Issue '04: Education

[A18]

I've got all the major party nominees (I think) plus that third guy.

[A18]

Bush wins this one hands down. School choice will help thousands of urban kids in this country. He's also made huge budget increases in education spending, good or bad.

Kerry has the boring, dry 'stick with public schools' attitude, even when there are kids that can't read or do math.

Anyway, I don't know where Cobb or Badnarik stand exactly on the issue.

[A18]

Badnarik, even though I disagree somewhat on privatizing the school system. But what he does realize is that in the unlikely event that he was electe president, that his only duty and power would be to get the federal government out of it - let the states decide what to do with their systems.

Private schools have time and time again been proven superior to their public counterparts. It also means you can send your kid to a school that shares your values.

I think every kid in the country should be able to get government funding for private schooling.

Not that you can just abolish the public school system or anything. But I'm saying, we need to get some competition in the fading picture.

Remember, this is the first generation that's LESS educated than the previous. The public schools have failed, I think...and I know, 'cause I go to one, heh.

[A18]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, parents should be trusted with that decision. Public school is NOT maximized education. Take it from someone who's living it first hand.

And yes, it's competition. It works the same as any other market...what else could it be? It's not as if you couldn't learn without any computers at all, and fourty year old books, and a beat up building with no lights.

[A18]

No, I understand part of the logic. Government is investing money.

But I'm saying, the best thing for government to do is trust the parents. Private schools are hugely superior.

Also, it is a parent's right to teach his or her child. Government shouldn't be in the business of deciding where it's 'maximized' (which isn't in the public schools)...it should just be a broad policy of, the more tools will give parents to teach their kids, the more the dollar will be worth.

[A18]

Like electing someone who supports school choice.

Sorry, but I have a serious theory. Democrats don't want children learning in private schools because the public school system is the liberal breeding-ground.

[A18]

Elections don't make schools accountable at all. The junk falls through the political cracks.

Let the school board worry about fixing the schools and put pressure there. And do school vouchers; there's no downside to school vouchers, so I don't know why we'd wait and make sure we needed them.

The value of the $ rests of these people. If kids can't read, it's time for a change.

As someone who's been in a public school for the last ten years, I'm offended by how liberal every teacher is and all the liberal values they slip in. Especially in social studies.

I didn't necessarily mean you. I'm about 80% confident that mainstream Democratic politicians want to keep their monopoly on the public schools system. It keeps kids from growing up with conservative values.

[A18]

Like electing someone who supports school choice.

Regardless of whether we institute vouchers, the public school system needs fixing, as Nym pointed out.  So let's do the latter first and see if that is sufficient.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not the traditional liberal but I'm pretty offended by this comment.

Try to remember that the opposing view from yours is a legitimate one.  You can disagree with it, but it is still trying to accomplish the same ends but through a different process.

Exactly. Almost all of us on this board agree on fundamental goals. We all want a good, strong, prosperous economy, a balanced budget, clean air, clean water, good schools, low poverty, low crime, and a safe, secure country. We just disagree on process, and on what the best way is to achieve those ends. Let's not resort to name calling and assuming that our opponents are evil. Conspiracy theories do nothing but poison the debate.

Woah...this sounds a lot like Iraq!

Anyway, I'm sure there's a side of you that believes in public schools for its Democratic leanings.

[A18]

WHAT?! Education spending has SURGED under Bush to record highs! Far more than under Clinton. And we have brought in MORE money.

Taking away money from the public schools is not a downside. The parents of those kids aren't part of the system, and therefore shouldn't have to pick up the bill.

[A18]

Yeah, but if you have less kids you don't need as much money.

[A18]

What the  are you talking about?

This is exactly what I mean. Idiot Democrats want more idiot Democrats.

[A18]

Anyone who does not support eliminating affirmative action should be eliminated affirmatively.

[A18]

You quoted me before I edited my post affirmatively by taking action.

First of all, all affirmative action is stupid; we just need good schools so people can EARN their way up. But even if we are to accept the premise of affirmative action, why should it matter if you're a poor white kid or a poor black kid? What if you were picked on in school? It's so unfair! Weh!

[A18]

Brilliant.

While we're at it, why don't we affirmatively take action in order to ensure that people's IQs can't help them!

The problem with liberals is they're okay with someone being wealthy, as long as it doesn't benefit them in any way. If that happens, it's unfair.

McDonalds should do a background check on each of its customers...say, a two week wait until you get a hamburger license. In fact, let's nationalize that license for all fast food restaurants and force them to use it. Then, if you buy a Big Mac, it should clearly depend on how much money you have. After all, you have more money to pay, so obviously you should pay more.
Now, what should the prices be? Let's nationalize that too so that businesses don't corrupt things. One plain hamburger will be, by net worth-

below $50k: 10 cents (+1 for cheese)
$50-60 k: 25 cents (+2 for cheese)
$61-70 k: 37 cents (+3 for cheese)
...
above $5 mil: $7,000 ($500 for cheese)

I'm enjoying this affirmative action stuff. We need to affirmatively take action in order to ensure that people who want to affirmatively take action learn that the whole point to being wealthy is actually HAVING that wealth.

$5 mil does nothing for you when a cheeseburger costs $7,000. Yet this is the ultimate conclusion to your logic.

In other words, you think no one should be allowed to have a higher form of wealth. See, normally when you have wealth, you think that means it can get you stuff. Every dollar should be worth a dollar; you are effectively taking wealth away from people that they ALREADY have.

Now, once I get my $50,000 shoes I guess I'll enjoy all this money.

...But wait, that's right! Now it makes no difference! I THINK I'LL BUY A CHEESEBURGER AND $1,500 FRIES!

When you have a dollar, that should be your dollar. It should be a stake in the national wealth. But the dollar has no worth if it's not accepted, so now we're going to take it away once people already have it.

Anyway, go ahead and ask Burger King for your $35 cent hamburger next time you swing buy. If they don't comply, take affirmative action.

[A18]

Yeah. People with low IQs also have problems with grades.

If the logic makes sense, use it. If it doesn't, don't use it at all. They DESERVE what they EARN. They didn't earn anything for being poor. I don't care if the stupid kids can't get into college and I don't care if it's not their fault; people with an IQ of about 6 shouldn't get any advantage.

[A18]

He didn't. His PARENTS earned it for him. Just like if I earn $100,000, I deserve to be able to give it to someone.

[A18]

I just agreed that it's not their right. It's the parent's right.

And opportunity comes from being who you are in a free world.

[A18]

Life isn't fair, but it isn't unfair either. You live, and you have to build you own life.

[A18]

There you go then. You don't believe my wealth exists. Dollars are supposed to be able to get you things...that's kinda the point.

[A18]

That's part of wealth.

What if a rich guy likes me as more than a guy who's just as talented/smart/hard-working (as if anyone could compare) and gives me a $3,000,000 check. Can I spend it or does this wealth not exist either?

[A18]

I agree. You should get in on merit only.

[A18]

Solely on merit and based on economic background are two different things.

On merit is my way; getting in on actual grades and accomplishments.

[A18]

No, I mean real merit. As in, best educated.

Which, by the way, is also in the best interest of society.

[A18]

And I believe people's creativity is measured by other people. You can be hardworking at throwing rocks.

Grades should decide it.

[A18]

Well, the kid that got the best grades has done the most to prove to society that he has the creativity and hardworking ethic merit demands.