Riggo-toni Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Destino Thank god that their aren't many. Most Americans don't want 3rd world education systems in the United states. The Dept. of Education was formed in the late 70s by Carter as payback to the teacher's union for supporting him in the election. Since its inception, federal spending on education has skyrocketed, while dropout rates have soared and test scores have plummeted. My wife was a teacher and is now a vice principal. You want Liberal - she has pics of herself with both Hillary and Bill from when she worked on his gubernatorial campaign. She'll be the first to admit the Dept. of Ed does nothing for her school. Our secondary ed system is a joke amongst OECD countries. We spend more than twice as much as anyone else per student per year, for a year that is 2 months shorter, while an 8th grade S. Korean student gets as much math as the average MBA graduate. Stop believing the NEA hype that all our educational problems (or any of them, for that matter) stem from lack of funds. By the way, approx 90% of the cost of education is paid by local gov'ts, not the Dept of Ed or any other part of the federal gov't -ergo, eliminating it wouldn't plummet the country's youth into bankruptcy and ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama In our school district, the NEWEST school was made in the early 70's... we have 2 schools that are over 85 years old. We also have 4 over crowded high school, yet year after year, there is not enough money to replace schools. The cost of upkeep of our schools is a huge topic each year as well. How much of this is due to problems with builder's unions and such? Not pointing fingers at your statement - I'm genuinely curious. In NYC, for example, it costs more to build a new school than it does a luxury high-rise thanks to all the corruption and union rules. The problem therefore, is not really lack of money, but systemic corruption that no politician seems able or willing to take on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 And you think uneducated people are equipped to recognize and combat these problems? You think it's an accident the schools are kept bad? Let me ask you a question, how has the Department of Education improved education in this country? Test scores have fallen; discipline problems have risen to the point where teachers no longer feel safe( particularly in the inner city). Please spare me the lack of funding argument, spending on public education has skyrocketed since the 60's. It is no coincidence an increasing amount of federal intervention in our schools has led to detoriation, not improvement. Many parts of the third world, if anything, have over invested in education. Investment in education means nothing without a basic capital infrastructure (the ability to create jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities). The best and brightest of the third world are coming here, not staying in their country. Government is the enemy of the poor, not a friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Well put LuckyD. :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by luckydevil Let me ask you a question, how has the Department of Education improved education in this country? It wasn't created to improve it as much as police it and provide a little funding here and there. States are still the masters of their schools. Sadly our history has taught us that you can't trust everyone to do the right things as far as equally insuring quality education to all colors or to the poor. Originally posted by luckydevil Test scores have fallen; discipline problems have risen to the point where teachers no longer feel safe( particularly in the inner city). Please spare me the lack of funding argument, spending on public education has skyrocketed since the 60's. Lack of funding isn't the reason test scores have fallen, I've never said that. Expectations and discipline has been on the decline and that will always yield poorer results. Likewise the increasing need for two working parents and single parent families with one seriously over worked parent have led to decreases in parent involvment in their childs education. Originally posted by luckydevil Many parts of the third world, if anything, have over invested in education. Investment in education means nothing without a basic capital infrastructure (the ability to create jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities). The best and brightest of the third world are coming here, not staying in their country. Government is the enemy of the poor, not a friend. The best and brightest will always go to where they can best make use of ther talents. Change in the third world is slow but it doesn't happen on it's own, and an educated population doesn't hurt or hinder the process. If anything it may trigger it or at the very least encourage it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Art Well, it's just too bad we aren't providing enough money to schools and all. I mean, the budget crunch is so dire, we can leave money unspent until we make a threat to take it back. This is what liberals do people. They pretend they don't have enough while not even utilizing the full amount they do have so we continue to foot higher bills for less meaningful items. Um, this is what EVERYBODY does. One constant complaint you'll hear from lobbyists who get federal funds for clients such as cities, counties, transit authorities, etc. is that they never access the funds that were appropriated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Brown 43 Art, I agree! In my Town, there are 20 assistant Supervisors for my school district! A little much! Art, is your political website ready yet? Nah. Going for a live launch around the election. My hope is to violate campaign finance laws in some way . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Riggotoni How much of this is due to problems with builder's unions and such? Not pointing fingers at your statement - I'm genuinely curious. In NYC, for example, it costs more to build a new school than it does a luxury high-rise thanks to all the corruption and union rules. The problem therefore, is not really lack of money, but systemic corruption that no politician seems able or willing to take on. They don't even get as far as builder's unions. The money is the deciding factor right now. I'm actually on one of the commitees becuase of transportation issues involving zoneing and such if a new school were built. They just don't have enough money to consider it. We just recently had a closed hospital donated to us but after inspection, it would have cost more money to "transform" the building into a school. We just got a new superintendant, and we are trying for some grants, but no luck as of yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Thank god that their aren't many. Most Americans don't want 3rd world education systems in the United states. Ooooooooeeewwww scary!!! Typical Liberal scare tactic. Have you just ignored the fact that third world countries education system's poor performance is the result of economic factors and corrupt goverments filling their coffers and ignoring the school systems? It's the exact opposite here... they're flush with money and they hide it so they can scream "poor pitiful us" and get more money to the budget next year. Additionally, the funds go to pay ignorant administrators and incompetent teachers at the expense of the children. Please NOTE: I'm not saying all administrators and teachers are the problem... but I think we've all read enough articles on derelict administrators and indifferent teachers to realize there is an issue present. The education system in this country has gotten worse from it's inception. High school kids today can barely fill out job applications and write in complete sentences. More money isn't going to solve the problem until the administrative corruption, read liberal slanted "protect our own" school systems, is eliminated and this country's education system is privatized or morphed into charter programs. Finally.. it's the Left's championed "polictical correctness" that further dumbs down the public school system. Don't want to offend someone struggling in the classroom so let's slow the whole class down so those "struggling" don't feel uncomfortable and alienated. The result? Bored and unchallenged kids becoming disinterested in school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNumberOne Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by luckydevil Let me ask you a question, how has the Department of Education improved education in this country? Test scores have fallen; discipline problems have risen to the point where teachers no longer feel safe( particularly in the inner city). Please spare me the lack of funding argument, spending on public education has skyrocketed since the 60's. It is no coincidence an increasing amount of federal intervention in our schools has led to detoriation, not improvement. Many parts of the third world, if anything, have over invested in education. Investment in education means nothing without a basic capital infrastructure (the ability to create jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities). The best and brightest of the third world are coming here, not staying in their country. Government is the enemy of the poor, not a friend. On the surface, this logic is sensible, but when you think about it a little more it appears, perhaps, disingenuous. I doubt it was on purpose though. That kind of government is the enemy of the poor? No, the government that equips its "poor" to succeed in other countries would not be an enemy of it. It would be a friend, it would seem. Instead, that government would be hurting itself in the long term, since in theory it would like to keep its brightest citizens in-country. Of course, that doesn't account for expatriate investment back into their homeland, which may alleviate some of the pain of losing some of your best and brightest. As pointed out by others, if the "third world" place has a fledgling economy, then it will still lose many of its best and brightest to America. Of course, the stronger the economy for the third world nation, the less likely its educated will leave it behind for better opportunities. Still, regardless I would hardly say the government that equips its poor for success (even if the success occurs elsewhere) is the poor's enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 All I want to know is if DC Public schools is sitting on ANY money whatsoever. Because if they are... :cuss: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.