View Full Version : Republicans On Education
I just have NO interest in political conventions, but I saw JC Watts on CNN's Talk Back live (a black republican from Oklahoma) talking about how Bush will change education by giving parents a choice through vouchers. He said that lower-income African Americans deserve the same choice as other Americans.
Huh?
The last time I checked, the kids my dad teaches who live in places like the 5th ward or other really low income areas can barely afford clothes, books and school supplies for their kids. How are vouchers that give them a discount on private schooling going to help them have a choice?
To me, vouchers are just another way to give white families the opportunity to send their kids to private schools. It won't really help the schools or the people who need it. Plus, giving vouchers to parents who choose to send their kids to private religious schools walks a VERY thin line between legitimate help and the state funding a religious institution.
If you really want to help public schools, you must re-distribute the wealth that pours into the upper income areas across the entire school system and give kids in lower income areas a shot at a real education.
One gentleman in LA recently got so fed up with how bad the inner city schools were and how good the suburban public schools had it that he bought a couple hundred disposible cameras and gave them out to students at inner city schools. He asked them to take pictures of the problems with school buildings, teachers, students, etc.
He took literally hundreds of photos to city leaders, got tons of media pub and forced them to re-distribute their wealth across the board.
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
Standing Ovation!
If the Republicans really want to impress me, they would take that bazillion surplus and invest every cent of it on the educational system.
I don't understand why these political idiots in Washington don't see this.
Take the money, spend it on rebuilding public schools in the inner city or anywhere there is a need, then with the gazillion you still have left, you revamp the educational standard by hiring better and more qualified teachers. With the billions you have left after that, you go and give the freakin teachers a raise so they get paid just as much as doctors. With the millions you have after that, you go and spend it on books that actually have pages to turn. And with the money left over, you make sure that every damn person in this country can go to college, any college, FOR FREE. And yes, all that freakin money they got from my taxes and the surplus is enough. If they can spend about 600 BILLION on a freakin plane that disappears at night so that Iraq can't tell when we are going to kick their ass(as if they could stop it if they knew), then they can spend it on my kid and everyones kid so that they can give back to the society.
Ok, you can take the surplus and spend it on Medicare or a health system or these other matters that are important, don't get me wrong.
But the basis of a society is its educational system. You educate children, they become productive adults. You get the scientists, doctors, lawyers, inventors and the such that will continue to solve problems, create new inventions, enforce the law, interpret it, etc. The standard of living will continue to increase and crime will actually go down. Then, when everyone is working and the country is 10 times richer, your dumb asses can go and tax us some more to then go and spend it on whatever you want. BUT FIX THIS FIRST.**
**I would just like to say that I am not, nor do I intend to, run for office. As you can see by my opinions on this post and the others, I would probably be assasinated while watching Mission Impossible 12 in 2020.
------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan
How does that bumper sticker go:
It will be a great day when education has all the funding it needs and the military will have to hold a bake sale to buy more guns.
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
I'm fairly conservative, although I don't call myself a Republican. I could NEVER be called a Democrat. I'm pretty much disgusted by America's two party politcal system.
Anyway Jeff, two cents from a conservative who thinks education in America, and specifically how much it needs to be improved, is one of the most important issues on the politcal front today: NEVER, EVER, use a catch phrase like "re-distribute the wealth" and expect to win friends and influence people. Tell me that all students will have the same amount of public funds available for their education and you'll never hear me complain. Tell me you're gonna re-distribute wealth, and I'll dismiss you and your ideas as Socialist. (even if you are one, you're arguments might go further if you disguise that fact)
Anyway, just my $.02
------------------
stop posting my damn signature
RocketMan Tex
08-02-2000, 08:44 AM
Bravo, Jeff. I believe you hit the nail on the head on this one. Education is the key to a future, and a high-grade education must be provided to all children, not just those whose parents can obtain vouchers or can afford to send their kids to private school.
One thing that also bothers me regarding this convention is how inclusive the Republican party is trying to portray itself to be. How Gov. Bush, as president, will be sensitive to minority groups and their issues.
If he is so sensitive, how come he couldn't get a hate crimes bill passed in the Texas Legislature after James Byrd Jr. was dragged to death in Jasper? Compassionate conservatism, indeed.
Even some of the Texas delegates removed their hats and turned their heads in protest when the only openly gay man in Congress, Rep. Jim Kolbe from Arizona, gave a speech on free trade of all things! Sounds like the same old Republican party to me...
I can't wait for the Democratic convention so I can see what lies & falsehoods they bring out to counter the lies & falsehoods from the Republican convention.
Pass the remote. Wish I had ESPN Classic.
------------------
Bring It!!
mc mark
08-02-2000, 10:11 AM
Almu wrote...
"If the Republicans really want to impress me, they would take that bazillion surplus and invest every cent of it on the educational system.
I don't understand why these political idiots in Washington don't see this."
Its very simple Almu...It doesn't put money in their pockets. Thats why they don't "see" it.
------------------
MadMax
08-02-2000, 10:17 AM
Actually vouchers have been a unifying force among Republicans and the inner-city. It has worked where it's been tested and those polled in the inner-city overwhelmingly want the opportunity to send their kids to better schools. Vouchers are not being used just on white kids...in fact, where they've been tested so far they're only granted to those in lower-income brackets...so I'm not sure what you're talking about, Jeff. However, I do feel that parents should ultimately have the choice as to where their children are taught, no matter what income bracket they're from. And if they're paying that tax money, they're every bit as entitled to it as anyone else. I think it's a creative solution to the problem...it beats the hell out of the old liberal, "just throw money at it" solution that has failed for 40 years now. However, I will note that George Bush's plans for federal contributions to education look very much like a democrat's. Are all of you educated as to how much money he wants to pump into education? It's overwhelming..it may not be the case anymore (because Gore is so reactionary) but at one time it was more than Gore was proposing. I'm just surprised that anyone would be complaining about George Bush's plans to spend on education. He spent a ton here in Texas, including the largest teacher pay raise in the history of the state...huh...a Republican legislature and a Republican governor gave out the largest teacher pay raise in the state's history...I thought they were mean and insensitive and didn't care anything about kids??
As for the hate crime stuff...give me a break!! James Byrd's killers were sent to death row, exactly where they belong! Hate crime legislation enhances a person's criminal sentence based on the thoughts in their head...based on hate. Last time I checked, the government couldn't put you in jail for thought. They can however put you in jail for murdering someone or beating someone. The action should be punished..the thought shouldn't. Funny how when the murderous act is of racism, we should show sympathy to the victim...but when a man is put to death by the state for murdering and raping women, the liberals all come out in support of the one to be put to death.
I find it nothing short of laughable that you guys have bought into the liberal spin that Republicans are mean and don't care about kids. Do you people honestly believe that??? You honestly believe that Al Gore cares more about you?? Or that Bill "me, myself and I" Clinton cares more about you?? I'm not saying these men don't care at all..but they certainly have a vested interest in you believing that the Republicans don't care.
------------------
Dennis2112
08-02-2000, 10:23 AM
How about holding teachers accountable for failing students and getting parents involved in helping their own kids. The education level of the children has increased greatly in Texas, especially the minorities. If you give local control over the school system and leave the feds out of it. Things would be much better.
Redistribution of the wealth?!? The money that I earn by my hard work should not be taken to be given to someone who doesn't work, especially if they can work.
Maybe the republicans and democrates have failed in the past but Gov Bush must be doing something right. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif
------------------
Houston Rockets Forever!!
In Rudy We Trust
Pole, your suggestion is simple semantics, but I get the point. The problem is that you have rich schools because they live in a rich neighborhood and poor schools because they live in a poor neighboorhood.
Guess which one's get the better books, the better buildings, the better supplies and better teachers? My point is that it is simply unacceptable in a PUBLIC school system to give one group of kids an advantage simply because the were fortunate enough to be born in a nice area of town (or have their parents move there).
Take Lamar High School in Houston. It is a public school on the edge of River Oaks (the richest subdivision in Houston). It is a great school - my parents know the principal there of 30 years - but they get anything and everything they want. Now, compare that to Booker T. Washington High School which is in a low-income neighborhood and is predominantly African American. Their conditions don't even come close to comparing to Lamar.
Now, that example is only high school. The elementary and middle schools are FAR worse off. Both Lamar and Booker T. are in the same school district (HISD), yet they get treated differently. One has a huge, beautiful campus, the other a little parking lot and that's it. One has the finest music program with all the best equipment in town outside of the High School for Performing and Visual Arts and the other barely has a band.
One has new books and desks and gets facelifts to the school when the bricks start to fade. The other has the same stuff and same building it had 20 years ago.
"Having the same amount of funds available for students," "re-distribution of wealth," you call it whatever you want to call it. It sucks no matter how you look at it and it HAS to change.
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
Dennis: Have you ever even attempted to try and get a parent involved when they don't want to be involved. Is that any reason to turn a blind eye to the struggling student? Give me a break.
As for teachers, maybe if districts had enough money to attract decent teachers in the first place with decent salaries, you could hold them accountable. Let me ask you this: if you had a CAREER position open up in a big corporation where the person was in charge of large numbers of people every day. That same person had to work nights and weekends from home on things for those people. They also had to go to all the company events and even participate in many of the activites. How much do you think that person would expect to be paid by the time he/she was in his/her 20th year with that company? $75,000? $90,000? $100,000.
My father, after being a teacher in HISD for 35 freakin' years still only manages to take in just over $35,000 per year. Now, you tell me how you expect to bring in quality educators on that money. I'm all ears.
As for what GW Bush did for education, let me educate you. TAAS scores are up for one reason and one reason only. Children in schools now are required to take "How to Pass the TAAS" courses as part of their class schedule. In addition, their teachers have been instructed in every class to place emphasis on TAAS-oriented elements of that subject.
So, kids who should be learning to read great novels or do complex algabreic funtions are answering multiple choice questions and going over the same functions for weeks to guarantee they pass the TAAS.
Anyone could learn to take a test if they were given constant tutoring on it. The bottom line is that our TAAS testing was becoming an embarrasment to the local and state goverment so they implimented changes designed specifically to get kids to pass the TAAS, not to teach them how to learn.
With those "sweeping changes", our beloved governor was able to radically change our education system and make our childrent that much better...
...at taking tests. Bravo! Job well done!
Does that sound like a good use of your "hard earned tax dollars" or just a waste of time?
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
[This message has been edited by Jeff (edited August 02, 2000).]
Sorry about the tangent, but I've seen two of the smartest people I know (my parents) railroaded by the education system and embittered to it. I've watched this from the inside my entire life and it just freaks me out.
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
rimbaud
08-02-2000, 10:50 AM
Vouchers have always been a near-sighted, stupid idea.
In additiona to the obvious implications Jeff brought up about religious private schools, etc, It is just not very practical on a broad level.
The goverment will decide (on state/city levels) who gets to go to "good" schools, and who gets left behind? The goverment provides discounts to everyone? More private schools would have to be built.
To me (and I know this is a really dumb, impractical idea) it seems better to keep the students where they are, but improve the schools themselves.
While my old high school was not inner city, it was predominately black (followed by hispanic), had pitiful graduation rates, and had equally pitiful teachers.
Nobody cared about most of the students. The teachers did not want to be there. When it rained, the halls were filled with mud.
This is not a learning environment. I will forever feel cheated by my middle and high schools.
In the long run, it would be cheaper to improve the public school system. It is not really that difficult.
Vouchers will make the public schools worse, leaving children behind. Which is contrary to the education slogan of the proponents "leave no child behind."
------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit
BrianKagy
08-02-2000, 10:56 AM
Vouchers have always been a near-sighted, stupid idea.
That's constructive.
"You're not just wrong, or misinformed, or backing a plausible but inefficacious idea. You're stupid because your ideas are different from mine."
------------------
I didn't use the cocaine to get high, I just liked the way it smelled.
rimbaud
08-02-2000, 11:01 AM
BK,
Yes, that was just my opinion, to be taken as any reader wishes. It is not just because it is different than my views - I am not like that. I have just done a decent amount of research on the subject, and have some practical life-experience that I think lends itself to this particular area.
I apologize if it upsets anyone, but that is how I feel. I am not demeaning the people who have these ideas. just the concept of the idea.
Please respond to what I said after my opinion.
------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit
Dennis2112
08-02-2000, 11:11 AM
Jeff~
I never said it was a perfect system but to pour money down a well does not solve the problem either. So what if the kids are taught to pass a test. At least they are learning something and quite possible get to like learning. Reading a book can increase your writing skills greatly. If you have programs that get parents involved then whats the problem. Teachers needs to be payed more but the feds should not be the ones to do it. Local schools should be controlled be local people. That is all I am saying.
Redistributing the money is not the answer. I would prefer that local people vote on how their school tax dollars are used.
------------------
Houston Rockets Forever!!
In Rudy We Trust
4chuckie
08-02-2000, 11:24 AM
One problem that our legislature can't figure out in Ohio is how to fairly distribute the money in the 1st place. Do you do it per student, per area, etc.
I work in a one of the best school districts in the state and they only receive 25-30% of their funding from state/federal dollars, the remainder all comed from property taxes (paid by the residents) who agreed, by vote, to raise their property taxes in order to ensure their children have the best public education possible.
Also from hearing Bush speak he mainly talks about turning the schools ove rto the states and not the federal government. I agree with that. Also he talks about letting kids go to whatever school they want, which in theory would force the schools that lose students to improve or eventually shut down. I also agree with that, although it does make it tough on less wealthy folks to get their kids to other schools.
I know I will also get ripped for this but I for one don't believe teachers are that underpaid. Teachers get into teaching for one of 3 reasons 1) The kids 2) Coaching or 3) Short work years. Teachers know going in they will not be rich. For the teachers who work hard I give them credit but too many bad teachers pull down the good ones. How many teachers did each of us have that use the standardized test straight from the teachers edition, how many actually graded the homework (not just checked it if it was done). Teachers get 2 months off for summer, realistically work a short day (7:30-3:30 with a lunch period and planning period), & get off many holidays. Figure the average job requires 2080 hours/year (52 weeks * 40 hours/week) and I would guess a teacher has 43 weeks at 35 hours/week (1505 hours). I give them credit for their emotional toll of dealing with children's personal problems but we all face different things, but I never listen to teachers complaing about money, if they wanted money they would do something else.
I do agree the good ones should be paid more, but the teachers unions prevent this. I know my post won't be popular but that's just my opinion.
------------------
JayZ750
08-02-2000, 11:27 AM
From all Ive heard and seen, the voucher system has had some success in the inner city so afr, as Mad Max points out. Im not saying it is the way to go, or it is the best idea, but I am saying that I think it is overall having positive effects and is a better idea than simply redistributing the wealth. While each school should have the same opportunities, you said it yourself Jeff, the schools that get less are in poorer neighborhoods. If your goign to "redistribute the wealth" you have to concetrate on the whole neighborhood. Othewise, your just going to end up buying a whole bunch of really nice stuff that is going to be ignored and trashed in no time, even though it will be a definite improvement. Anyway, the fact that Bush is focusing on education makes it good in my book. Maybe hes doing it the right way, maybe he isnt. But he is at least trying, with a creative idea, one that hasnt been put to much use yet at all so it isnt known for sure whether it will work at all or not yet.
As far as teachers getting raises in their salaries. Well, everyone pretty much agrees with this. And Bush has raised Texas' teachers salaries.
One last thing...not all private schools are religiously affiliated. A lot are, but many arent, so this isnt really a religious issue at all.
------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women!
Achebe
08-02-2000, 12:16 PM
1) Has anyone deciphered how vouchers work?
2) Are they constitutional?
3) What will be the aftermath? Will private schools become swamped and appeal to the recently unemployed teachers to fill their needs? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif
Immanuel Kant's "categorial imperative" states that you should only act (pardon the paraphrase) "when you can only imagine each and every other person on the planet doing the same thing in the same circumstance". It is impractical to imagine the 300 high schools on my block (j/k, but Utah is very young) unleashing all of their kids upon the Catholic school up the street.
Irregardless of the mantra, ask yourself this simple question will the damn things work?
------------------
In related news, the RNC has gathered every politician that Bill Clinton ever defeated to speak on behalf of George W. Bush.
Again, I reiterate.
Why not just get the MONEY that we all know is there and go to each public school and say "Hey, lets fix the hallways here." "Lets fix the floors." "Lets get some new books in here." "Hey, lets get some computers in here."
Why not just give the teachers exams to see if they know what they are teaching and then give them evaluations(just like all of us who get them at work) and those who fail...fire them. Hire new, young, qualified teachers, start them with a decent salary, hold them accountable for their graduation rate and for a certain percentage, their salary raise is matched by a percentage. For example, you graduate 100 percent of your class to the next level, you get a 10 percent raise each year. You graduate 90, you get 9. You graduate 50 or less, you get nothing. But, you get warnings, and after 2 sub-par years, your out.
Some people might think that there are students who just don't get it or have family problems that hinder their learning capabilities. That is true in some cases. Parents have to be involved also and some teachers don't have the students parent involvement and that makes it more difficult. But, in my opinion, if the teacher tries her absolute best and is the most qualified for the job, I guarantee you that at least 80 percent will graduate with good grades. And I don't know too many parents who want their kids to be bums anyway.
In all, they should try and structure the public school systems like the corporate world. You pay the good executives the money to lead the company. You pay teachers the money to lead our future. If you can't lead, then you are fired. Plain and simple. People in corporate jobs like me have no room for error because they expect alot from me and if I don't perform, there is a younger, just as qualified guy with a possible MBA waiting in the wings. Teachers need to have that type of accountability if they don't perform. The school system needs to be structured where the teacher is compensated to stay overtime with students and keep going to a sort of "seminar" to keep themselves up to date with teaching techniques and the like.
Again, this is just my humble opinion. But I just don't see how the hell people in Europe, Asia and South America have less to work with and they keep kicking our ass when it comes to schooling. My cousin came here a few years ago from the Dominican Republic and when she got into the 11th grade, she told me that they are teaching her Algebra II. Well, she had trigonometry AND chemistry already in the 9th and 10th!! I never had trig during my 16 years of education and didn't have chemistry until my senior year in high school. She thinks high-school is easy and thinks college was not that hard. She proved it when she graduated from NYU with a 3.6 in Biology. And that is not just her. I know everyone here sees how people who come from other countries start kicking butt in school as soon as they learn the language. True or not?
Ok, thats enough from me.
------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan
Dennis2112
08-02-2000, 02:14 PM
Jeff~
I am all for spending more money on the schools but not spending the money on buracrates and silly things. The teachers and the schools should get the bulk of the money not the superintident or his flunkies.If I vote no to a school bond election because I am unhappy with the way the money is spent does not mean that I am against spending money on schools. How the money is spent has alot to do with why we have only passed one school bond out of four. I for one am for spending money for education AND the military. Without the military we would not be able to protect our liberties and freedom. Without the freedom to vote , we have not have opportunity to have bond elections.
But I do agree that something needs to be done. However to reform the system we must start somewhere and it needs to be done in moderation. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif
Almu~
Bravo, I could not have said it better myself. Spend the money smartly.
------------------
Houston Rockets Forever!!
In Rudy We Trust
[This message has been edited by Dennis2112 (edited August 02, 2000).]
JayZ750
08-02-2000, 02:18 PM
Almu-
Im sure there are levels of schooling in the Dominican Republic too. Did she come from one of the better schools there? And did she go into one of the better schools here?
Cause people from the good schools here sometimes also find it to be easy.
------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women!
4chuckie
08-02-2000, 02:41 PM
Almu,
The basic problem is there isn't enough money to have a great public school system without school levys and or other local efforts to put more money into schools.
How would you allocate funds to schools? The problem is if you do it per student then small rural schools don't have enough money, if you do it by area covered then urban schools get shafted.
The bottom line is affluent communities will be able to give additional monies for their schools while poorer districts don't have the luxury.
Also I think it would be illegal, or unconstinutional, to say OJ poor school A is in a poor neighborhood but rich school B is in an affluent neighborhood. Each scholl has 1000 students and covers 10 square miles. How could you justify sending more taxpayer money to school A then B.
Bottom line is life isn't fair, more affluent districts will have better schools and with better schools you get better teachers.
------------------
Dennis, thank you.
JayZ:
She came from an extremely poor area of the Dominican. I lived there for 2 years of my life and I can tell you that when I visited my family where she is, there was never any lights and barely any water to take showers. But, she did attend school and if I am not mistaken, she missed 2 years in her schooling because she had to work selling food on the street to help make ends meet. I think she graduated from high school here at 19.
And she is not the only one. My aunt says the same thing about schooling here and so does my other cousins who were above average there become honor roll students here. Is it hard work? Is it the environment? I don't know.
4Chuckie:
There isn't enough money? Are you serious? We are about to build somekind of defense system in space that will cost a bazillion dollars yet we can't find the funding or use the surplus to help nurture the very people who in the future will be going to other planets to discover and create? How is that possible?
How do you allocate funds? On a school by school basis, thats how. You get a sort of "evaluator" for each school who makes an estimate of what each school needs. Then, you send someone like a "social school worker" who goes and checks what the evaluator says, confirms or rejects, and then in a couple of weeks, a person designated by the Education Department who is qualified to administer the funds for that school, goes during the SUMMER and fixes what needs to be fixed so that in September, the children come to school with the majority of the work done at the school.
I mean, I just came up with that off the top of my head and you mean that these geniuses in Washington can't come together and discuss sh*t like this to solve something that is vital to the future of this country?
Think about this. This country leads in almost everything the world has to offer. It leads in wealth, stature, respect, admiration, whatever you want...EXCEPT education. Despite the fact that we push kids through who don't deserve it, we have a country that is kicking major behind right now and is extremely prosperous. Yet, we have that 20 percent of the country that if you just try and reach with a little education, discipline and structure, can you imagine where this country can head? Think about that. Its amazing this country is where it is despite scoring so low in math and science. Just imagine how great this society could be, how much racism would be reduced, and crime, and all the ignorance if we just increase how much learning there is by a mere 20 percent?
Scary.
------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan
[This message has been edited by Almu (edited August 02, 2000).]
MadMax
08-02-2000, 05:02 PM
Almu -- If N. Korea or China develops missile technology within the next few years, it doesn't matter how much education you have!!
But beyond that...I hate to sound like a stadium supporter (even though I am one) but the improvement of education and the establishment of a missile defense system aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. For the most part, the states are in the business of educating children..not the federal government.
For my money, I think the first priority of the FEDERAL government is to defend the citizens of the United States at home and abroad. Certainly I believe the federal govt has other concerns...but I kind of respect the Constitution and the 10th Amendment in particular
------------------
4chuckie
08-02-2000, 05:24 PM
Almu said:
"How do you allocate funds? On a school by school basis, thats how. You get a sort of "evaluator" for each school who makes an estimate of what each school needs. Then, you send someone like a "social school worker" who goes and checks what the evaluator says, confirms or rejects, and then in a couple of weeks, a person designated by the Education Department who is qualified to administer the funds for that school, goes during the SUMMER and fixes what needs to be fixed so that in September, the children come to school with the majority of the work done at the school.
I mean, I just came up with that off the top of my head and you mean that these geniuses in Washington can't come together and discuss sh*t like this to solve something that is vital to the future of this country?"
So you don't think an evaluator can be flawed. Without some type of objective criteria their will be mistakes. Humans can't be totally objective. Hell, I say give all the state money to my high school. Also how would you feel if none of your tax dollars went to local schools.
It has to be a fair system (like based on number of students or size of district, size of school, etc). You are esentially spending more money on evaluators to go observe than now. Also why punish schools which are effective with their resources (by an evaluator saying you did good with 1 million last year, but this year other schools need more so you only get 700K this year).
It needs to be logical, not just giving to schools that can't take care of themselves effectively.
------------------
Like I said, 4Chuckie, I just did that off the top of my head.
Its better to do SOMETHING instead of doing NOTHING like whats happening now.
MadMax, I am all for defense. What I am trying to say is that people say there is no money for education. I say that there is.
And N.Korea and China has been threatening to do something nuclear forever. And we have to worry about Iraq. And we have to worry about every damn country since alot of the world don't like us. But remember what worrying about the USSR got us? A huge deficit, a huge debt and a collapsed country. There was no nuclear war. Endless spending for what? To scare them too?
You can build 1000 space defense systems. If a nuclear war breaks out, nothing is going to stop it. Not US. Not them. Not anyone. If those people overthere want to end civilization, what can be done? Eventually, one missle will get through and that is all you need.
Want to end the threat? Get rid of all the damn missles. How about that for an idea?
------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan
One more thing, Max says he can say that all the money should go to his highschool, right? Well, if you high school sucked like mine did, then ok. But that is what the evaluator is for. He is not perfect. But neither is the guy that comes to your home and tells you how much he thinks your house is worth. Do you take his word for it, though? Or do you say that his way of evaluating can be flawed and get another evaluator. Then, if you don't agree with that one, you get another?
No system is perfect. But A SYSTEM is needed. Overall, schools are ok. But they need to get better.
------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan
Bobby
08-02-2000, 09:42 PM
Jeff, Almu, et al. - more money for education, absolutely agree! As long as its for teachers, facilities, books, the necessary stuff, with accountability - not for more administrators and coaching staffs. The rub is in out to calculate who gets what, but if we could get a truly non-partisan effort going, I'm convinced there are smart people who can figure out the details.
Couple of examples that tee me off:
Coaching staffs: I understand that Texans love their high school football,but the amount of money spent for equipment and coaches is absurb. Went to a game last Fall Klein vs. somebody, don't remember who. There were nine coaches on the sidelines for each team!
There's a suit going on in NYC where the administration is suing for more funds over the $10 biilion they currently receive to educate one million kids - that's $10,000 per student per year! I imagine there are thousands of school districts that would kill to have a third of that per student. Where's the money going and for what?
Back to sports: ever b-ball season, I read about these tournaments in places like Las Vegas, LA, etc. that draw teams from all over the country. And there are a number of schools that regularly schedule games out of state, sometimes across the country. Is showcasing the b-ball team more important than hiring a couple more teaching assistants.
Just my two cents worth.
------------------
"Who Wants To Be A Rocket?" - and probably a millionaire as well. The off-season will be interesting!
Dennis: Actually, we have voted. On four separate occassions over the past 15 years, we have had the opportunity to vote for or against bond elections that would've passed funds on to the schools locally that would raise teachers pay and provide infrastructure repairs.
Guess how many passed? ONE. We scream and yell about how we want a better education system but we don't want to do what is necessary to make it happen.
I don't care who pays for it. I don't care if it is the Fed, the state, the city, the county or a gopher named "Bronco". The point is that we spend more money every 15 seconds on the military in this country then we spend on an entire year's worth of education! That is pathetic.
And, if education isn't a federal issue, why should Bush or Gore adopt ANY stance on it? Why not just say, "That is the job of the cities." and let it go? The fact is that, if we had the choice to increase federal spending on education and put as much work and technology and effort into it as we do into things like missle defense systems, I think it is an absolute no-brainer.
How can anyone suggest that putting computers, better books, better school supplies, better paid teachers, more complete after-school activities (that, as studies have shown time and time again keep kids out of trouble), agressive early childhood development, agressive parental counseling to help kids, student counseling and more well-equipped faculties is a bad idea? You don't just get that from wishing for it or hoping it gets better. You pay for it and I think the vast majority of Americans would have NO problem diverting funds from military spending, for example, to education. I could be wrong, but since polls indicate that education is the NUMBER 1 issue to Americans in this election, I doubt it.
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
MadMax
08-03-2000, 10:08 AM
Almu -- first of all...I wasn't involved in that discussion with you about evaluators..that was someone else.
Second..I agree that full-fledged nuclear war is unstoppable. What I'm concerned about is a smaller nation developing the technology to fire a few missiles to the US. It is conceivable we could stop one or more of them. And stopping one may save 4 million Houstonians. I say it's worth the effort. When it was just the Soviet Union, at least there was balance...it was really just us and them with nuclear arsenals. But missile technology in the hands of a leader hell-bent on making a stand or a statement against the US.
On a personal note (and I don't want this to be too lovey-dovey)..though we tend to disagree a lot, Almu..I do appreciate the way you argue. You make your point, you make concessions when necessary, and you don't nit-pick others like you're finding some legal technicalities. There are others here who could take some lessons from that. I'd like to persuade you to see things my way...but you have a well-reasoned perspective.
Ultimately my concern is the Constitution and the safeguards to protect us from an overreaching government. I think a "big" fedreral govt is a bad thing. Thomas Jefferson once said, "A government powerful enough to give you everything you ever want, is powerful enough to take away everything you ever had." The protection of individual liberty is extremely important to me, and when we allow the government to take care of us all, we eventually turn over our liberties. I believe strongly in federalism and the rights of the states to determine their own course. I think local school boards and officials know far more about what it takes to educate children in their particular area than those in Washington do. Federalism allows for a great laboratory..one state can experiment with vouchers and we can all learn from that experience without having to commit Texas resources to it just yet. Federalism creates a check on the federal government, and allows for the federal government to work as a check on oppressive state govts. I see no respect for federalism among the Democratic party. Every solution they offer to every problem is some grand federal program....the same type of programs that have consistently failed us (and others around the world) over and over again. Our rights stand juxtaposed to government power. As government grows, our rights necessarily are affected...as if on a balance sheet...debit the government, credit the individual.
sorry for the rambling
------------------
rimbaud
08-03-2000, 10:19 AM
MadMax,
Jefferson also get disenfranchised with the whole constitutional process. He felt that many were being too elitest. Especially when John Adams said that the purpose of government was (and I paraphrase), "to protect the opulent minority from the views of the majority."
He also gave a few warnings about the constitution, which I cannot remember. Basically, he felt really strongly about liberty and did not feel that the framers were really creating something for that.
This is all going off of memory, so I cannot clarify and might have stumbled a bit.
------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit
rimbaud
08-04-2000, 12:02 AM
MadMax,
A few things:
1. You should not be afraid of me. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif
2. I was not suggesting you beleived anything, I was merely trying to add something about Jefferson. I thought you might be interested. Just because I am replying to your topic does not mean I am arguing with you.
3. I am not spending my whole day trying to catch you in "word slips", as you said. The incident to which you are referring was a legitimate response to a comment I thought you made in earnest. You seem to have taken it personally.
------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit
MadMax,
Thanks.
I agree with the principles you stated. You make valid points.
I believe that if you want to control smaller countries from developing missles that reach us, then you have to know they are years away from that. You keep them from closing the gap by choking off their money supply. Little countries can't survive if they can't have money to buy goods. And if this doesn't work, the technology to develop something to reach Houston is so exclusive and rare that I think spending billions on missle defense is not proper right now.
------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan
[This message has been edited by Almu (edited August 03, 2000).]
heypartner
08-04-2000, 12:35 AM
can I jump in late here.
this is the only issue fixable by legislature that i care to follow. the reason i say, "i care to follow", is because it is the most important one i feel like i can effect. i am for drastic reform of government whereby actual decisions on revenue appropriations is closer to my votes.
I said in the Cheney thread to consider more where your votes are, and less for whom you vote. We only have 3 federal level votes. We have literally dozens of state and local votes. Thus, we as voters have more power of our vote closer to where we live. I contend that reform which moves actual decisions on spending closer to our votes will make the country more flexible, because it allows us voters to make change.
<font size="1">(Before you say flexibility can lead to evil, I say that is what the federal government is for. Not spending and making federal mandates, but policing our state legislatures for evils like discriminatory spending.)</font>
What would I do with my suggested change of voting power: I would vote for local and state politicians who have intentions on improving our school system.
That is the best, most important thing I feel I can effect as a voter.
MadMax
08-04-2000, 01:34 AM
rimbaud -- I never said I adopt any one of the framer's views entirely...i tend to piecemeal a little of Hamilton and a little of Jefferson together. I do agree with Hamilton that you can't have a democracy such that it's mob rule. But I think it's clear that the framers were extremely concerned with the power of the government and the invididual's liberty. The entire Constitution is meant to set up LIMITS on the federal govt's power. This was a revolutionary idea and is still foreign in many ( I won't say all for fear of you trying to trip me up on words again) parts of the world today.
------------------
RocketsPimp
10-05-2000, 04:34 PM
I'm all for taking money from the military and directing it toward education, especially if it is for underprivileged kids.
The thing I'm still unclear on is Bush's tax plan. Is he going to help keep the rich from getting richer and start helping the poor and middle class get over the hump? If his plan is what Gore made it out to be where only those making over a million a year get the cut, screw him! Why not give it to people on the low end(under $40-50K/yr), the ones that really need the money?
------------------
Too often, we lose sight of life's simple pleasures.
Remember, when someone annoys you it takes 42 muscles in your face to frown, but it only takes 4 muscles to extend your arm and pimp-slap the mother****** upside the head!
mrpaige
10-05-2000, 05:13 PM
It is my understanding that the Bush tax plan gives everyone a tax cut, but because people with higher incomes and in higher tax brackets pay more taxes, they will get a larger monetary break (not a larger percentage break) than those on the lower end of the income scale.
Personally, I'd rather the debt be paid down before we start talking about expanding spending on even giving this small, across-the-board tax break. Given the size of the debt service on the outstanding debt, it seems to me that when given a chance to reduce that huge expense that doesn't help anyone, we should go for it.
If the Congress and the President truly believe in reducing Government Spending, getting rid of as much of that annual interest payment as possible would go a long way toward reducing spending.
But maybe that's just me.
Going back to the original point. I hate to say it, but I agree with folks like Jessee Jackson on this one. Competition isn't going to fix the public school system, and vouchers seem to me to be a surrender. It's like saying, "We can't fix the public schools, so we'll save some kids with vouchers and the rest can fend for themselves."
If a private school can really teach kids better, maybe we need to find out how they achieve those results and copy those methods for our public schools. Or find out what works and do that.
------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
DFW Sports Board (http://www.dfwsportsboard.com)
Amen, mrpaige. I actually discussed this very issue with several African American people who are working on the arena campaign. One arm of the campaign is working specifically on the minority vote and we were discussing the widening gap between the rich and the poor because they talk to the poor inner-city citizens every day.
Many of them there spoke about how you won't find a computer in an entire urban minority community let alone internet access but that is for another thread.
When I mentioned vouchers, they all said that vouchers would not get poor people any closer to a private school because it isn't enough.
What about transportation since private schools have no buses? What about the cost of books and uniforms? What about the amount per semester not covered by the voucher?
One of them compared it to a coupon to an expensive restaurant. While it is a nice gesture, a buy-one-get-one-free card at a restaruant where the entrees are $30 won't do poor people any good because they can barely afford a three-dollar burger and fries.
------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)
4chuckie
10-06-2000, 07:30 AM
Again it's a fine example about how Gore is promising a change (like Medicare, social security, etc) yet he ahd Willy haven't done squat in their first 8 years.
Now I don't know for sure if vouchers ar ethe best way, but it definetely beats the Clinton-Gore way, or I should say campaign for something, get elected then pick fights with congress and get nothing done.
Vouchers have worked in other areas so we may as well try it to see if it works.
------------------
Groogrux
10-06-2000, 12:30 PM
I love how Republicans like to paint a picture of good 'ole GOP congressmen begging Clinton to work with them.
Please, while Clinton was at fault, so were the Republicans. The guy was vilified before he ever took office. He should have just shrugged off the numerous personal attacks and worked with them, but he didn't.
Just don't act like it was all Clinton's fault because it wasn't.
------------------
Cheerleaders are just dancers who've gone retarded.
visit www.swirve.com (http://www.swirve.com)
vBulletin® v3.0.17, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.