Originally posted by kbear1kSeems as if those are old stories. We have a public education system, in which where the most money is spent the returns are the worst. Wasn't the first "stimulus" about shovel ready jobs? We already spend way more than is necessary or sensible on public works and public education.
Let's see - by improving education, improving the collapsing infrastructer around the nation, etc.
- Joined
- 06 Aug 07
- Moves
- 8299
"We have a public education system, in which where the most money is spent the returns are the worst.
That is because the money spent is on students who come from very dysfunctional families. The well-to-do familes see that their children do their homework. The well-to-do familes also provide their children with more access to books and other learning materials (which children from poor neighbohoods have little access to.
It costs much more to educate children in poor neighborhoods than in well-to-do districts.
As a nation that many claim is based on Christianity we should do a better job of taking care of "the least of these".
We already spend way more than is necessary or sensible on public works and public education."
What is you basis for such a claim?
Originally posted by sh76All that can be known is that had McCain won the election there would be fewer jobs and more wars and higher deficits. Also, if Romney wins there will be fewer jobs, more wars, and higher deficits. Ironically, if Obama is elected there will also be less jobs, more wars, and higher deficits.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443686004577637191324704890.html
6th consecutive month of lackluster job growth.
🙁
Vote Whodey!! 😵
Originally posted by kbear1kBefore you try and teach this to our children in the secular public schools I suggest you secure a good lawyer first.
[bAs a nation that many claim is based on Christianity we should do a better job of taking care of "the least of these".
What is you basis for such a claim?[/b]
The last thing we need it to start teaching kids morality. All that needs to be done is teach them evolution stupid. 😛
Originally posted by kbear1kIt's a standard norm "holding his breath until he turns blue" claim. Any reasonable assessment of the state of our nation's infrastructure would conclude that we badly need at least hundreds of billions of dollars worth of repairs and upgrades. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates we need $2.2 trillion in infrastructure investment in the next five years.http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
"We have a public education system, in which where the most money is spent the returns are the worst.
That is because the money spent is on students who come from very dysfunctional families. The well-to-do familes see that their children do their homework. The well-to-do familes also provide their children with more access to books and other learning mate ...[text shortened]... sary or sensible on public works and public education."
What is you basis for such a claim?
Even the pro-business Chamber of Commerce states:
he U.S. Chamber is leading the charge to modernize and expand our nation’s transportation, telecommunications, energy, and water networks. Without proper investment and attention to our infrastructure systems, the nation’s economic stability, potential for job growth, and global competitiveness are at risk.
The Facts
Transportation: One-third of major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, 25% of bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete, and the air traffic control system faces a multiyear overhaul. If transportation networks continue to deteriorate, the Chamber’s Transportation Performance Index projects that over the next five years, the economy could forgo as much as $336 billion in lost growth.
Energy: Successful construction of the 351 energy projects identified in the Project No Project inventory could produce a $1.1 trillion short-term boost to the economy and create 1.9 million annual jobs.
Telecommunications: Making broadband available everywhere in America will take up to $350 billion.
Water: 1.7 trillion gallons are lost annually via water distribution systems, costing $2.6 billion annually.
http://www.uschamber.com/infrastructure
In light of these virtually undisputed facts, only the most strident laissez faire loon would assert "We already spend way more than is necessary or sensible on public works". But hey he's a disciple of Bastiat who's "solution" to a famine was to have the starving people buy some food.
- Joined
- 06 Aug 07
- Moves
- 8299
It is a shame that that many of the folks who back the current republican party will be hurt the most by the party's policies. The republican party wants to regionalize all of America thereby keeping the rich enclaves by themselves leaving the poorest communities in the nation to fend for themselves with their meager resources. Our founding fathers would be appalled by their attitude towards the nation.
Originally posted by kbear1kThrowing more money at education is a waste, other than paying teachers more and thereby increasing the money they can spend. I'm all for that.
"We have a public education system, in which where the most money is spent the returns are the worst.
That is because the money spent is on students who come from very dysfunctional families. The well-to-do familes see that their children do their homework. The well-to-do familes also provide their children with more access to books and other learning mate ...[text shortened]... sary or sensible on public works and public education."
What is you basis for such a claim?
To fix education, you need a model that actually works. It is a totally irresponsible model that says everyone should get the same level of education and blaming teachers for all problems in the classroom. Hold kids responsible. Teach kids who can (and are willing to put in the effort to learn). Have an appropriate place for all kids. If kids do not put in the effort, then have a place for them. Moving everyone along no matter what they do just leads to people who do not care.
Fix the model and things will get better.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra"useful government services" are very few in number, most government projects, programs, and services, are a boondoggle at best, merely a way to redistribute the money away from the productive and to the unproductive.
It will help if there is not enough revenue to fund useful government services.
Read the Constitution, it defines the only "useful government services", per "porovide for the common defense...", etc. All of the "useful government services" not explicitly named in the Constitution are defacto Unconstitutional and should be eliminated.
Originally posted by CLL53Hey now, you are trying to say that the Constitution's words give it meaning. We all know that words mean nothing and only Supreme Court Justices decide what is Constitutional or not.
"useful government services" are very few in number, most government projects, programs, and services, are a boondoggle at best, merely a way to redistribute the money away from the productive and to the unproductive.
Read the Constitution, it defines the only "useful government services", per "porovide for the common defense...", etc. All of the "useful g ...[text shortened]... licitly named in the Constitution are defacto Unconstitutional and should be eliminated.
The Supreme Court is the Constitution, not the words put down on paper. Have you just woken up from a 50 year sleep or something?
- Joined
- 06 Aug 07
- Moves
- 8299
Originally posted by CLL53Would you consider the FDA a useful government service? The FAA? What parts of the government would you keep? eliminate?
"useful government services" are very few in number, most government projects, programs, and services, are a boondoggle at best, merely a way to redistribute the money away from the productive and to the unproductive.
Read the Constitution, it defines the only "useful government services", per "porovide for the common defense...", etc. All of the "useful g ...[text shortened]... licitly named in the Constitution are defacto Unconstitutional and should be eliminated.
Originally posted by kbear1kExcept that the rich enclaves will own everything in the poor enclaves.
It is a shame that that many of the folks who back the current republican party will be hurt the most by the party's policies. The republican party wants to regionalize all of America thereby keeping the rich enclaves by themselves leaving the poorest communities in the nation to fend for themselves with their meager resources. Our founding fathers would be appalled by their attitude towards the nation.