Act Acting » Acting Agency » Right-wing is anti education for the poor
Right-wing is anti education for the poor
Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – First off let’s all acknowledge that this Michael Lind book must be a real piece of work as evidenced by the fact that it feeds to twisted views of Gail and that loon Loren Petrich. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not! At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. Ahem, this only helps the middle class with kids in college and it is little help at that considering the rates of increase in tuition. The ONLY way to help the middle class via a tax cut is a RATE REDUCTION. Fine. Let’s keep it restricted to the middle-class. Let’s try to pay for entitlements that people want without making the poor pay, without increasing the debt, and, then if we have money left over after that, think about how to help the cities, then we can talk about a rate reduction for the wealthy.
How about a rate reduction for EVERYONE Gail. Once again you jealous wealthy-phobes fixate on the rich who, if every penny they own were taken by the IRS tomorrow, could not sustain this bloated federal government for more than a day. Clue: that ain’t where the money is or where the lions share of taxes come from. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This shows the warped sense of what "caring" is. To give a poor person a voucher with which that person can go to a top flight private school is precisely the MOST "caring" approach to take. Like $1500 is going to pay for a voucher to a "top flight private school!!!"
Hmm, first a $1500 tax break is praised because it comes from the oh-so caring Bill CLinton who is "trying" to help. But let that $1500 come from the evil nasty mean-spirited GOP and Gail mocks it. Your real agenda shows clearly here. Also your irrational bias. The most important thing to a kid and hopefully his/her parents is to get the kid a GOOD EDUCATION – whether it be public or private. Warning: anti-union/strawman argument without adequate backup ahead. It is the Democrats who subvert this goal to the interests of the entrenched NEA union bozos.
Warning: no rebuttal ahead. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I urge everyone to read Michael Lind’s Up From Conservatism on how the right-wing wants to use the hoax that public schools are hell to get tax breaks for the rich to send their kids to Choate, or to get public money into private religious schools. Oh, so you claim public schools are not "hell"??? Good one Gail. Been in one lately? I did not make the claim. Go read the sources and come back. Especially one in a poor neighborhood? Better wear your kevlar vest. Then try doing something about the neighborhood and the schools. Then we can argue whether Bill Clinton should get a tax break for Chelsea to go to Sidwell. Or John Metzger can get a voucher to send his kid to Nazi school.
In either case, the parent is not taking advantage of a school system that they nevertheless are forced to pay for. In both cases, the money confiscated for education purposes should indeed be put in control of the parents to choose what institution should provide it. Also read Jonathan Kozol’s books on schools and The Manufactured Crisis, Myths, Fraud, and the Attacks on Public Schools by David Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle. Yeah, public schools are MUCH better than private ones eh? Get real. Lots of public schools, particularly ones in the suburbs are better than private schools.
Really? Then why is there not a "crisis" in private schools that requires that "volunteers" be brought in to teach 3rd graders to read? Hmm? That is what Bill proposed for the publics. I believe social scientists who are experts on the subject or even ideologues like Kozol who has experience, more than I believe Eleanor who is just a GOP spinster, or you, who apparently makes assertions without citing reasons for those assertions.
Unlike you who get all of your specious arguments from academicians who live in the world of nice theories I get mine from observation of real world situations and events. — Mark D. Vincent | — Insert profound quote
Response:
As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not! Correct me if I’m wrong, but that represents a tax credit, and not just a deduction on taxable income, right? If so, it would effectively zero out taxes for a family of four living on $18,000.
A question begs to be axed: how are we going to pay for all this? — Mr. Sam: member, talk.politics.misc troll patrol, ( mrsam-at-concentric.net ) The Doctor Of Dittology, Usenet Truth Detector, and the Keeper Of Universal Wisdom, serving humanity with talent on loan from God. "Government is not a solution to our | "First of all, keep in mind that most problem, government IS the problem." | of our problem is with working – R. Reagan. | Americans." — B. Clinton.
Response:
As soon as you stop abscibing evil to the NEA and to Democratic Senators, which has become a tired cliche that loses voters for your party, let’s talk about the policy issues. Translation: As soon as you stop assigning blame where it belongs and start agreeing with the liberals we can discuss issues. Nice try.
So all Gail has to do in order to be allowed to discuss issues with you is admit that she is evil, right? Hmmm. Well. That certainly seems fair. Gail, that’s probably the best offer you’ll get today. I think you should take it. "No Keith, I am not a racist, nor have I ever practiced racism. I have tried to post the facts they have asked for only to be personally attacked and called a racist for my efforts. My using epithets and personal attacks against them was only to drop to their level so they could understand what I was talking about." –Truth ("Dippy") Mason, giving an "explanation" of his use of racial epithets. Novus Ordo Seclorum Volpus de Marina
Response:
Heck, many of the ‘rich’ already send their kids to private schools. The Republican voucher plan is intended to allow low and middle-class parents the opportunity to do the same if *they* (the parents) feel that public schools are not helping their kids. It’s called choice, and there is not a darn thing wrong with that.
They’ve already GOT choice. They just want the public to pay for it. Never mind that if it’s a religious school, there’s already huge tax breaks involved. Many public schools in this country are total failures and a little competition may do them some good. If they actually have to do their job correctly (such as teach kids to read before third grade) the quality will probably improve and those that don’t should have their doors nailed shut.
So you send all the problem kids to the private schools which presently don’t have to accept them, and somehow, magically, all their problems will clear up? The public schools that teach collectivism over individualism may have to re-think their policies if their enrollments decline because of supply and demand. Our country was founded on individualism and those parents who wish to instill this in their children should be able to send their kids to schools where the same values are taught instead of being forced to send their kids to collectivist education camps that turn out good little robots who have learned to rely on the government for all of their needs.
I love it when I hear phrases like, "Our country was founded on individualism". If we were really as individualistic as you like to pretend, there would be no country, and it certainly would not be ours! How long have you held this opinion that others are different from you and therefore robots? "No Keith, I am not a racist, nor have I ever practiced racism. I have tried to post the facts they have asked for only to be personally attacked and called a racist for my efforts. My using epithets and personal attacks against them was only to drop to their level so they could understand what I was talking about." –Truth ("Dippy") Mason, giving an "explanation" of his use of racial epithets. Novus Ordo Seclorum Volpus de Marina
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Heck, many of the ‘rich’ already send their kids to private schools. The Republican voucher plan is intended to allow low and middle-class parents the opportunity to do the same if *they* (the parents) feel that public schools are not helping their kids. It’s called choice, and there is not a darn thing wrong with that. They’ve already GOT choice. They just want the public to pay for it. Never mind that if it’s a religious school, there’s already huge tax breaks involved. Many public schools in this country are total failures and a little competition may do them some good. If they actually have to do their job correctly (such as teach kids to read before third grade) the quality will probably improve and those that don’t should have their doors nailed shut. So you send all the problem kids to the private schools which presently don’t have to accept them, and somehow, magically, all their problems will clear up? The public schools that teach collectivism over individualism may have to re-think their policies if their enrollments decline because of supply and demand. Our country was founded on individualism and those parents who wish to instill this in their children should be able to send their kids to schools where the same values are taught instead of being forced to send their kids to collectivist education camps that turn out good little robots who have learned to rely on the government for all of their needs.
The private schools have been tried in the marketplace and have been found wanting. Now they want government money. Maybe they should rethink their policies if their enrollments decline because of supply and demand. And once again, since you don’t seem to be listening: Parents are not being forced to send their children to public schools. They are allowed to send them to private schools or school them at home. They don’t send them to private schools. Accept that private schools are failing in the marketplace. And would anyone care to do a statistical analysis of the proportion of Merit Scholars and Westinghouse Scholars that come from public schools and from private schools? My Merit Scholarship and best-in-state in the Westinghouse competition were earned while attending a public school. I would be highly surprised if I found very many at private schools. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I love it when I hear phrases like, "Our country was founded on individualism". If we were really as individualistic as you like to pretend, there would be no country, and it certainly would not be ours! How long have you held this opinion that others are different from you and therefore robots?
Response:
And how will putting more money into the educrats pockets help the poor? Some of the nation’s poorest public schools have the most money per student.
Most money per student means that they have programs for emotionally disturbed kids or disabled kids – with little money left over for the regular kids. What’s your point? You’re comparing apples to oranges. —
Response:
ANYONE who REALLY wants an education can find one at the public library.
You’ll have to excuse me, Jim, but I can’t quite fathom what good the public library (which I imagine you also don’t want to pay for) would do a typical six-year-old. What’s he going to do? Gum on the corners of the covers of "The Republic"? Our current system of ‘education’ is a form of child abuse.
What utter rot. "No Keith, I am not a racist, nor have I ever practiced racism. I have tried to post the facts they have asked for only to be personally attacked and called a racist for my efforts. My using epithets and personal attacks against them was only to drop to their level so they could understand what I was talking about." –Truth ("Dippy") Mason, giving an "explanation" of his use of racial epithets. Novus Ordo Seclorum Volpus de Marina
Response:
And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but that represents a tax credit, and not just a deduction on taxable income, right? If so, it would effectively zero out taxes for a family of four living on $18,000. "No Keith, I am not a racist, nor have I ever practiced racism. I have tried to post the facts they have asked for only to be personally attacked and called a racist for my efforts. My using epithets and personal attacks against them was only to drop to their level so they could understand what I was talking about." –Truth ("Dippy") Mason, giving an "explanation" of his use of racial epithets. Novus Ordo Seclorum Volpus de Marina
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This incessant drum beat that those with whom we disagree are evil people who "don’t care" really gets a little tiresome. IMHO it’s just a cheap means of avoiding a rigorously honest, intelligent discussion of policy differences. Let’s start with your not saying that I said anyone was evil. As far as school vouchers are concerned, let’s take a concrete example. Last year the GOP had a bill in Congress which would have provided scholarships for a few thousand of the very poorest kids from the Anacostia section of D.C. to go to safe, effective private schools if their parents wished. The kids wanted to go, the parents wanted them to go, and schools had been lined up which would take the kids for less than half of the annual per pupil amount which DC spends. The district would have retained the other half of the funding to provide more money for the kids remaining in the system. Sounds like a win/win proposition, doesn’t it? But it was filibustered by Democratic Senators all of whom had their own little darlings safely tucked away in expensive private schools. Why? With an election coming up, these kids’ futures had to be sacrificed on the altar of maintaining the NEA’s own little private monopoly. Tell us, Gail, does that strike you as an example of "caring"? As soon as you stop abscibing evil to the NEA and to Democratic Senators, which has become a tired cliche that loses voters for your party, let’s talk about the policy issues.
Translation: As soon as you stop assigning blame where it belongs and start agreeing with the liberals we can discuss issues. Nice try. — Mark D. Vincent | — Insert profound quote
Response:
}The public schools that teach collectivism over individualism may have }to re-think their policies if their enrollments decline because of }supply and demand. Our country was founded on individualism
Really? Is that why the first words of the Constitution are "We, the People"? Mitchell Holman "For the first time in military history, U.S. military personnel are not under the command of United States generals." Rush Limbaugh on Bosnia, forgetting that US troops served under French generals in WWI and the Revolutionary War. (TV show, 4/18/94)
Response:
At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This incessant drum beat that those with whom we disagree are evil
Errr, are you criticizing Mr. Gingrich? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -people who "don’t care" really gets a little tiresome. IMHO it’s just a cheap means of avoiding a rigorously honest, intelligent discussion of policy differences. As far as school vouchers are concerned, let’s take a concrete example. Last year the GOP had a bill in Congress which would have provided scholarships for a few thousand of the very poorest kids from the Anacostia section of D.C. to go to safe, effective private schools if their parents wished. The kids wanted to go, the parents wanted them to go, and schools had been lined up which would take the kids for less than half of the annual per pupil amount which DC spends. The district would have retained the other half of the funding to provide more money for the kids remaining in the system. Sounds like a win/win proposition, doesn’t it? But it was filibustered by Democratic Senators all of whom had their own little darlings safely tucked away in expensive private schools. Why? With an election coming up, these kids’ futures had to be sacrificed on the altar of maintaining the NEA’s own little private monopoly. Tell us, Gail, does that strike you as an example of "caring"? Eleanor Rotthoff
– rha
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This incessant drum beat that those with whom we disagree are evil Errr, are you criticizing Mr. Gingrich? people who "don’t care" really gets a little tiresome. IMHO it’s just a cheap means of avoiding a rigorously honest, intelligent discussion of policy differences. As far as school vouchers are concerned, let’s take a concrete example. Last year the GOP had a bill in Congress which would have provided scholarships for a few thousand of the very poorest kids from the Anacostia section of D.C. to go to safe, effective private schools if their parents wished. The kids wanted to go, the parents wanted them to go, and schools had been lined up which would take the kids for less than half of the annual per pupil amount which DC spends. The district would have retained the other half of the funding to provide more money for the kids remaining in the system. Sounds like a win/win proposition, doesn’t it? But it was filibustered by Democratic Senators all of whom had their own little darlings safely tucked away in expensive private schools. Why? With an election coming up, these kids’ futures had to be sacrificed on the altar of maintaining the NEA’s own little private monopoly. Tell us, Gail, does that strike you as an example of "caring"? Eleanor Rotthoff — rha
"Safe, effective private schools". Strange that you didn’t mention just which schools these were. Could it have been religious schools that were involved? You wouldn’t be trying to sneak one past us, would you Eleanor? And that "half the per-pupil ammount that DC spends"–would that be half the ammount that DC spends on an average student, or half what DC spends on all students, averaged out? If you include the special-needs students that are expensive to educate in the costing, then don’t send any of those students out on the scholarships, it is distorting the cost figures. Was this the case? And just who rated these schools "effective"? What was the reason the Democrats gave for being against the plan? Surely it was not that they said their own kids were in private schools and they didn’t care? Yes, Eleanor, omission of vital facts DOES count as dishonesty. You wouldn’t do that would you?
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This incessant drum beat that those with whom we disagree are evil people who "don’t care" really gets a little tiresome. IMHO it’s just a cheap means of avoiding a rigorously honest, intelligent discussion of policy differences.
Let’s start with your not saying that I said anyone was evil. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -As far as school vouchers are concerned, let’s take a concrete example. Last year the GOP had a bill in Congress which would have provided scholarships for a few thousand of the very poorest kids from the Anacostia section of D.C. to go to safe, effective private schools if their parents wished. The kids wanted to go, the parents wanted them to go, and schools had been lined up which would take the kids for less than half of the annual per pupil amount which DC spends. The district would have retained the other half of the funding to provide more money for the kids remaining in the system. Sounds like a win/win proposition, doesn’t it? But it was filibustered by Democratic Senators all of whom had their own little darlings safely tucked away in expensive private schools. Why? With an election coming up, these kids’ futures had to be sacrificed on the altar of maintaining the NEA’s own little private monopoly. Tell us, Gail, does that strike you as an example of "caring"?
As soon as you stop abscibing evil to the NEA and to Democratic Senators, which has become a tired cliche that loses voters for your party, let’s talk about the policy issues. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Eleanor Rotthoff
Response:
"Safe, effective private schools". Strange that you didn’t mention just which schools these were. Could it have been religious schools that were involved?
Not at all. In point of fact, the DC school proposal involved only secular private schools because it was agreed in advance that any involvement with parochial schools would doom the project politically. And that "half the per-pupil ammount that DC spends"–would that be half the ammount that DC spends on an average student, or half what DC spends on all students, averaged out?
It was the average-per-pupil expenditure which, as I am sure you are aware, is the standard statistic which all school districts release. If you include the special-needs students that are expensive to educate in the costing, then don’t send any of those students out on the scholarships, it is distorting the cost figures. Was this the case?
I have no idea how many, if any, special needs students were included in the projected private school enrollees. In point of fact, I don’t think the project got that far because Senate Democrats refused to approve the funding. I do know that the legislation contained a provision expressly requiring that participating schools accept the agreed number of pupils without any discriminatory screening. BTW are you maintaining that it costs more than twice as much to educate every special ed child as it does to educate the average student? Unless that is the case, some additional funding would still remain in the district to help other kids. And just who rated these schools "effective"?
Their test scores, graduation rates, crime rates, etc. Most important, however, was the judgment of the parents of the students involved. Don’t you think they should be the ultimate arbiters of their own children’s welfare? What was the reason the Democrats gave for being against the plan? Surely it was not that they said their own kids were in private schools and they didn’t care?
I listened very closely to the debate on this proposal, and the only reason I heard advanced for Democratic opposition was the hue and cry that "it would destroy the public school system" — not that there was any concrete, rational argument as to *why* this would occur — just a generalized fear-mongering. Of course they didn’t point out that their own children weren’t exposed to this vaunted public school system (no one willingly faces, let alone admits, gross hypocrisy, does he?) but the fact is that every single one of their kids who attends school in Washington is in an expensive private school. Not that I blame them, any more than I blame Bill and Hillary Clinton for sending Chelsea to Sidwell Friends. Every conscientious parent wants his/her child to get a good education. And I wouldn’t put my child in the sewer that is the DC schools either. But it seems the height of hypocrisy to insist that these poor kids have to be denied the brighter future that a good education would give them "in order to protect public education" while the same senators who are sobbing about the importance of public education are keeping their own children out of it. Yes, Eleanor, omission of vital facts DOES count as dishonesty. You wouldn’t do that would you?
I outlined the proposal in some detail. If you want to ask additional questions about it, I’ll be more than glad to answer them if I can. Why do you feel a need to attack the integrity of anyone who disagrees with you on policy issues? Eleanor Rotthoff
Response:
At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor.
This incessant drum beat that those with whom we disagree are evil people who "don’t care" really gets a little tiresome. IMHO it’s just a cheap means of avoiding a rigorously honest, intelligent discussion of policy differences. As far as school vouchers are concerned, let’s take a concrete example. Last year the GOP had a bill in Congress which would have provided scholarships for a few thousand of the very poorest kids from the Anacostia section of D.C. to go to safe, effective private schools if their parents wished. The kids wanted to go, the parents wanted them to go, and schools had been lined up which would take the kids for less than half of the annual per pupil amount which DC spends. The district would have retained the other half of the funding to provide more money for the kids remaining in the system. Sounds like a win/win proposition, doesn’t it? But it was filibustered by Democratic Senators all of whom had their own little darlings safely tucked away in expensive private schools. Why? With an election coming up, these kids’ futures had to be sacrificed on the altar of maintaining the NEA’s own little private monopoly. Tell us, Gail, does that strike you as an example of "caring"? Eleanor Rotthoff
Response:
Ask any New Yorker if they know any private school in the city that remotely approaches Bronx Science, Stuyvesant, H.S. of the Fine Arts, or a lot of other public schools. How many National Merit Scholarships or Westinghouse Scholarships go to private schools? Hint: I got a Merit Scholarship, and placed first in the state in the Westinghouse competition, while attending a public school.
I have not seen anyone argue that there are no good public schools. Demonstrably there are some excellent ones. Unfortunately, these are primarily located in affluent suburbs while schools in the inner cities (where kids most desperately need the chance to move up which education offers) continue to decay. The result is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer educationally at a time when all of us agree that education is more crucial than ever before to kids’ future economic well-being. This can only exacerbate the problem of the income gap. The issue should not be seen in the context of public schools versus private schools. That’s a false dichotomy. The issue is how we can provide an adequate education for *all* this nation’s kids, not just those whose parents can afford to move to neighborhoods where the schools are good. BTW, to answer the question you posed, in my community *far* more National Merit scholars come out of the private high schools, proportionately, than the public high schools. One can debate the reasons for that fact, but the statistics are indisputable. Eleanor Rotthoff
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not! At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. I urge everyone to read Michael Lind’s Up From Conservatism on how the right-wing wants to use the hoax that public schools are hell to get tax breaks for the rich to send their kids to Choate, or to get public money into private religious schools.
Heck, many of the ‘rich’ already send their kids to private schools. The Republican voucher plan is intended to allow low and middle-class parents the opportunity to do the same if *they* (the parents) feel that public schools are not helping their kids. It’s called choice, and there is not a darn thing wrong with that. Many public schools in this country are total failures and a little competition may do them some good. If they actually have to do their job correctly (such as teach kids to read before third grade) the quality will probably improve and those that don’t should have their doors nailed shut. The public schools that teach collectivism over individualism may have to re-think their policies if their enrollments decline because of supply and demand. Our country was founded on individualism and those parents who wish to instill this in their children should be able to send their kids to schools where the same values are taught instead of being forced to send their kids to collectivist education camps that turn out good little robots who have learned to rely on the government for all of their needs. Frank R. Hipp
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – First off let’s all acknowledge that this Michael Lind book must be a real piece of work as evidenced by the fact that it feeds to twisted views of Gail and that loon Loren Petrich. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not! At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. Ahem, this only helps the middle class with kids in college and it is little help at that considering the rates of increase in tuition. The ONLY way to help the middle class via a tax cut is a RATE REDUCTION. Fine. Let’s keep it restricted to the middle-class. Let’s try to pay for entitlements that people want without making the poor pay, without increasing the debt, and, then if we have money left over after that, think about how to help the cities, then we can talk about a rate reduction for the wealthy. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This shows the warped sense of what "caring" is. To give a poor person a voucher with which that person can go to a top flight private school is precisely the MOST "caring" approach to take. Like $1500 is going to pay for a voucher to a "top flight private school!!!" The most important thing to a kid and hopefully his/her parents is to get the kid a GOOD EDUCATION – whether it be public or private. Warning: anti-union/strawman argument without adequate backup ahead. It is the Democrats who subvert this goal to the interests of the entrenched NEA union bozos. I urge everyone to read Michael Lind’s Up From Conservatism on how the right-wing wants to use the hoax that public schools are hell to get tax breaks for the rich to send their kids to Choate, or to get public money into private religious schools. Oh, so you claim public schools are not "hell"??? Good one Gail. Been in one lately? I did not make the claim. Go read the sources and come back. Especially one in a poor neighborhood? Better wear your kevlar vest. Then try doing something about the neighborhood and the schools. Then we can argue whether Bill Clinton should get a tax break for Chelsea to go to Sidwell. Or John Metzger can get a voucher to send his kid to Nazi school. Also read Jonathan Kozol’s books on schools and The Manufactured Crisis, Myths, Fraud, and the Attacks on Public Schools by David Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle. Yeah, public schools are MUCH better than private ones eh? Get real. Lots of public schools, particularly ones in the suburbs are better than private schools. I believe social scientists who are experts on the subject or even ideologues like Kozol who has experience, more than I believe Eleanor who is just a GOP spinster, or you, who apparently makes assertions without citing reasons for those assertions.
Ask any New Yorker if they know any private school in the city that remotely approaches Bronx Science, Stuyvesant, H.S. of the Fine Arts, or a lot of other public schools. How many National Merit Scholarships or Westinghouse Scholarships go to private schools? Hint: I got a Merit Scholarship, and placed first in the state in the Westinghouse competition, while attending a public school.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -First off let’s all acknowledge that this Michael Lind book must be a real piece of work as evidenced by the fact that it feeds to twisted views of Gail and that loon Loren Petrich. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not! At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. Ahem, this only helps the middle class with kids in college and it is little help at that considering the rates of increase in tuition. The ONLY way to help the middle class via a tax cut is a RATE REDUCTION.
Fine. Let’s keep it restricted to the middle-class. Let’s try to pay for entitlements that people want without making the poor pay, without increasing the debt, and, then if we have money left over after that, think about how to help the cities, then we can talk about a rate reduction for the wealthy. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. This shows the warped sense of what "caring" is. To give a poor person a voucher with which that person can go to a top flight private school is precisely the MOST "caring" approach to take.
Like $1500 is going to pay for a voucher to a "top flight private school!!!" The most important thing to a kid and hopefully his/her parents is to get the kid a GOOD EDUCATION – whether it be public or private.
Warning: anti-union/strawman argument without adequate backup ahead. It is the Democrats who subvert this goal to the interests of the entrenched NEA union bozos. I urge everyone to read Michael Lind’s Up From Conservatism on how the right-wing wants to use the hoax that public schools are hell to get tax breaks for the rich to send their kids to Choate, or to get public money into private religious schools. Oh, so you claim public schools are not "hell"??? Good one Gail. Been in one lately?
I did not make the claim. Go read the sources and come back. Especially one in a poor neighborhood? Better wear your kevlar vest.
Then try doing something about the neighborhood and the schools. Then we can argue whether Bill Clinton should get a tax break for Chelsea to go to Sidwell. Or John Metzger can get a voucher to send his kid to Nazi school. Also read Jonathan Kozol’s books on schools and The Manufactured Crisis, Myths, Fraud, and the Attacks on Public Schools by David Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle. Yeah, public schools are MUCH better than private ones eh? Get real.
Lots of public schools, particularly ones in the suburbs are better than private schools. I believe social scientists who are experts on the subject or even ideologues like Kozol who has experience, more than I believe Eleanor who is just a GOP spinster, or you, who apparently makes assertions without citing reasons for those assertions. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mark D. Vincent | — Insert profound quote
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – College tax breaks and extra spending for schools are among Clinton’s chief priorities. Senate Republicans offer a $2,500 deduction for student loan interest. They’ve proposed education investment accounts, similar to IRAs, allowing non-deductible contributions of up to $1,000 a year to accumulate earnings tax-free. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? The right-wing 105th is under way. And how will putting more money into the educrats pockets help the poor? Some of the nation’s poorest public schools have the most money per student. The issue of poor education indeed is a sobering one but Clinton doesn’t appear to have any better answers than the GOP and is simply appealing to the emotional side of voters by paying lip service to education (throwing money at a broken system).
Quite correct. ANYONE who REALLY wants an education can find one at the public library. Our current system of ‘education’ is a form of child abuse. Jim Glass
Response:
And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what?
As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not!
Response:
And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not!
At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor. I urge everyone to read Michael Lind’s Up From Conservatism on how the right-wing wants to use the hoax that public schools are hell to get tax breaks for the rich to send their kids to Choate, or to get public money into private religious schools. Also read Jonathan Kozol’s books on schools and The Manufactured Crisis, Myths, Fraud, and the Attacks on Public Schools by David Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle.
Response:
First off let’s all acknowledge that this Michael Lind book must be a real piece of work as evidenced by the fact that it feeds to twisted views of Gail and that loon Loren Petrich. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? As contrasted with the Clinton proposal for a $1,500 tax credit or a $10,000 per year tax deduction for education costs. Now *there* is real help for the poor, right? Not! At least Clinton is upfront that this a proposal to help the middle-class. He is also roundly criticized by both liberals and budget-watchers for this proposal.
Ahem, this only helps the middle class with kids in college and it is little help at that considering the rates of increase in tuition. The ONLY way to help the middle class via a tax cut is a RATE REDUCTION. As opposed to the GOP voucher proponents who don’t care about the public schools or the poor.
This shows the warped sense of what "caring" is. To give a poor person a voucher with which that person can go to a top flight private school is precisely the MOST "caring" approach to take. The most important thing to a kid and hopefully his/her parents is to get the kid a GOOD EDUCATION – whether it be public or private. It is the Democrats who subvert this goal to the interests of the entrenched NEA union bozos. I urge everyone to read Michael Lind’s Up From Conservatism on how the right-wing wants to use the hoax that public schools are hell to get tax breaks for the rich to send their kids to Choate, or to get public money into private religious schools.
Oh, so you claim public schools are not "hell"??? Good one Gail. Been in one lately? Especially one in a poor neighborhood? Better wear your kevlar vest. Also read Jonathan Kozol’s books on schools and The Manufactured Crisis, Myths, Fraud, and the Attacks on Public Schools by David Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle.
Yeah, public schools are MUCH better than private ones eh? Get real. — Mark D. Vincent | — Insert profound quote
Response:
Private Education From The Associated Press, 2/2/97: College tax breaks and extra spending for schools are among Clinton’s chief priorities. Republicans are wary, remembering Clinton’s campaign charge that the GOP was taking an ax to education. Wrangling over public money to help poor families pay for private or religious school tuition and the use of tax credits to pay for college will mark the debate over education policy. Senate Republicans offer a $2,500 deduction for student loan interest. They’ve proposed education investment accounts, similar to IRAs, allowing non-deductible contributions of up to $1,000 a year to accumulate earnings tax-free. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? The right-wing 105th is under way. Harry Republicans in Congress are still smarting over Clinton’s success last year in labeling them as enemies of the environment, so efforts to broadly rewrite environmental laws are on hold. One of the most contentious battles in the coming months will center on a plan by the Environmental Protection Agency to tighten the federal requirement for controlling smog and soot in the air. An industry coalition is intent on getting Congress to block the tougher standards. Everyone agrees the Superfund law needs an overhaul, but Republican lawmakers and the administration disagree to what extent polluters should pay cleanup costs. Republicans abandoned their effort last year to give a broad reprieve, but still are eyeing a bill that would allow for numerous exemptions. The administration insists that polluters should pay. THE POOR Acting on his pledge to “fix” last year’s welfare reform bill, Clinton wants $16 billion to restore cuts to legal immigrants and food stamps, pay for job-training programs and offer a new tax credit to employers who hire people on welfare. Republicans in Congress have little interest in revisiting welfare. Clinton proposes about $20 billion in savings from Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor, partly by capping the amount that could be spent on any one person. The proposal has drawn fire from some congressional Democrats but not Republicans, who back stricter caps on spending. Clinton wants to use some of the Medicaid savings to expand health coverage for uninsured children. Republicans talk about letting states extend Medicaid to poor workers without insurance. Housing and Urban Development officials focus on downsizing, hoping to keep Republicans who want to eliminate HUD at bay. The administration wants to continue replacing substandard public housing. Republicans want to reform rent payments for public housing to remove disincentives to work and consolidate programs aiding the homeless. They also hope to increase child support collections by tying federal contributions to state efficiency. This could spark a battle among states, which now get federal support based solely on the amount of child support collected. –By Laura Meckler WORKER-BUSINESS ISSUES Both the White House and Congress want to reform so-called corporate welfare, the government subsidies and tax breaks enjoyed by businesses. House Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, R-Ohio, is leading an attack on spending for such things as energy research projects, logging roads and export promotion. He’s attracted support from anti-tax, environmental and consumer groups. The administration, meanwhile, is going after tax subsidies, trying again to convince Congress to close some loopholes including a limit on tax breaks for multinational companies. Supporters argue that since Congress pushed through reforms to force poor people off welfare, it must make business pay a fair share too. Clinton and the GOP Congress both want to help time-strapped parents by allowing employers more flexibility in providing compensatory time off. Senate Republicans want to let employers give employees 1.5 hours off for every hour of overtime worked. Clinton insists any such measure must have safeguards against employer abuse. Unions argue that employers might pressure workers to take comp time in lieu of overtime pay. –By Martin Crutsinger MILITARY-FOREIGN AFFAIRS Clinton is expected to propose a defense budget of about $260 billion, some $5 billion less than this year. As they have done the past two years, Republicans are likely to add at least a few billion dollars for weapons modernization. Yet, Congress and the administration have remarkably few sharp differences over defense. Having former Republican Sen. William Cohen as Pentagon chief is expected to make it easier to manage any disagreements. The Republicans also have identified missile defense as a top priority. Clinton agrees that a system to shoot down hostile missiles is needed, but he and Congress disagree on how soon it should be put into operation — and at what cost. The Republicans also have served notice that they want the administration to scale back its commitments to international peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, although they are not ready to pull the plug on U.S. involvement in Bosnia. Another Clinton priority is Senate ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention, an international treaty that Republicans criticize as weak and unverifiable. Clinton will ask Congress to pay about $1 billion in dues owed the United Nations. The U.N. is not especially popular in Congress, and the proposal’s fate is murky.
Response:
College tax breaks and extra spending for schools are among Clinton’s chief priorities. Senate Republicans offer a $2,500 deduction for student loan interest. They’ve proposed education investment accounts, similar to IRAs, allowing non-deductible contributions of up to $1,000 a year to accumulate earnings tax-free. And what are poor families supposed to do with $1000 a year? A $2500 deduction from what? The right-wing 105th is under way.
And how will putting more money into the educrats pockets help the poor? Some of the nation’s poorest public schools have the most money per student. The issue of poor education indeed is a sobering one but Clinton doesn’t appear to have any better answers than the GOP and is simply appealing to the emotional side of voters by paying lip service to education (throwing money at a broken system). — My opinions are free, worth nothing, and not Apple’s It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. – David Hume
Response:
Related Posts
- Attacked at Hospital
- Is my wife cheating?
- EIR Talks 02/08/95
- Classic Model and Talent, Inc
- how do you act right?
- The Science Foundation of Psychotherapy
- Psychotherapy is Lacking Key Science
- Does CA Searcher Have PI License?
- Looking for casting agencies in San Francisco....
- Friends?? who'd have them???