- This topic has 99 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
.cb new_rayz said:
– Even if our banks are totally in the hands of the government, that doesn’t mean Obama is the dictator. There are still checks and balances.Yes there are plenty of checks and balances. The government can make the banks do anything they want and if the banks don’t like it they can give the money they owe the government back, thus lowering their wealth portfolio and monetary holdings, getting the CEO and board members fired because they lowered the company’s value, and making them acquisition targets by other banks still rich from government loans.
.cb new_rayz said:
-Obama isn’t controlling anything, redistribution (If that is what you want to call it) is a WHOPPING 4-6% increase in taxes for a WHOPPING 5% of the population. Yeah okay that is a REAL control freak.He’s taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. That is redistributing wealth. That top 5% everyone likes to talk about ALREADY pays 55% of the taxes. How much more do you really think they are obligated to pay? 70%? 90%? All of it?
Quote:
-So he kicked people off his plane. Anyone who has a plane first off, has the right to kick whoever he wants off. Secondly, the “Obama’s press coverage was much more positive than McCain’s and that McCain had nearly 60% negative stories and 15% positive ones while Obama was balanced at ~30% positive/negative/neutral” point you make, has nothing to do with fear or terror.Quite right. The problem with that is that Obama doesn’t own the plane outright, his campaign does. Since his campaign was based on being open and transparent, it’s odd that he would then turn around and kick people asking the questions that would make him transparent off. As to your second point, if the media is biased enough to produce the numbers I quoted above, it’s obvious that he has at least some control over them. Control over the media is a form of censorship. And before you even go there, Bush obviously didnt’ have control over the media as they were all the time declassifying documents for him and bashing him for every mistake him or his cabinet made, even when they didn’t make the mistake at all.
.cb new_rayz said:
-He is part black, it is a monumental achievement for the black community, for Christs sake they only have 1 month out of the year, its about time!So this election was about race? Nice to know that liberals are FINALLY starting to admit that. This election is only a monumental demonstration of racsim as 96% of blacks voted for Obama. If 96% of whites had voted for McCain you can rest assured it would have been racist.
.cb new_rayz said:
Your whole Fascism spew can be used with any other president. Here I will give you Sir Fascist Bush:–Centralization of authority under a dictator: government overstepping power, going into a war without approval, manipulating intelligence.
The government didn’t overstep it’s power, it got approval for everything. Bush had 90+% approval from the senate to go to war. Manipulating intelligence? Yeah ok, tell yourself what you need to sleep better at night.
.cb new_rayz said:
–stringent socioeconomic controls: Giving tax cuts that don’t really do much, banning stem cell research because it’s “inhumane” and “life is too precious”, then turning around and say “collateral damage” is unfortunate but part of war.The tax cuts obviously help someone or Obama wouldn’t be renewing them. It’s pretty odd that you would say that because you just flip-flopped on a position in the same thread.
No one has a problem with stem cell research. The controversy is over embryonic stem cell research which kills a fetus and has yet to produce a single medical breakthrough. On the other hand, adult stem cell research is harmless to the donor and has produced quite a few medical breakthroughs in the last two decades. They simply want to ban the useless and deadly form of research in favor of the useful and non-lethal form. How is that bad?
Collateral damage is part of any war. Moreso in this war because the enemy combatants hide behind civilians. If you don’t like innocents being killed, please go tell the terrorists to quite shooting at people from schools and churches and quit blowing up markets full of their own people.
.cb new_rayz said:
–suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship: Terror and censorship? LOL that is bush’s middle name. Did you all forget 9/11? He used fear as a catapult to get us into this mess of Iraq.No, he actually used being ATTACKED as a catapult to get us into war. And go read Nickname’s rant on Iraq. It’s pretty much what I would have typed.
.cb new_rayz said:
policy of belligerent nationalism and racism: He is from Texas, enough said.Last time I was in Texas it seemed like the most down to earth and friendly part of the southern strip of states. Have you ever been to Louisianna or Mississippi? Did you ever go to New Orleans before it was flooded? Obviously not…
.cb new_rayz said:
No one is fascist in this country, period. You republicooks will always be around with your ridiculously large guns that most probably compensates for something. If any president truly did in fact step out of the proper line, he would be checked faster than a turban in an airport.So Bush never stepped out of line then. Always a nice thing to hear from a flaming liberal.
As for guns, well, remember that every weapon is created for a purpose. I’m not really sure what gun in particular you’re referring to but I doubt it was created just for the hell of it. In fact I can’t think of any weapons that the US invented that weren’t created to fullfill a need or counter an enemy advantage.
.cb new_rayz said:
MasterP might have succeeded in an epic trolling, but I found this random thread much more interesting than the majority of the nonsense we post on here. It feels good to try and use the noggin sometimes! lolGlad I could be of service. I do have one request though. Quit reading biased newsources (on both sides). Using organizations and the Huffington Post as your sources really discredits you.
YouWinGameOver said:
Once again you have failed to answer my other questions from earlier I want to know…”What I have to ask you is if more then 3/4 of the people who carried out the attacks on 9/11 why did we attack Sadam Hussein and go into Afghanistan? Was it not Saudi Arabia’s fault?”They were trained, armed, and lead from Afghanistan. Unlike Obama, Bush doesn’t discuss attacking allied nations on national television.
YouWinGameOver said:
Why do republicans constantly compare a somewhat socialist agenda to communism. It is no where close to it. Communism is everyone getting the exact same pay for doing whatever job they get.Socialism is the stepping stone to communism. If you need a history book I’ll be glad to mail you one. But even by your own definition of communism, if a doctor gets paid $250,000 but pays 60% taxes for being “rich” and an engineer gets paid $100,000 but is tax exempt from being “middle-class”, they get the same paychecks. This whole “tax the rich more” system can only lead to communism.
YouWinGameOver said:
Yes I do believe that paying taxes is our patriotic duty otherwise our country would crumble. Your version of the perfect conservative/republican world automatically becomes Anarchy and therefore I win. Peoplle Have to pay taxes there is no question about this. That is how the potholes in your street gets fixed or when it snows your road gets plowed.Yes people have to pay taxes. No my potholes aren’t getting fixed and no my streets don’t get plowed. Raising the taxes won’t do anything for the infrastructure because state governments routinely pull money from highway and infrastructure funds to balance out the general budget. Taxes aren’t the answer to infrastructure, actually giving a *edited* is.
YouWinGameOver said:
And yes there are a lot of people that I am mad at because they make an over satiable amount of money for doing nothing. No matter what you say our country is not how hard you work but who you blow. Those rats sitting in office and congress and senate or even the mayor of your town has most likely taken a bribe or two and weaseled there ways into office.That I can agree with. The leads of this country should be taken from the average joe population. The fastest way to implement this would be an immediate 2 term limit on congressmen and senators as well as a 10 year limit on supreme court justices and state legislators. That won’t happen so get over it.
YouWinGameOver said:
I did not disagree with every action Bush has made but I do feel that he is one of the worst presidents we have ever had and I do feel that he did not deserve office. I am glad it was him who was there when 9/11 happened because I do not believe Kerry could have handled it. But I do not believe that he went after the right group of people.History will prove different but it will take a good 30 years for the real historians to start writing the truth. I think there’s been alot of stuff going on behind the scenes that if brought to light would have helped his short-term legacy. There were several attacks that were prevented, both here and abroad, from our increased intelligence gathering operations and from “torturing” prisoners captured during our “illegal wars”. As much as you might hate to admit it, they are bad people and they do want to kill us by any means necessary. Hell they kill their own people for being a different sect of the religion.
I am glad to see liberals finally admit that Kerry would have lead this country down the wrong path after 9/11. I honestly didn’t think any of you would ever admit it.
.cb new_rayz said:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/16…ration-history/Inauguration ceremony is coming up soon, PPPAAARRRTTTEHHH!! lol
It’s going to be something ridiculous, like over forty thousand people.
I thought there were supposed to be millions of people? When did the number become realistic?
Dear Wing Nut,
Aye, I agree with you on my sources. They are pretty pathetic. I read a lot of things, but unfortunately don’t always remember where I get certain information. Call it lazy, but last time I checked I wasn’t signed up for debate 101. I realize biased and sloppy sources drastically discredit my thoughts, but unfortunately time is of the essence. I’ll research my previous points in the near future, to bring my ideas back up to par.
For the rest of your reply, I’m just going to quickly point out one part and why I think it isn’t inaccurate. Not in very much detail, as I don’t really have time to research atm.
-The rich aren’t going to be taxed 70% or 90%, EVEN THOUGH they control over 90% of the wealth in this country. And as you may already know, we have a progressive tax for a very good reason. The rich get more out of the government. Yes I am saying it, the rich get more from the government.
Defense – If someone has more to defend, as in more at stake, it makes sense that they have to pay more for defense. Someone who has more, has more to defend. Which is partly why they get taxed more.
SSI -Social security payments, which make up another 20% of the budget, are dependent on income– if you’ve put more into the system, you get higher payments when you retire.
Investments in the nation’s infrastructure- transportation, education, research & development, energy, police subsidies, the courts, etc.– again are more useful the more you have. The interstates and airports benefit interstate commerce and people who can travel, not ghetto dwellers. Energy is used disproportionately by the rich and by industry.
Education- A good chunk of public school funding comes from state property taxes (at least in Texas), and obviously schools that sit on expensive land with extremely wealthy suburbs as their surroundings are clearly going to benefit more. This isn’t some misconception, some myth. If the wealth issue in schools didn’t have an effect, why do the numbers say other wise? It is clear that wealthier more funded school systems are going to have the edge over lesser funded schools. The opportunity for a rich kid to get into trouble, to make bad grades, to flunk out, IS MUCH LESS than a kid in a poor section. And don’t tell me the opportunity is equal for all public schools, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT. I went to a high school where we didn’t even have Advanced Placement Courses, because we simply didn’t have enough funding. So tell me, how is that fair again?
Beyond all this, the federal budget is top-heavy with corporate welfare. Counting tax breaks and expenditures, corporations and the rich snuffle up over $400 billion a year- compare that to the $116 billion spent on programs for the poor.
Your’s Truely,
Flaming Libbie
P.S. I have been to all the states of the Southern Rainbow. As I said before, I go to Texas A&M University, and I can tell you first hand racism is still strong in the Lone Star state. It’s not as blatant or up-front, thank god, but the backdoor racism is overwhelming. You guys probably didn’t hear about this, but their was a egg tossing of Obama’s face on my own very campus. Also, if I do recall, their were certain parts of the Dallas Fort Worth School district that didn’t even de-segregate until the 1990’s.
MasterP said:
And go read Nickname’s rant on Iraq. It’s pretty much what I would have typed.Huh? What did I type about Iraq? I think you mean Pink Monkey #16
They were trained, armed, and lead from Afghanistan. Unlike Obama, Bush doesn’t discuss attacking allied nations on national television.
I don’t know where you got your resources on this one but they were not trained in Afghanistan. All of the people who drove the planes got their certification from American pilot schools.
Socialism is the stepping stone to communism. If you need a history book I’ll be glad to mail you one. But even by your own definition of communism, if a doctor gets paid $250,000 but pays 60% taxes for being “rich” and an engineer gets paid $100,000 but is tax exempt from being “middle-class”, they get the same paychecks. This whole “tax the rich more” system can only lead to communism.
Yes people have to pay taxes. No my potholes aren’t getting fixed and no my streets don’t get plowed. Raising the taxes won’t do anything for the infrastructure because state governments routinely pull money from highway and infrastructure funds to balance out the general budget. Taxes aren’t the answer to infrastructure, actually giving a *edited* is.
I think that we need to increase taxes for everyone not just the upper class. I realize you may have earned your money but so have I. I did not “excel” in school but I tried my hardest to get into college and better myself and now I go to one of the best teaching schools in the nation.
I am glad to see liberals finally admit that Kerry would have lead this country down the wrong path after 9/11. I honestly didn’t think any of you would ever admit it.
I am not a liberal or a democrat. I have said from day 1 that I believe that Kerry would have messed things up worse than Bush if a 9/11 would have happened for him. That being said I do believe that it was our fault 9/11 happened in the first place. And no matter how much you may deny it, it is true.
.cb new_rayz said:
SSI -Social security payments, which make up another 20% of the budget, are dependent on income– if you’ve put more into the system, you get higher payments when you retire.This would work if the payments you were making to social security were actually tied to your name. However
the federal government in its infinite wisdom decided to borrow the money from Social Security to make the
budget look better. Social Security is counted as an asset instead of leaving it alone as an “savings plan” like it
was originally marketed to the people of the United States. Never mind that illegal aliens and individuals like my
grandfather who didn’t even pay into the system are getting benefits.
.cb new_rayz said:
Education- A good chunk of public school funding comes from state property taxes (at least in Texas), and obviously schools that sit on expensive land with extremely wealthy suburbs as their surroundings are clearly going to benefit more. This isn’t some misconception, some myth. If the wealth issue in schools didn’t have an effect, why do the numbers say other wise? It is clear that wealthier more funded school systems are going to have the edge over lesser funded schools. The opportunity for a rich kid to get into trouble, to make bad grades, to flunk out, IS MUCH LESS than a kid in a poor section. And don’t tell me the opportunity is equal for all public schools, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT. I went to a high school where we didn’t even have Advanced Placement Courses, because we simply didn’t have enough funding. So tell me, how is that fair again?Ummmmm… my public high-school was made up of many middle class families… We did not have AP courses at all.
Individuals who wished to excel and take college courses ahead of time had to make do with relying upon themselves.
The point is that AP courses do not make a successful school. A successful school is made up of students that are willing
to put in time and effort. ANYONE can get a good education or even a good enough education if they are willing to
work for it. Nothing comes free and people should stop expecting handouts and life on a silver platter.
YouWinGameOver said:
That being said I do believe that it was our fault 9/11 happened in the first place. And no matter how much you may deny it, it is true.Did you really just say that it was our fault that terrorists hijacked 4 planes and killed several thousand innocent people
because we somehow deserved it? Are you prepared to defend that to families of the victims? Please inform me how on
earth that was our fault…
.cb new_rayz said:
-The rich aren’t going to be taxed 70% or 90%, EVEN THOUGH they control over 90% of the wealth in this country. And as you may already know, we have a progressive tax for a very good reason. The rich get more out of the government. Yes I am saying it, the rich get more from the government.Beyond all this, the federal budget is top-heavy with corporate welfare. Counting tax breaks and expenditures, corporations and the rich snuffle up over $400 billion a year- compare that to the $116 billion spent on programs for the poor.
Can I take it that you agree that 70% to 90% taxation is unfair? What guarantees are there that the tax rate won’t go up on the rich to those excessive levels? During the 60’s and 70’s the top tax bracket bounced around between 70% up to 90%. These “evil” rich couldn’t stop it then, so I seriously doubt they could stop it now. I guess that they would just have to quit buying their toys like jets and yachts. Oh wait, I forgot, Americans’ jobs depend upon the rich buying these toys. I live in Wichita, KS, the “Air Capital.” When the rich don’t have money for planes, our whole economy goes to *edited*. This affects everyone from the engineers to the assembly line workers to the janitors. Confiscatory tax rates on any segment of the population affect everyone, even if it is not directly.
Corporate welfare is a terrible thing, you and I can agree. However, I believe your numbers are extremely flawed.
Looking at this chart, you can see that, by far, the Department of Health and Human Services gobbles up the most of the budget. I’m not exactly sure what sort of Corporate Welfare they dole out, but I do know that the rest of the welfare, the programs for the poor come through this office. So instead of the “measly” $116 Billion it will be $700 Billion for 2009. That is the cost of the first bailout. Tack on the budget of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Labor and you have a good chunk of our money being spent on welfare, not for the greedy evil rich corporations, but for the poor. In 1964, President Johnson declared war on poverty. 45 years later, after trillions were spent and more being spent each year, we still have poor among us. Before we pull out of Iraq and declare defeat, maybe we should consider withdrawing from a more expensive and longer lasting quagmire.
A word on terrorists. Yes, they were training for their mission here in the US at our own pilot schools, however, they also trained previously in Afganistan, in terrorist “boot camp” if you will.
Pink Monkey #5 said:
Ummmmm… my public high-school was made up of many middle class families… We did not have AP courses at all.Individuals who wished to excel and take college courses ahead of time had to make do with relying upon themselves.
The point is that AP courses do not make a successful school. A successful school is made up of students that are willing
to put in time and effort. ANYONE can get a good education or even a good enough education if they are willing to
work for it. Nothing comes free and people should stop expecting handouts and life on a silver platter.
You are right and at the same time are missing my point. I’ll blame this on me because I gave a poor example. I agree that nothing is free. I don’t agree with you totally that a successful school is made up of kids who are willing to put in the time and effort. You are telling me that public school kids, ages 5-18 are going to have to rely only on themselves to decide what is in their best interest in life? And that if they decide wrongly, it is their fault? These are kids. I am not saying they should be GIVEN anything, except an equal opportunity to learn. When their isn’t equal opportunity or funding, THAT is when the kids fail. It takes effort with kids, contact, attention. Are you seriously going to tell me that it’s the kids “will” to learn in those schools that makes them better and not because of all the better things they have? A kid, is expected to rely on themselves to make decisions that could potentially make or break their life? Rich school districts have more money to spend on better teachers, better curriculum, better equipment, and as a result more successful kids. Kids at those schools don’t have a larger “will” to learn more than kids at the poorer districts, because that my friend is a bunch of bullsh!t.
I agree that there are a lot of crappy public schools out there. It should also be noted that yes a
proper education is more determined by the school itself in grades K-8. However students should
be taking a more active role and taking charge of their education by choosing the harder classes.
Back to the issue of bad schools. Can anyone tell me why teachers shouldn’t receive payment based
upon the quality of teaching rather than how many years they have taught? Why is it that schools have
a hard time getting rid bad teachers? All these problems plague public schools because the teachers union
exists. The union cares not about education and the well being of the students. They care about keeping
students exclusively in public schools and keeping their jobs. Note: this is a broad generalization, however
this is a real problem with the public school system. Has anyone asked why students in private schools tend
to have greater success? It is because private schools tend to have better teachers. Why? Because they
are paid based upon their performance and bad apples can be gotten rid of. However one issue with private
schools is the tuition. Less fortunate families cannot afford this extra burden. But ahah! There is a solution.
This solution is called vouchers. Public schools receive a certain amount of tax money for each student enrolled.
Vouchers allow families to taken the tax money allotted to their child and apply it towards tuition for private school.
However the teachers unions are generally opposed to this measure because it takes away their student base.
The national teacher’s unions are large supporters of the democratic party. Thus democrats are usually opposed
to the idea of Vouchers. See the attached link.
http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-open-t…vouchers/71403/
Note that observers find it odd that a democrat would even be open to the idea of vouchers. However at one point he
was against vouchers stating that it wouldn’t help students or even be harmful. I don’t have the exact verbiage and
cannot find an article fill in the blanks. It should be noted that President Obama’s daughters are currently attending
a private school. This is representative of many democratic politicians. However this isn’t a democrat bash I just want
to explain why I am opposed to many of the ideas of the democratic party. How can vouchers hurt students? It has
the student’s well being in mind by allowing them to attend better and safer schools.
I agree with you to a point that a better school means a better education. However parents and students can put forth
effort that can overcome even the worst of situations. Otherwise there wouldn’t be any success stories of individuals
making it out of the ghetto with the sacrifice of their parents and by working hard and studying their asses off. My
question to you is why can’t vouchers be used to help low income families or better yet why can’t the public education
system be forced to improve?
Can you at least agree with me on this?
man…i wanted to avoid this
but education, vouchers and private schools hits me hard
i can only speak from experience, i don’t know the national statistics and really i don’t care to, *edited* statistics. i know i’ve had a different experience then some, but why should i be so different. I went to normal public school till 2nd grade, then i went to a magnet school for 3-5, then a magnet middle school for 6-8. I went to my local high school rather than continuing with the IB program that was offered at another high school (my brother chose to continue his education that way, and it probably did well for him). Both of these high schools offered AP classes and my brother and I took advantage of them, i have about 12 hours of history classes alone along others, my brother went into college as a second semester sophomore i think, it was ridiculous. I feel that all schools should offer the opportunities that i was able to enjoy, and *edited*sux that it doesn’t happen much. Guess what? Teachers are paid *edited* when they first start, get very little help from the parents, especially in this culture of my son/daughter is fine, your *edited*ed, i can see why people aren’t very keen on being a teacher, i mean i’ve had some very good teachers and some bad ones, but rarely have i blamed my lack of performance in a class on the teacher. Other areas may not have the system set up to distribute the money effectively, i really doubt that vouchers are gonna be much better for everyone, supply and demand is gonna be fun. Wanna go to GoodFuture High? that’ll be 4,000 bucks, oh your voucher is only good for 1,500? gotta make up the difference yourself, What you can’t? ohhhh…enjoy AverageLearning High son…
Man i think time has come for america to man up on education, year round schools, AP classes, proper schools that have enough room, and what’s all this *edited* about computers? honestly anytime i have used a computer in class it has been less effective then when i used regular learning methods. If you want people to learn how to use one, then make computer apps 1 mandatory for all freshmen or something. Also it’s metric time *edited*ers, let’s do it.
METRIC
: )
that’s it, i’m done, back to lurking
Well, whatever we do, I know that constantly arguing, bickering, and not working together on anything will pretty much keep us right where we are.
I personally support the main idea, we got a lot of *edited* to fix so lets get started. I mean, agree to disagree and DO something. Something has to be done and decisions have to be made. We may not agree with all of them but its better than doing nothing.
potion#9 said:
Discuss.
he’s doing better than Mr. ‘Oh all that money you thought you had in Social Security? Yeah I blew that’
lockEm said:
With Obama in office, maybe the US will get on Canada’s level.our level of pwn
I doubt it.
Pink Monkey #5 said:
Did you really just say that it was our fault that terrorists hijacked 4 planes and killed several thousand innocent peoplebecause we somehow deserved it? Are you prepared to defend that to families of the victims? Please inform me how on
earth that was our fault…
Yes I did and I have defended this in front of people who were there and people whose families have died.
Yeah, living your lives, being better off than other people justifies the death of thousands of innocent people.
Pink Monkey #5 said:
I agree that there are a lot of crappy public schools out there. It should also be noted that yes aproper education is more determined by the school itself in grades K-8. However students should
be taking a more active role and taking charge of their education by choosing the harder classes.
Back to the issue of bad schools. Can anyone tell me why teachers shouldn’t receive payment based
upon the quality of teaching rather than how many years they have taught? Why is it that schools have
a hard time getting rid bad teachers? All these problems plague public schools because the teachers union
exists. The union cares not about education and the well being of the students. They care about keeping
students exclusively in public schools and keeping their jobs. Note: this is a broad generalization, however
this is a real problem with the public school system. Has anyone asked why students in private schools tend
to have greater success? It is because private schools tend to have better teachers. Why? Because they
are paid based upon their performance and bad apples can be gotten rid of. However one issue with private
schools is the tuition. Less fortunate families cannot afford this extra burden. But ahah! There is a solution.
This solution is called vouchers. Public schools receive a certain amount of tax money for each student enrolled.
Vouchers allow families to taken the tax money allotted to their child and apply it towards tuition for private school.
However the teachers unions are generally opposed to this measure because it takes away their student base.
The national teacher’s unions are large supporters of the democratic party. Thus democrats are usually opposed
to the idea of Vouchers. See the attached link.
http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-open-t…vouchers/71403/
Note that observers find it odd that a democrat would even be open to the idea of vouchers. However at one point he
was against vouchers stating that it wouldn’t help students or even be harmful. I don’t have the exact verbiage and
cannot find an article fill in the blanks. It should be noted that President Obama’s daughters are currently attending
a private school. This is representative of many democratic politicians. However this isn’t a democrat bash I just want
to explain why I am opposed to many of the ideas of the democratic party. How can vouchers hurt students? It has
the student’s well being in mind by allowing them to attend better and safer schools.
I agree with you to a point that a better school means a better education. However parents and students can put forth
effort that can overcome even the worst of situations. Otherwise there wouldn’t be any success stories of individuals
making it out of the ghetto with the sacrifice of their parents and by working hard and studying their asses off. My
question to you is why can’t vouchers be used to help low income families or better yet why can’t the public education
system be forced to improve?
Can you at least agree with me on this?
One thing that should be noted however, is that there are more than one teachers union, which could possibly be part of the problem. Don’t quote me on this yet, because I’m recalling it from a Political Science class I took a while back, but I recall a couple of the major groups often don’t agree with each others ideas.
I agree that vouchers should be allowed. But I can also see why the teacher’s unions are against it. Public school teachers don’t get paid squat. Yes for vouchers, and yes for raising teacher pay, and of course, with raising teachers pay we should also raise the expectations of those teachers. Teacher observation and assessment already occurs, but I believe there can be improvements on the critiques and requirements of our teachers.
I also agree that it is in the parents hands to help provide the opportunities that every child should have. But not every parent is a good parent. Parents that fail to put effort in their child’s future should be fined or thrown in jail.
lockEm said:
Yeah, living your lives, being better off than other people justifies the death of thousands of innocent people.That isn’t what I said. I am not going to defend myself on this one because you all have very different views on the subject matter than I do. You will all also bash what ever I have to say so on that note consider this my response.
YouWinGameOver said:
That isn’t what I said. I am not going to defend myself on this one because you all have very different views on the subject matter than I do. You will all also bash what ever I have to say so on that note consider this my response.That’s a bull*edited* answer and you know it. If you can defend that position in front of people who lost family members during the attack why is it so hard to defend it here? I would think this would be the less biased and more open minded of the two venues. The truth is that after all the smoke and dust settled, there is no sane reason to believe that we caused the attack. Some of the same people pushing that garbage out are the ones that later claimed the Bush was behind the attacks himself.
Southpark was dead on. “1/4 of the population is retarded.” Unfortunately that numbers seems to get larger every day.
As far as teachers go, they are getting EXACTLY what they deserve. I know it’s harsh but hear me out. No matter what market or industry it is, a union kills any hint or shred of fairness. Teachers don’t care because they don’t get paid to care. If teachers were paid based on their performance, instead of based on passing percentage and years “of service” you’d see alot more teachers trying to help their students to succeed by any means necessary. Yes the problem is usually the student, you can’t argue against that, but saying that poor schools are suffering because they can’t afford good teachers is stupid. They all get paid the same, the union ensures that. Throwing more money at schools doesn’t fix anything, I know this because I watched another high school where I live get tons of money and still not beat my high school in gratuation rates or EoC scores. They had more AP classes, some really nice labs, and even offered a Cisco certification class but parents still sent their kids to my school because our teachers were better. They kept increasing their budget until they realized money wasn’t the solution and redrew the district lines to send a sizable portion of public housing to my already 120% capacity school to “balance the opportunities and test scores of the county”. Oddly enough though sending them to the poorer school actually helped the students.
Four years later, the richer school still has declining scores while my school has about peaked at well above state and national averages.
rainefardreamer said:
Also it’s metric time *edited*ers, let’s do it.That is possibly the most amazing thing i’ve ever heard.
also, i must agree with masterp on this one. i would imagine it far easier and less daunting to try to convey your message over the internet than to the faces of the victims’ families. i would like to hear your argument for how we deserved 9/11.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.