Tea Party 4-18-11 Topic

"There is no simple answer here. All of these things working together but, yes, we have to shine a spotlight on excellence. We have hundreds of thousands of teachers who are beating the odds every single day performing miracles. We have extraordinary schools closing the achievement gaps, great districts, great states. We have to learn from excellence. Answers are all out there," he said.


Just more of that kind of rhetoric from the folks in charge would probably help.

It sometimes seems like the only remotely positive portrayals of teachers come from Samuel L Jackson movies.
8/30/2010 3:27 PM
remember - we are all a bunch of greedy union thugs . . . . . . .
8/30/2010 7:12 PM
Posted by creilmann on 8/30/2010 7:46:00 AM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 8/29/2010 11:47:00 PM (view original):
1 It isnt a rant that I am being censored by the left. Just beacuse you dont do it doesnt mean it is happening.

2 Let me pick a few of my favorites.

What would be the down side of Tort Reform. You always point to the rest of the world, isnt our legal system a global oddity?

Saying you work for 40 years. If someone retired this year would they have been better off investing half of their SS in a general blue chip mutual for the last 40 years?

Other places create standards that help them. Our standards are being created to help the world. GM should be able to sell the cars that make them money.

How much has the ADA cost American business? Is the tiny percentage of people it helps worth the overall cost?

Education and Energy got Departments as mostly political posturing. What does the DOE do that a branch of HHS couldt do with less money.
There seems to be some confusion amongst the far right as to what censorship is.  If people choose to ignore you, that is not the same as censoring you.  If people speak against your POV, that does not in any way infringe on your 1st Amendment rights.

When given the chance to clearly define your position, you respond with questions and defer to generalizations.  You don't need to cover five topics in one post.  I know you dislike regulations.  I know you think that public services should be privatized.  WHY do you think this?
These were all answers to specific questions from you.

I have explained and shown evidence to support that the current tort system cost business money and adds greatly to the nations medical bill. I relaize there was data that countered that so we get no where there. I posed the question what is the down side of tort reform. Even it it is the 2% you claim what is the downside to doing it. In phrasing it that way I am saying that I can see no down side. I also posed it in an international light. You have commented a couple of times that the rest of the world can do something why not us. Our tort system is a global oddity. No one anywhere does it like we do.

You did ask what would happen to someone who privatized there SS after this crash. My point was that you dont save for your retirement for a couple of years, you save for a lifetime. Over the course of your lifetime almost everyone would do better with an investment account. For the handful that dont we can take up the slack. No more anacdotes about seniors eating dog food.

Your last paragraph ased why public should be private.

I think the government is horrible at accounting. Everything that goes into the government comes out losing half the value. We have a top flight military, but we dont have a cheap military. Remember $400 toliet seats.

When we go from a part of the HEW to the Dept of Education a certain amount of money goes to administration. This is money that never gets to the kids. There is a huge difference between the money that goes into DOE and the money that schools see. It is easier to see it in this department because we know what they do. How do we know what the waste at the dept of Energy is? 

I have heard left wing talk using the line that Tea Party wants to get rid of Fire Departments and Federal Highways. Of course that is nuts. We want the government the size it was during the 50s when the massive expansion of government started. We dont want to gut the government, just limit its influence. Pull back to the level that makes sense, not eliminate it.

I hope this explains my position a little better. Now why dont you answer my questions. This isnt me on trial for Conservatism. This is give and take. Explain some of your positions.
8/31/2010 1:11 AM
Posted by antonsirius on 8/30/2010 1:38:00 PM (view original):
I'd add dismantling the burgeoning security state in our schools to that list. No more strip searches, remote spying on students through their webcams etc.
There is nothing that is more important to the educational process than safety. If kids are scared to be in school, why bother.
8/31/2010 1:14 AM
Wow!  It really is impossible for you to discuss one subject in even a little bit of detail.  

We'll stick with education.  

When we go from a part of the HEW to the Dept of Education a certain amount of money goes to administration. This is money that never gets to the kids. There is a huge difference between the money that goes into DOE and the money that schools see. It is easier to see it in this department because we know what they do. 

This doesn't make much sense.  Are you saying that combining the two departments will make them more transparent?  That the result will be that schools receive more money?

8/31/2010 8:58 AM

You guys realize, of course, that federalizing ANYTHING is pretty much a death sentence for fiscal responsibility and accountability.  What you guys talk about might make sense if our government stooges knew how to run anything efficiently or cost-effectively. 

Why would putting the feds in charge of the schools suddenly make them better?  Right now, the problem is at least partially that the schools aren't TEACHING anymore, they're training kids to pass standardized tests and achieve test scores so the individual districts can get more funding.  And teachers are more concerned with protecting their own jobs (understandable), and the unions are busy NOT allowing reasonable salary decreases in times of fiscal need which results in layoffs.  Locally, the union turned down a 5% decrease across the board, so the district dumped 5% of the teachers.  Of course the old teachers kept their tenure and their position despite their inability to relate to the short-attention span, media-drunk kids of today. 

The feds would just screw it up worse.  I'd be more inclined to give private schools a shot than turn it over to known bureaucratic incompetents.

8/31/2010 12:06 PM
FASCIST
8/31/2010 12:15 PM
Todd - I have had the same argument with my union many times over the past 18 months.  We are in the middle of a rather contentious contract negotiation (expired last December) and they cannot seem to get out of their own way, public relations wise, when it comes to the current economic fiscal reality.
8/31/2010 12:30 PM
When you're in an area with 10-12% unemployment, it's ridiculous that the teachers' union won't cede a relatively small chunk of salary/benefits to protect 100% of the jobs.  Since the union leadership is typically tenured, they don't give a **** if the ax falls because it will just chop the youngest and least tenured.  So, our kids get taught by 60-year old fossils that remember black-and-white tvs and don't know how to enter grades into the computer...
8/31/2010 12:36 PM
Posted by creilmann on 8/31/2010 8:58:00 AM (view original):
Wow!  It really is impossible for you to discuss one subject in even a little bit of detail.  

We'll stick with education.  

When we go from a part of the HEW to the Dept of Education a certain amount of money goes to administration. This is money that never gets to the kids. There is a huge difference between the money that goes into DOE and the money that schools see. It is easier to see it in this department because we know what they do. 

This doesn't make much sense.  Are you saying that combining the two departments will make them more transparent?  That the result will be that schools receive more money?

It makes a lot of sense. Education used to be part of a department called Health, Education and Welefare. Under Carter they split it out to fix the Education problem in America. Billions more were pumped into this department, much of it going to administrative costs. Much of it just going to projects that didnt do anything. 30 years later we still have a problem, but we spent billions of dollars on nothing.

Todd put it a little more fierce, but he is on track. If we make Dept of Education a part of another department and get rid of all the extra stuff, and use that to actually give money to schools that are in trouble we may go somewhere.
8/31/2010 2:01 PM
I was referring to your wording.  It's unclear.  It doesn't make sense.  It's Palin-esque in it's structure.

So you're saying that when the Department of Education was part of HEW, it was staffed more efficiently?
8/31/2010 3:08 PM
It was much smaller and didnt need as much staff.

Palin-esque is garbage. Lets take 100 people in the Mall at random and see if the understand Palin or Howard Dean better!

It is pretty easy to demand someone lay out their whole agenda and you get to pick at it. Lets hear some of your views. let me pick at your beliefs!
8/31/2010 3:11 PM
So the information that they post on their website is false?
One final note: while ED's programs and responsibilities have grown substantially over the years, the Department itself has not. In fact, with a planned fiscal year 2010 level of 4,199, ED's staff is 44 percent below the 7,528 employees who administered Federal education programs in several different agencies in 1980, when the Department was created. These staff reductions, along with a wide range of management improvements, have helped limit administrative costs to approximately 2 percent of the Department's discretionary budget and less than 1 percent of all grants and loans made by the Department. This means that ED delivers about 99 cents on the dollar in education assistance to States, school districts, postsecondary institutions, and students.
8/31/2010 3:14 PM
Probably a lot of private business owners out there that would love to be running a 1% labor cost.
8/31/2010 3:21 PM
Of course they are going to paint it that way. The budget for the ED (turn out that is the correct term, my name being Ed I like that) has spiraled out of control with almost nothing to show for it.

Saying that only 1% is administrative is counter-intuitive. How can 5000 people and a whole department cost so little. It is very easy to bury administrative costs.

The question is what are we getting for our buck?
8/31/2010 3:28 PM
◂ Prev 1...60|61|62|63|64...133 Next ▸
Tea Party 4-18-11 Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.