The Palin/Biden Debate: 10/02/08

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
408

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
I don’t see/hear the majority of people bitching because they get to send their children to public school free of charge.

Um…You’ve never heard of school taxes, they come in various forms. Come on say you were kidding about the above.
[/quote]

I was exaggerating. Of course I know about schools being funded by taxes.

My point was that the public school system is socialized, and I don’t hear a huge uproar about how everyone should have to send their kids to private school instead. I doubt that the majority of American families could afford to send multiple children to $30,000 dollar private schools (which is about average for the private schools where I live) from kindegarden to first grade.

I don’t think it’s a perfect system by any means either. But most of the problems involved are due to a lack of funding by the federal government, primarily in recent years because they are spending billions of U.S taxpayers’ money on the war in Iraq every day. And on top of that giving those who actually have the money to spare to support education (the wealthiest individuals/companies) tax breaks! Heck, if they just taxed these people fairly that would take care of a lot of the funding problems in our public schools.

You don’t think it’s important for them to eat?

With obesity becoming a growing epidemic in this country, I don’t think it’d be all that wise a move to eliminate a class that teaches the importance of physical activity.

Fair enough.

Well, some research has shown that music could potentially be used to cure certain neurological disorders/damaged speech, and studies using MRI’s have shown that learning how to play music actually increases the size of the cerebellum. So, I wouldn’t be too quick to eliminate art and music either.

Well, you might be able to teach those three courses in 3 hrs, but what about things like history, social studies, and health (let’s assume that they actually taught people how to be healthy, and don’t try to say that their parents should teach them that, because clearly the majority of parents out there don’t know themselves)? You don’t think those subjects are important?

Perhaps they do, but perhaps it’s because when a Democrat is in Office things tend to get a little better on the public sector (i.e. more funding to the public schools), and they are tired of having to try to get by while sucking pond water.

The structure works if the funds that should be going to it are. It doesn’t work so well if the money that should be going to it are going elsewhere.

The Canadian system obviously isn’t perfect either, but at least everyone in Canada has health insurance (and again, I don’t see a huge exodus coming from Canada to the U.S. to flee their horrible health care system).

Do You know that John Erlichman and Richard Nixon are on audio tape talking about how they plan to pass bills to promote HMO’s like Kaiser Permanente, which have the goal of providing as little care as possible to their members in order to try to make as much money as possible?

Do you know that studies show that the quality of health care in the U.S is less than that of the health care in countries like Canada, Sweden, and Breat Britain which have a universal health care system?

409

[quote]pushharder wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
…Tyranny. The system that we have now empowers the state, not the individual…

One small snippet of proof that the constitution ratified in 1789 by the 13 States has been brutally and repeatedly raped into submission and now remains in a perpetual on-all-fours posture in front of the empowered state meekly awaiting another pounding.

The empowered state (federal) was absolutely dreaded by the founders, the author - Madison, the signers, and the individual states. IMO, all of them including Hamilton - an ardent Federalist, would have preferred life under the Articles of Confederation or King George over the hideous fat bastard child that our system has now become.[/quote]

True. But then many of the founders felt that the greatest threat to our country was a central banking system. The Federal Reserve is just that, a non government agency which disguises itself as a federal branch.

Here are some quotes by Jefferson about the concept of a central bank:

“The system of banking is a blot left in all our Constitutions, which, if not covered, will end in their destruction. I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity is but swindling futurity on a large scale.”

“The end of democracy, and the defeat of the American revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of the lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”

“If the people ever allow the banks to issue their currency, the banks and corporations which will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

“The bank of the United States is one of the most deadly hostilities existing against the principles and form of our Constitution. I deem no government safe which is under the vassalage of any self-constituted authorities, or any other authority than that of the nation, or its regular functionaries. What an obstruction could not this bank of the United States, with all its branch banks, be in a time of war? It might dictate to us the peace we should accept, or it might withdraw its aid. Ought we then to give further growth to an institution so powerful, so hostile?”

410

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
I don’t see/hear the majority of people bitching because they get to send their children to public school free of charge.

Um…You’ve never heard of school taxes, they come in various forms. Come on say you were kidding about the above.

I was exaggerating. Of course I know about schools being funded by taxes.

My point was that the public school system is socialized, and I don’t hear a huge uproar about how everyone should have to send their kids to private school instead. I doubt that the majority of American families could afford to send multiple children to $30,000 dollar private schools (which is about average for the private schools where I live) from kindegarden to first grade.
[/quote]
30K a year? Yeah, those are the only options. The point of a voucher system is that parents can choose where to send their kids. New schools will pop up. More competition = better performance and lower price. The average student here in MN cost the tax payer 10k per year. If you think the gov’t can educate our childeren more efficently than the private sector, you high.

This is so wrong in so many ways. We spend exponentially more than other countries that kick our ass in math and science. There is no fucking funding problems…period.
[/quote]
A kid spends how many hours per day in school? Doing what?

Lunch?

You don’t think it’s important for them to eat?

Gym?

With obesity becoming a growing epidemic in this country, I don’t think it’d be all that wise a move to eliminate a class that teaches the importance of physical activity.
[/quote]
If gym class was effective there would be no problem. Logic is your friend, use it.

Agreed on music. Art can go.

Yep, all the more reason to give more power to parents. I would choose a school for my kids base on the text books used. I do not want my childeren to be indoctrinated into liberal revisionist history. They should also be learning economics in HS.

The teacher unions are disaster. If are unable to work through on your own why they are doing the most damage to our childeren’s education, I would be happy to explain.

Bullshit. We’ve already addressed this, so I won’t repeat myself

You are obviously not paying attention. Just do a seach on Canadian health care issues. Enjoy.
[/quote]
Do You know that John Erlichman and Richard Nixon are on audio tape talking about how they plan to pass bills to promote HMO’s like Kaiser Permanente, which have the goal of providing as little care as possible to their members in order to try to make as much money as possible?

Do you know that studies show that the quality of health care in the U.S is less than that of the health care in countries like Canada, Sweden, and Breat Britain which have a universal health care system?[/quote]
This is complete and absolute bullshit. Where on earth did you get this?

411

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
pushharder wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
…Tyranny. The system that we have now empowers the state, not the individual…

One small snippet of proof that the constitution ratified in 1789 by the 13 States has been brutally and repeatedly raped into submission and now remains in a perpetual on-all-fours posture in front of the empowered state meekly awaiting another pounding.

The empowered state (federal) was absolutely dreaded by the founders, the author - Madison, the signers, and the individual states. IMO, all of them including Hamilton - an ardent Federalist, would have preferred life under the Articles of Confederation or King George over the hideous fat bastard child that our system has now become.

True. But then many of the founders felt that the greatest threat to our country was a central banking system. The Federal Reserve is just that, a non government agency which disguises itself as a federal branch.
[/quote]
They feared it rightfully so. Please tell me how they are non-government?

These quotes are right on the money. I not sure who is going to disagree with this.

412

[quote]malonetd wrote:
<<< And I’m tired of hearing about hockey moms. No one plays hockey in America.[/quote]

Hey, watch yer mouth bub.

413

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
malonetd wrote:
<<< And I’m tired of hearing about hockey moms. No one plays hockey in America.

Hey, watch yer mouth bub.[/quote]

I can’t believe he didn’t grow up with hocky players in wisconsin. I’m friends with some, and know several others.

416

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
…

The Canadian system obviously isn’t perfect either, but at least everyone in Canada has health insurance (and again, I don’t see a huge exodus coming from Canada to the U.S. to flee their horrible health care system)…[/quote]

When I lived in Watertown, NY I saw tons of Canadian cars in the hospital parking lot. They came for better and faster treatment and paid for it out of their own pockets rather than get shunted aside in the Canadian system.

417

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
I am against the government providing parents with educational vouchers allowing them to send kids to schools of their choice.

Do you think it’s fair for me to have to double pay so that I can send my child to a better school which better reflects my values?

I think it’s tyranny that they (government)confiscate my money each pay period and then tell me I’m shit out of luck when I want to use that money to educate my child the way I see fit. Tyranny. The system that we have now empowers the state, not the individual. Let me choose which school I send my child to without the state shackling me with the responsibility of supporting the shitty school which doesn’t reflect my values, while at the same time paying (again) to send my child to a better school.

What do you support? A fully federalized education system where we all pay education taxes and the money is distributed to school districts across the nation by the federal government? If not, how is it fair that you could choose to live in a place with low property taxes and little funding for schools yet send your child to a school funded by high property (and other) taxes specifically enacted to support that district’s schools?
[/quote]

You’re missing my point entirely.

I’m speaking to the fact that, if I really desired to send my child to a catholic or private school, then I’m forced to pay for the local school which sucks and the perochial/private school I send my child to. This results in a pseudo fine on me for not choosing the local school. This of course, sucks ass.

W/R/T the situation described above; it is only under a few specific circumstances in which you may send your child out of district to another public school. This is what voucher advocated speak of when they say that they are trapped in a failing school sysytem. No money for a perochial or private school, and not allowed to leave their public school district. Which of course, again, sucks ass.

418

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
You’re missing my point entirely.

I’m speaking to the fact that, if I really desired to send my child to a catholic or private school, then I’m forced to pay for the local school which sucks and the perochial/private school I send my child to. This results in a pseudo fine on me for not choosing the local school. This of course, sucks ass.

W/R/T the situation described above; it is only under a few specific circumstances in which you may send your child out of district to another public school. This is what voucher advocated speak of when they say that they are trapped in a failing school sysytem. No money for a perochial or private school, and not allowed to leave their public school district. Which of course, again, sucks ass.

[/quote]

Thank you. I didn’t have the energy. What you describe above is exactly my situation. I send my kids to a private school AND have to pay to support the shitty government schools. I should get rewarded for finding superior education for lower cost (actually half the cost per student). Instead, I pay double. Go figure.

419

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
I am against the government providing parents with educational vouchers allowing them to send kids to schools of their choice.

Do you think it’s fair for me to have to double pay so that I can send my child to a better school which better reflects my values?

I think it’s tyranny that they (government)confiscate my money each pay period and then tell me I’m shit out of luck when I want to use that money to educate my child the way I see fit. Tyranny. The system that we have now empowers the state, not the individual. Let me choose which school I send my child to without the state shackling me with the responsibility of supporting the shitty school which doesn’t reflect my values, while at the same time paying (again) to send my child to a better school.

What do you support? A fully federalized education system where we all pay education taxes and the money is distributed to school districts across the nation by the federal government? If not, how is it fair that you could choose to live in a place with low property taxes and little funding for schools yet send your child to a school funded by high property (and other) taxes specifically enacted to support that district’s schools?

You’re missing my point entirely.

I’m speaking to the fact that, if I really desired to send my child to a catholic or private school, then I’m forced to pay for the local school which sucks and the perochial/private school I send my child to. This results in a pseudo fine on me for not choosing the local school. This of course, sucks ass.

W/R/T the situation described above; it is only under a few specific circumstances in which you may send your child out of district to another public school. This is what voucher advocated speak of when they say that they are trapped in a failing school sysytem. No money for a perochial or private school, and not allowed to leave their public school district. Which of course, again, sucks ass.

[/quote]

Vouchers are not the answer. In Milwaukee and Cleveland, where vouchers are used, they are not helping the poor disadvantaged that need it most. The evidence shows they are helping already elite students. Part of the problem is that private schools choose who to accept. And they just don’t want these kids. They’re turned students away in droves, particularly low-income and struggling students. Private schools want the best students and don’t have the capacity to accepts droves of public school students. Incidentally, that’s one of the reasons why private schools are successful. But will that continue to be the case if federal vouchers become commonplace or will some Supreme Court case come out robbing private schools of the right to ‘discriminate’ and forcing them to take every applicant irrespective of qualifications? You really think throwing 10 5th grade students on a 2nd grade reading level into a top private school is really going result in them excelling? And isn’t going to cause serious problems and hurt the education of the class that was already there? And I don’t mind my taxes being used to supply underprivileged schools with enough money for each student to have a textbook. But I don’t want my money to go to send your kid to private school because you don’t like the school in your district.

Why should people who can afford it get a free ride here? I want my kids to get a great education, I’ll send them to private school myself. Or I’ll live in a district with a good public school supported by high property taxes. What I do think would be appropriate would be a tax credit for parents not utilizing the public school system in the amount attributable to that of their taxes used to fund the schools. That eliminates the double tax. But let people who can afford it pay for their own kids schools. I mean whatever happened to personal responsibility. Most private schools are significantly more expensive than the equivalent in taxes for even excellent public school districts. Now the government is supposed to foot the bill for all those kids? Well, it can’t afford to. Under a lot of proposed voucher programs, parents would still have to pay several thousand additional dollars for their kids to attend the coveted private schools (assuming they’d even be accepted). Many can’t. The result is remaining stuck in the failing public school.

At the least, any actual ‘voucher’ should only be given to those under a certain income level. But that doesn’t solve the other problems.

420

You’re just not getting it. What’s frustrating is you refuse to actually think through this.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Vouchers are not the answer. In Milwaukee and Cleveland, where vouchers are used, they are not helping the poor disadvantaged that need it most. The evidence shows they are helping already elite students. Part of the problem is that private schools choose who to accept. And they just don’t want these kids. They’re turned students away in droves, particularly low-income and struggling students. Private schools want the best students and don’t have the capacity to accepts droves of public school students. Incidentally, that’s one of the reasons why private schools are successful. But will that continue to be the case if federal vouchers become commonplace or will some Supreme Court case come out robbing private schools of the right to ‘discriminate’ and forcing them to take every applicant irrespective of qualifications? You really think throwing 10 5th grade students on a 2nd grade reading level into a top private school is really going result in them excelling? And isn’t going to cause serious problems and hurt the education of the class that was already there? And I don’t mind my taxes being used to supply underprivileged schools with enough money for each student to have a textbook. But I don’t want my money to go to send your kid to private school because you don’t like the school in your district.
[/quote] You should spend some time away from this forum thinking about the reasons these applications did not work. The answer is quite simple and if you can’t figure it out, I feel very sorry for you and offspring that you may produce.

[quote]
Why should people who can afford it get a free ride here? I want my kids to get a great education, I’ll send them to private school myself.
[/quote]What about those that don’t have that option? Fuck them I guess. Again, you are unable to understand what a voucher system would look like. You are also unable to compare to what we have now.

[quote]
Or I’ll live in a district with a good public school supported by high property taxes. What I do think would be appropriate would be a tax credit for parents not utilizing the public school system in the amount attributable to that of their taxes used to fund the schools. That eliminates the double tax. But let people who can afford it pay for their own kids schools. I mean whatever happened to personal responsibility.
[/quote] Again, fuck the poor kids. Let them rot in shitty schools.

[quote]
Most private schools are significantly more expensive than the equivalent in taxes for even excellent public school districts.
[/quote] You have no clue what you are talking about. You also need to revisit supply and demand.

[quote]
Now the government is supposed to foot the bill for all those kids? Well, it can’t afford to. Under a lot of proposed voucher programs, parents would still have to pay several thousand additional dollars for their kids to attend the coveted private schools (assuming they’d even be accepted). Many can’t. The result is remaining stuck in the failing public school.

At the least, any actual ‘voucher’ should only be given to those under a certain income level. But that doesn’t solve the other problems.[/quote]
You have no clue what you are talking about. You need to spend some time mulling it over.

422

How can there be a lack of funding when were throwing more then 600 billion dollars a year at our public schools.Honestly do you really think upping that number to 800billion hell why not just increase it to a trillion dollars is going to help.Lets just face the fact alot of kids don’t go to school to learn they go to hangout,Parents don’t want to be parents those are your two biggest problems right there that no amount of money is going to solve.

423

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
dhickey keep in mind junior is still in school. He’s probably never made more than beer money in a week.

It hit me when I made my first real pay check and I noticed that a good deal of it was not there… [/quote]

I’m not in school anymore. I make $160,000 a year base salary before bonus.

424

[quote]dhickey wrote:
You’re just not getting it. What’s frustrating is you refuse to actually think through this.

jsbrook wrote:
Vouchers are not the answer. In Milwaukee and Cleveland, where vouchers are used, they are not helping the poor disadvantaged that need it most. The evidence shows they are helping already elite students. Part of the problem is that private schools choose who to accept. And they just don’t want these kids. They’re turned students away in droves, particularly low-income and struggling students. Private schools want the best students and don’t have the capacity to accepts droves of public school students. Incidentally, that’s one of the reasons why private schools are successful. But will that continue to be the case if federal vouchers become commonplace or will some Supreme Court case come out robbing private schools of the right to ‘discriminate’ and forcing them to take every applicant irrespective of qualifications? You really think throwing 10 5th grade students on a 2nd grade reading level into a top private school is really going result in them excelling? And isn’t going to cause serious problems and hurt the education of the class that was already there? And I don’t mind my taxes being used to supply underprivileged schools with enough money for each student to have a textbook. But I don’t want my money to go to send your kid to private school because you don’t like the school in your district.
You should spend some time away from this forum thinking about the reasons these applications did not work. The answer is quite simple and if you can’t figure it out, I feel very sorry for you and offspring that you may produce.

Why should people who can afford it get a free ride here? I want my kids to get a great education, I’ll send them to private school myself.
What about those that don’t have that option? Fuck them I guess. Again, you are unable to understand what a voucher system would look like. You are also unable to compare to what we have now.

Or I’ll live in a district with a good public school supported by high property taxes. What I do think would be appropriate would be a tax credit for parents not utilizing the public school system in the amount attributable to that of their taxes used to fund the schools. That eliminates the double tax. But let people who can afford it pay for their own kids schools. I mean whatever happened to personal responsibility.
Again, fuck the poor kids. Let them rot in shitty schools.

Most private schools are significantly more expensive than the equivalent in taxes for even excellent public school districts.
You have no clue what you are talking about. You also need to revisit supply and demand.

Now the government is supposed to foot the bill for all those kids? Well, it can’t afford to. Under a lot of proposed voucher programs, parents would still have to pay several thousand additional dollars for their kids to attend the coveted private schools (assuming they’d even be accepted). Many can’t. The result is remaining stuck in the failing public school.

At the least, any actual ‘voucher’ should only be given to those under a certain income level. But that doesn’t solve the other problems.
You have no clue what you are talking about. You need to spend some time mulling it over.
[/quote]

You’re the one that needs to mull things over. You just don’t get it.

425

[quote]Nyballer31 wrote:

I don’t think it’s a perfect system by any means either. But most of the problems involved are due to a lack of funding by the federal government, primarily in recent years because they are spending billions of U.S taxpayers’ money on the war in Iraq every day. And on top of that giving those who actually have the money to spare to support education (the wealthiest individuals/companies) tax breaks! Heck, if they just taxed these people fairly that would take care of a lot of the funding problems in our public schools.

How can there be a lack of funding when were throwing more then 600 billion dollars a year at our public schools.Honestly do you really think upping that number to 800billion hell why not just increase it to a trillion dollars is going to help.Lets just face the fact alot of kids don’t go to school to learn they go to hangout,Parents don’t want to be parents those are your two biggest problems right there that no amount of money is going to solve.

[/quote]

I agree with this. The federal funds that are allocated need to be used more efficiently. Rich school districts don’t need federal funding. And we need to get rid of the strings attached to federal funding–arbitrary benchmarks that don’t always adequately reflect whether a school is doing a good job that trigger mandatory changes that aren’t paid by the federal government and exceed any federal funding the schools are getting.

427

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
dhickey keep in mind junior is still in school. He’s probably never made more than beer money in a week.

It hit me when I made my first real pay check and I noticed that a good deal of it was not there…

I’m not in school anymore. I make $160,000 a year base salary before bonus.[/quote]

The fact that you would post this on a forum probably means you make half this at best. What does your salary say anyway. It doesn’t matter if you make 12k a year or 500k a year. You are 100% missing the point of a voucher system.

You don’t work for the teacher’s union do you?