and more effective. I believe this would help public schools tremendously. Public schools are too traditional. More "out there" methods of learning would be much more effective in my opinion.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 11:30:28 PM
Then don't act like one. Oh, and I don't care if you are mad or not. Seriously, you slap at me over my caring about children then you whine like one? And a hint, when the forum cop is on your side, you should rethink your position.
Three responses in 10 minutes. Attention whore. I rest my case.
PS: I don't see many coming to your aid...Gweed
Oh, no...I guess it's true...the public schools are an abject failure...guido can't read! I specifically said the big 3, not HH at one point. And friends/family at another. I guess I will just have to keep the posts shorter, so there is no loss of attention span.
Hoss,
Again, you guys are leaving me out!! I wanna be an attention whore, too!!
Are you the forum cop he is talking about??
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 30, 2011, 11:42:19 PM
Oh, no...I guess it's true...the public schools are an abject failure...guido can't read! I specifically said the big 3, not HH at one point. And friends/family at another. I guess I will just have to keep the posts shorter, so there is no loss of attention span.
Hoss,
Again, you guys are leaving me out!! I wanna be an attention whore, too!!
Start posting links to YouTube videos, and then respond to yourself with another YouTube video, and you might qualify! Or, you might try and point that out to people, then I will deputize you as the newest Forum Deputy Sheriff...LOL.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 11:38:06 PM
Private schools are fantastic. The one that I used to go to (Riverfield) is very hands on. Worksheets are rarely used. Long recesses, frequent fieldtrips, and many hands on projects make learning fun and more effective. I believe this would help public schools tremendously. Public schools are too traditional. More "out there" methods of learning would be much more effective in my opinion.
That there in my opinion is a very reasoned response. I take back my slap at you.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 11:23:11 PM
Thank you for actually making an argument here rather than rant. My position on vouchers is not about different funding models or about competition in public schools. In my opinion, healthy competition is always a good thing and if private schools can do a job better educating our children than public schools (which they generally do), then why throw up walls to stop poorer kids from accessing them? Is the separation of church and state canard so sacrosanct (in some cases) that we are willing to to sacrifice them in favor of preserving public schools? Right now we have a disgusting public school system that is plainly not working. I want to read posts that posit changes/alternatives please...
I'm also for "healthy competition," but I have no idea what that means in this context. In a voucher system, public and private schools would both be competing for the same money, and as I said before it will only end in a vastly unequal educational system -- worse even than it is now.
And I also don't know what it is about private schools that makes them outperform public schools . . . unless it's the fact that the student body is self-selected by income and culture, and that they are well-funded. Outside of that, I'm not sure that the day to day running of a private school is somehow inherently different from the day to day running of a public school. Or that private school innovation can't be copied by public schools.
Unless you need more Jesus in your kid's day, and if that's the case, please feel free to have your own school for that.
I am not trying to promote Riverfield here, but I will once again use it as an example. The day to day running of that school is entirely different from a public school. It has a more intimate, casual, laid back type of feel. It doesn't feel rigid like public school does. The younger children are photographed constantly throughout the day with those pictures along with what they did sent in a daily newsletter to the parents via email. Older children are introduced into concepts such as drumline and "rock band" as an alternative to traditional band. (The school is too small for that.) So yes, private schools can offer very different approaches to learning as opposed to public, but I am not speaking for all private schools, but only from what I have encountered.
There are a number of things that keep public schools from performing in ways such as a private school. The first point being that the steps involved in trying to change the system that has been in place for the public schools for years to a completely different one is so difficult that it could never occur on a wide enough scale to make any kind of real difference. Another is that the parents of those in private school stay involved with the school, after all, they have to protect their investment. Yes, some parents in public schools do, but far too few. What that means is that those that are allowed to run rampant since there is no fear of reprisal at home that a lot of time and effort are diverted away from the rest of the student body to deal with them. Of course the whole no student left behind crap made it really hard to actually punish them by doing things like holding them behind a grade, and suspending does even less to get them in line. Another is the fact that the teacher to student ratio is better with Private schools. Granted this is more of a factor with younger students, after all colleges often have an even greater difference in the ratio, but it's in those early years that a foundation is laid. The private schools are more able to funnel their funds to this than the public since the privates are generally only one school, and thus only have the administration of that single school instead of the extended heirarchy needed to deal with the multiple school systems of the larger public schools. In essence, one of the largest problems the public schools have is that they have the issue of fighting the entire beast when it comes to almost anything involved.
Quote from: ZYX on May 31, 2011, 12:22:45 AM
I am not trying to promote Riverfield here, but I will once again use it as an example. ...
Were there a lot of kids there that didn't want to learn, had parents that didn't value an education, had discipline problems (beyond just being kids)? Were there many special needs kids?
I expect the numbers were small but correct me if necessary.
Didn't want to learn, yeah, parents that don't value education,no. Some probably had discipline problems, but these were not common, and I don't remember kids being expelled because of it. There are some special needs kids, I don't know how many, but there were some. But you also have to factor inthat the school is much smaller than public. I think one misconception about private schools is that kids are just expelled right and left when anything goes wrong. It doesn't happen. I'm really not trying to put down public school, but rather trying to bring up ways it could be more innovative. Innovation is not neccesarily expensive. You don't need to buy the latest technology to reshape the way learning happens. Encouraging teachers to provide a more hands on approach to learning is absolutely free. The problem with public school is that it's boring. If a student wants to succeed, he or she must pit their mind to it and work through the many boring assignments. Not to say private schools don't have those, but there are fewer. That is what gets rid of the kids that don't want to learn. They learn to like school. I honestly believe that many teachers we have now would love to be more creative, but they really aren't allowed to be after a certain extent.
Quote from: we vs us on May 31, 2011, 12:03:16 AM
I'm also for "healthy competition," but I have no idea what that means in this context. In a voucher system, public and private schools would both be competing for the same money, and as I said before it will only end in a vastly unequal educational system -- worse even than it is now.
And I also don't know what it is about private schools that makes them outperform public schools . . . unless it's the fact that the student body is self-selected by income and culture, and that they are well-funded. Outside of that, I'm not sure that the day to day running of a private school is somehow inherently different from the day to day running of a public school. Or that private school innovation can't be copied by public schools.
Unless you need more Jesus in your kid's day, and if that's the case, please feel free to have your own school for that.
There's no mystery to this at all. If a parent cares enough to pay tuition to send their child to school, they are typically going to be more involved in the child's education. In my personal experience with private school, we didn't have teacher's aides, parents would volunteer in the classroom. My history teacher explained that he took a pay cut to teach at the school I went to after he left Tulsa Public Schools, but it was worth the cut because the working conditions were so much better. What he meant by that was with the exception of one or two kids per class, everyone in there was success-oriented because someone at home cared about their education.
It has nothing to do with income or in-bred prosperity. It has to do with parents who truly care about the prosperity of their own children. You can't teach prosperity in school, you have to have role models at home. Too many people are using the public school system as a babysitting service which is not at all what it's intended for.
I do take exception to the idea being floated on here that the entire public education system is broken. I really don't give a whit about the situation in Wisconsin, this is TulsaNow, not MilwaukeeNow. I sent my kids to private school up until we moved into the Jenks district 12 years ago. My second daughter just graduated from Jenks two weeks ago, yet one more public school success story. My ex wife and I both worked, so neither of us had a lot of spare time to donate to the classroom. However, we did provide role models of success (I don't mean riches either, quite a few things define success) we were involved in their activities, and we were there to help them with their studies when they needed it. Both my daughters are very self-motivated so we really didn't have to ride them to finish projects and when they had trouble with a subject, we got them the necessary help if we could not be of help.
ZYX is very bright and well-spoken and by appearances is a public school success story. I suspect his parents have been quite involved in his education and have not left it all up to someone else to educate their child.
The liberal mind-set is that somehow money will solve any problem, and those who have it should keep throwing good money after bad to fix problems for which there is no amount of money which can fix them. The only thing which will fix the educational system is for parents to get involved, stay involved, and to provide positive role models. A truly great teacher isn't one who worries first about how much they are paid, a truly great teacher cares about the welfare and education of their students.
Riverfield is a good private school with a quite different approach to education.
I helped start their recycling and composting program and donated materials and bins to the school. We go out there every year around Earth day and work with the kids.
This spring, the principal and I walked around the campus and there was a group of kids outside drawing pictures while sitting on a bridge. We walked up to a child sitting by himself with a dog and the principal asked what was happening. The child responded with, "it is a stray that I thought needed attention. My teacher said I could stay outside with him for a while".
It all seemed odd to me to be so unstructured, but I know some of the parents of kids there and their kids seem well-learned to me.
Quote from: ZYX on May 31, 2011, 08:55:22 AM
Didn't want to learn, yeah, parents that don't value education,no. Some probably had discipline problems, but these were not common, and I don't remember kids being expelled because of it. There are some special needs kids, I don't know how many, but there were some. But you also have to factor inthat the school is much smaller than public. I think one misconception about private schools is that kids are just expelled right and left when anything goes wrong. It doesn't happen. I'm really not trying to put down public school, but rather trying to bring up ways it could be more innovative. Innovation is not neccesarily expensive. You don't need to buy the latest technology to reshape the way learning happens. Encouraging teachers to provide a more hands on approach to learning is absolutely free. The problem with public school is that it's boring. If a student wants to succeed, he or she must pit their mind to it and work through the many boring assignments. Not to say private schools don't have those, but there are fewer. That is what gets rid of the kids that don't want to learn. They learn to like school. I honestly believe that many teachers we have now would love to be more creative, but they really aren't allowed to be after a certain extent.
I could not agree with you more. Is Riverfield somewhat based on the Montessori system? It sounds familiar. My daughters went to Undercroft Montessori and the learning approach was to allow children to choose what they wanted to learn and how they wanted to go about learning it using the tools they had available in the classroom and they worked at their own pace. Teachers were actually more like guides to help keep some structure, but the students were allowed to innovate and feed their curiosity and creativity. I loved the program and was really worried neither of them would do as well in a more structured environment, yet they prospered. I think the biggest thing they took from the Montessori experience which helps them to this day is the sense of self-reliance and resourcefulness.
That sounds very similar. I know the younger children (under first grade) are based on Reggio Amelia, a city in Italy with a very similar learning structure in their schools. Now that I think about it, I believe Riverfield does take some ideas from the Montessori, I've heard that name tossed around before.
RM, did you notice the peacocks running free? [gag] I don't like peacocks for whatever reason.
Quote from: ZYX on May 31, 2011, 09:23:57 AM
RM, did you notice the peacocks running free? [gag] I don't like peacocks for whatever reason.
They have many animals and birds on their campus. I really like that.
QuoteI do take exception to the idea being floated on here that the entire public education system is broken. I really don't give a whit about the situation in Wisconsin, this is TulsaNow, not MilwaukeeNow. I sent my kids to private school up until we moved into the Jenks district 12 years ago. My second daughter just graduated from Jenks two weeks ago, yet one more public school success story. My ex wife and I both worked, so neither of us had a lot of spare time to donate to the classroom. However, we did provide role models of success (I don't mean riches either, quite a few things define success) we were involved in their activities, and we were there to help them with their studies when they needed it. Both my daughters are very self-motivated so we really didn't have to ride them to finish projects and when they had trouble with a subject, we got them the necessary help if we could not be of help.
ZYX is very bright and well-spoken and by appearances is a public school success story.
Public education "success" stories? What does that mean and why celebrate that? We should be showing scorn and disdain at a school system where we want to applaud those who "made it through" without getting f'd up.
Quote from: guido911 on May 30, 2011, 09:33:11 PM
Our public schools are FAILING our kids, and it pisses me off that my money is feeding that b~tch.
Some of 'em are. Most of our schools locally are not. And before you get pissy, I pay a lot to educate other people's kids. So does everyone here, unless they don't buy things. I pay even more since I own cars and a house. That's OK by me; the schools have to be paid for somehow. I'd rather we pay to educate kids than have them all become hoodlums and pay even more to incarcerate them. That's selfish me talking.
I like going on vacation in the Dominican Republic. I don't want to come home to it.
I can tell you the one thing we can do to fix schools, but I'm not prepared to do it and I doubt you or anyone else here is: End special ed. A large part of the increase in outlays on school (beyond the school lunch program and other mandates which are paid for with federal dollars) is on that one thing. That and districts like Jenks deciding they need what amounts to two teachers to a classroom. But the former is far more expensive than the latter, albeit much more necessary.
Quote from: ZYX on May 30, 2011, 11:10:51 PM
Anybody that knows me will tell you that I am NOT a snot nosed little punk.
Don't get mad, he's just projecting..
I had complaints about public schools for long time, but then started realizing the reality is that they aren't that much different. Parental participation is a much bigger component than just about anything else.
Conan, guido is biting the hand that fed him, since he has all but admitted that he is a product of those same schools upon which he heaps his scorn. But then, the thought just came to mind - look how he turned out... and a lawyer to boot!! Maybe his journey of self investigation and learning has lead him to this place in life. Maybe the system IS irretrievably broken!
Not! His bad result is a fluke. Plus, he has to spew to keep on script!
Average high school population nationwide has always had about 25% drop out rate. For many decades! Some of the Big Three seem to be slightly better than average. We really need to do better, but no one - including the private schools - has figured out how to do that.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 31, 2011, 12:52:19 PM
Average high school population has always had about 25% drop out rate. For many decades! Some of the Big Three seem to be slightly better than average.
I'm pretty sure those numbers are gamed. At the high school I went to, it wasn't possible to drop out. They'd "transfer" a prospective dropout to the alternative ed school before letting them do so. Maybe it was just them, but I somehow doubt it.
And yes, a large part of what makes private schools "better" also makes Booker T. better. Everybody who is there wanting to be there makes a big difference.
I know. If a private school has a potential "dropout" - someone who is failing - they just kick them out.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 31, 2011, 12:58:29 PM
I know. If a private school has a potential "dropout" - someone who is failing - they just kick them out.
Wow! That's not true.
Quote from: Gaspar on May 31, 2011, 01:18:23 PM
Wow! That's not true.
You're an interesting one to call a post into doubt.
And I will continue to help pay for the Tulsa Public Schools now that I have no school aged children and my children have never attended a school in the Tulsa district. I have no problem with that, that's part of being a resident citizen of Tulsa and living in the defined boundaries of TPS. Public education is NOT a pay-as-you-go service, we all pay for it. I've got a daughter at OU, yet my tax dollars also help fund something like 50 other public junior colleges and universities in the state.
The only thing I can't stand is being dunned for more money when the money they already have is not being managed properly.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 31, 2011, 03:32:43 PM
The only thing I can't stand is being dunned for more money when the money they already have is not being managed properly.
That's precisely my point, along with our public school's lack of competition.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 31, 2011, 12:58:29 PM
I know. If a private school has a potential "dropout" - someone who is failing - they just kick them out.
That there is a dumb@ssed point. Trying to snatch the "Clavin" moniker from Nate?
Quote from: guido911 on May 31, 2011, 04:17:41 PM
That's precisely my point, along with our public school's lack of competition.
I don't really see how "competition" from a private entity is going to improve government schools. I simply don't buy that you can force anything out of the government with competition. The government schools will still be allowed to exist even with sub-par service, just like every other government entity can do.
Private schools existed long before public schools, yet it's not really engendered any sort of competition all along unless I'm totally missing the point you are making. I'm simply not on the voucher train, as I don't see how it adds anything to public schools or forces them into improving.
If enough people participate in the voucher program, more private schools open to take advantage of government funding. Much like privately-owned quasi-tech schools (think cosmetology and electronics, and business schools) which thrive on government loan programs but often provide little value in return to the students. It's another system ripe for fraud.
QuoteI simply don't buy that you can force anything out of the government with competition.
UPS and FedEx are sure whipping the crap out of the government postal service. Here's an interesting read:
http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=ba61c52f-6deb-4ca6-998d-79419469a983
To bring this back to the OP point, yes, given today's economic climate, parents of children in public schools are, gulp, going to have to shoulder some of the financial responsibility for their kids' education. Oh the horror of that. If they don't, then there will have to be cuts or outright elimination of those programs that are fee-based.
Quote from: guido911 on May 31, 2011, 04:58:15 PM
UPS and FedEx are sure whipping the crap out of the government postal service. Here's an interesting read:
I'm sure it helps that they get millions of dollars every year from the postal service, and that they don't have a universal service mandate.
Quote from: nathanm on May 31, 2011, 05:01:20 PM
I'm sure it helps that they get millions of dollars every year from the postal service, and that they don't have a universal service mandate.
From my article which you apparently didn't read:
QuoteHere are the biggest nails in the Postal Service's coffin:
1. Its union is too strong. The USPS cannot lay off employees due to union contracts. And in the next four years, union members will get a 3.5% raise and seven (yes, SEVEN) uncapped cost-of-living increases. That's a shocking commitment.
2. It spends too much on salaries and benefits. About 80% of its budget goes to salaries and benefits, writes BusinessWeek's Devin Leonard. Can you even imagine that? Compare that with the 43% spent at FedEx and the 61% spent by UPS.
3. It hasn't raised prices enough. It costs the same to mail a letter to your neighbor as it does to deliver it by snowmobile to the Alaskan wilderness. (Yes, the USPS actually does that.) The postal service should charge higher prices for longer travel distances.
4. It relies too much on junk and first-class mail. Total mail volume fell 20% from 2006 to 2010. The USPS relies too much on first-class mail for money, and when mail volume falls, its revenue falls as well.
5. It has too many post offices. Most of the post offices around the country lose money. What if the USPS took a page from Starbucks (SBUX) playbook and opened mini post offices at supermarkets, gas stations and retailers like Target (TGT)? Still convenient, but lower overhead. Even better: Nonunion workers can staff those offices, Leonard writes.
6. It hasn't embraced the Internet. E-mail has been a killer. But maybe the USPS has taken the wrong approach to the Internet. In other countries, Leonard reports, the postal service lets people pay bills online, and even scans mail and sends it to customers online.
Funny that the "universal mandate" thingy you mentioned didn't make the author of this article's list.
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQWzCtpBCxZibdTk80EU-kGj_8FdibdQbU3iIOqQXWsWbHOKLDW)
Quote from: guido911 on May 31, 2011, 04:58:15 PM
UPS and FedEx are sure whipping the crap out of the government postal service. Here's an interesting read:
http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=ba61c52f-6deb-4ca6-998d-79419469a983
To bring this back to the OP point, yes, given today's economic climate, parents of children in public schools are, gulp, going to have to shoulder some of the financial responsibility for their kids' education. Oh the horror of that. If they don't, then there will have to be cuts or outright elimination of those programs that are fee-based.
And yet one more example of where competition has not improved the government product. Actually their product isn't so bad, they simply do a poor job of managing cash and their assets. The postal service is one government service which could be out-sourced and managed profitably. There IS an alternative to the government product for those who wish to (literally) pay the freight.
Don't underestimate the leverage the Teamsters has on UPS. Last time they walked out, UPS really did not have competition in the ground freight business, so they didn't risk permanent damage to their customer base by refusing to buckle to union demands right away. Now that FedEx has a competent ground organization (and I do not believe their drivers are unionized) UPS could lose a ton of customers.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 31, 2011, 05:30:27 PM
And yet one more example of where competition has not improved the government product. Actually their product isn't so bad, they simply do a poor job of managing cash and their assets. The postal service is one government service which could be out-sourced and managed profitably. There IS an alternative to the government product for those who wish to (literally) pay the freight.
Don't underestimate the leverage the Teamsters has on UPS. Last time they walked out, UPS really did not have competition in the ground freight business, so they didn't risk permanent damage to their customer base by refusing to buckle to union demands right away. Now that FedEx has a competent ground organization (and I do not believe their drivers are unionized) UPS could lose a ton of customers.
In one way, I really wish the government schools that are failing would just tank already so we can find real solutions. For those in these schools now, I would like them to get a voucher for a private school or be allowed to transfer. Leaving these kids there and hoping for a "success story" is not a solution by any means.
Quote from: guido911 on May 31, 2011, 05:11:35 PM
Funny that the "universal mandate" thingy you mentioned didn't make the author of this article's list.
Funny that you expect a hit piece like that to talk about the real issues. The USPS has a universal service mandate and flat-rate first class mail for a reason. If you want to go back to the 1800s and leave half your countrymen behind, there are plenty of places you'd be better off living. I'm about to be visiting one, actually. It seems to be attracting quite a large number of randhole expats.
You may not be aware of this, but there are places in this country to which FedEx and UPS won't deliver at any price. And places without electricity, much less Internet access or phone service. But yeah, let's leave folks behind, why not. It costs too much damn money to fulfill the ideals outlined in our Constitution. We're throwing the rest of it away, so why not one more thing?
Quote from: nathanm on May 31, 2011, 05:53:24 PM
Funny that you expect a hit piece like that to talk about the real issues. The USPS has a universal service mandate and flat-rate first class mail for a reason. If you want to go back to the 1800s and leave half your countrymen behind, there are plenty of places you'd be better off living. I'm about to be visiting one, actually. It seems to be attracting quite a large number of randhole expats.
You may not be aware of this, but there are places in this country to which FedEx and UPS won't deliver at any price. And places without electricity, much less Internet access or phone service. But yeah, let's leave folks behind, why not. It costs too much damn money to fulfill the ideals outlined in our Constitution. We're throwing the rest of it away, so why not one more thing?
There appears to be quite a bit of waste and inefficiencies in the system, too many facilities to maintain, too many employees dependent on the USPS. The list of people who aren't communicating primarily via electronic media is getting smaller and smaller by the day, even in rural areas. Consider that the postal service is the leading cause of unwanted and unsolicited litter to my house. They are somewhat of an anachronism in this day and age when the government is supposed to be leading by example in being more environmentally-friendly. There's a lot of emissions used delivering that mail and even more created printing trash I do not need or read. The only piece of value I get is value news because the newsprint is ideal for lighting charcoal in my draft chimney. The bills I can get delivered electronically I do. Other than the occasional greeting card, there's nothing I expect in my mailbox. It's becoming an outmoded method of delivering information. At some point in the next 50 years, I could see daily mail as being obsolete.
Certainly there's a place for the USPS and other people are necessarily more dependent on their services than I am, but like many other arms of government, it doesn't need to be as big as it is in this day and age. The revenue issues are bearing this out. It's not just employment costs, they also have a lot of maintenance costs associated with maintaining an aging fleet of buildings and vehicles.
Personally, I think the idea of stopping Saturday mail delivery would be a great cost-saving measure.
I agree that there are probably efficiencies to be found, and that I could do without the junk mail. Problem is that the junk mail is largely what finances the whole system. One of the big reasons they're hurting so badly despite the regular rate increases is that there are fewer ads being sent than in years past.
I'm not terribly enthused about giving up Saturday delivery, though. I don't think it would actually save that much money, and it would make netflix much less convenient. ;)
Quote from: nathanm on May 31, 2011, 07:14:35 PM
I agree that there are probably efficiencies to be found, and that I could do without the junk mail. Problem is that the junk mail is largely what finances the whole system. One of the big reasons they're hurting so badly despite the regular rate increases is that there are fewer ads being sent than in years past.
I'm not terribly enthused about giving up Saturday delivery, though. I don't think it would actually save that much money, and it would make netflix much less convenient. ;)
Then quit expecting non-netflix using taxpayers to subsidize your Netflix habit and be willing to pay more for FedEx or UPS delivery of your DVD's
Don't tell my mother I said that, as a Netflix junkie herself, she'd kick my donkey. ;)
Seriously, aren't they looking at going to electronic delivery for Netflix now?
Now, back to schools...
Quote from: Conan71 on May 31, 2011, 07:45:02 PM
Then quit expecting non-netflix using taxpayers to subsidize your Netflix habit and be willing to pay more for FedEx or UPS delivery of your DVD's
Don't tell my mother I said that, as a Netflix junkie herself, she'd kick my donkey. ;)
Seriously, aren't they looking at going to electronic delivery for Netflix now?
Now, back to schools...
They actually have been doing electronic delivery for a little while now (PS3 and I think XBox owners get this, as well as some BD player owners..I have the option but don't have a Netflix account, as I wish to put a pox on those sucking up all the bandwidth via Cox that renders my connection crappy for part of the evening..as a HD movie averages about 4 gb of bandwidth).
Conan,
I would be thrilled to quit expecting non-Netflix users to quit subsidizing the habit.
Just as soon as the warmongering, right wing extremists quit expecting me to subsidize their imperialistic voyeurism to the tune of trillions of dollars and 4,000 + lives of our children! You remember that little event; going to Iraq to look for the people we wanted who really were - and we knew it - in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Post office looks like a hell of a bargain compared to that. Most of the other stuff we do looks like a hell of a bargain compared to those deaths of our kids and the maiming and mutilating of tens of thousands of more. And the subsequent neglect of those survivors...
Schools are a trivial expense compared to those losses. Guess it just depends on how much we truly value the lives of those soldiers, as well as the rest of our kids. Even most of the people I know who have no children of their own recognize the value of participating in the education of all. The problem is, the Harvard MBA program has been able to show how much value there is to getting rid of jobs in this country, but they haven't been able to show the value to society of an educated, contributing member of that society.
What is really amazing is how some people cannot see the inter-connectedness of the whole thing. The goofy kids down the street who grew up in the neighborhood - how that all fits together to form a complex "machine" that is our society, economy, and way of life.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2011, 06:37:31 AM
Conan,
I would be thrilled to quit expecting non-Netflix users to quit subsidizing the habit.
Just as soon as the warmongering, right wing extremists quit expecting me to subsidize their imperialistic voyeurism to the tune of trillions of dollars and 4,000 + lives of our children! You remember that little event; going to Iraq to look for the people we wanted who really were - and we knew it - in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Post office looks like a hell of a bargain compared to that. Most of the other stuff we do looks like a hell of a bargain compared to those deaths of our kids and the maiming and mutilating of tens of thousands of more. And the subsequent neglect of those survivors...
Schools are a trivial expense compared to those losses. Guess it just depends on how much we truly value the lives of those soldiers, as well as the rest of our kids. Even most of the people I know who have no children of their own recognize the value of participating in the education of all. The problem is, the Harvard MBA program has been able to show how much value there is to getting rid of jobs in this country, but they haven't been able to show the value to society of an educated, contributing member of that society.
What is really amazing is how some people cannot see the inter-connectedness of the whole thing. The goofy kids down the street who grew up in the neighborhood - how that all fits together to form a complex "machine" that is our society, economy, and way of life.
Keep in mind those 4000 were not conscripted into the service. They went willingly into something they believed in and knew the risks. Everyone is weary of the wars overseas, and yes they have been costly, let's drop the tired rhetoric over them.
Back to the topic at hand: $1 billion here, $15 billion there, $6 billion over yonder that all eventually adds up. It only takes finding 1000 $1 billion wastes to cut $1 trillion from the budget. And for those with short memories, I've got no problem in EVERYONE sharing in a corresponding tax increase to help right the ship.
We need to re-set the priorities we expect from our government. Do we want to continue to say that since it's only $80,000 it's okay that our gov't is funding research into why the same teams keep making it to the NCAA tournament every year? Or is it more important to fund a teaching job with that $80K?
Should more public school funding come from the feds with performance strings attached, or do we want better local funding mechanisms which would keep the feds out of state business?
I simply refuse to see $200,000 boondoggles as "minor" or such a minuscule speck on the budget it's not worth worrying about. For every dollar wasted, that's a dollar which cannot go to a worthy program. I do think public education is a worthy and expected service provided by tax dollars.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2011, 06:37:31 AM
Just as soon as the warmongering, right wing extremists quit expecting me to subsidize their imperialistic voyeurism to the tune of trillions of dollars and 4,000 + lives of our children! You remember that little event; going to Iraq to look for the people we wanted who really were - and we knew it - in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Who knew that Obama was a warmongering, right wing extremist? At early April 2011, the Libyan operation had cost over $600M.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ji9xb3vW6c9MpNTjsTELu7GMHI8g?docId=CNG.a75eb18b88e9d2bd744da1f674e29b55.b1
And yep, Obama, too. Libya was stupid. No "tired rhetoric" - more a statement of fact.
Congress can spend how many hours talking about $80,000 or $800,000 occurrences; or even billion dollar ones? And in the end, when it is all added up, you save a few billion. After hundreds of hours of yapping like those little dogs that rich people carry around.
Or we could pull out of Iraq tomorrow afternoon about 2:15 and save another what? Billion or two per day??
The past is a sunk cost. Should never have been spent that way to begin with, but it is over and now we can stop a huge hemorrhage easily. Leave Iraq.
And while we are at it, close half of the bases we have on Okinawa. That would save many more billions. Pretty soon, you have saved much more than shutting down thousands of these little nickel and dime events. And much more quickly. Like instantly.
Or lose that second fighter jet engine program that the Republicans just had put back into the latest defense spending bill. There is a wasted $3 billion + just on that one line item.
And I bet the US Military is way more than capable of handling all that support BS that has been contracted out to places like Halliburton for a tiny fraction of the cost. And I bet they can handle the logistics of fuel procurement at way less that the $10 or 20 per gallon Halliburton gets. Another $50 billion savings.
Conan,
Your conclusion is impeccable! Every dollar wasted is multiplied because not only is it a dollar wasted on the item that it is spent on, it is another dollar that the deserving cause does not receive. In very real terms that leverages to 2 dollars wasted. Public education AT ALL LEVELS has been proven over and over and over to be the absolute best investment ours, or any society, can make! The return on trade school training or college education support repays itself so many times over and over the numbers become lost in the ages - continuing through an entire lifetime of work, contribution to the economy, society, and the the tax base. We just don't.... No, that isn't correct - some sections of society just don't understand. And sadly, probably never will.