[quote]apbt55 wrote:
oh and how many american public schools have you attended, or your children?[/quote]
None and to be honest I’m glad because Canadian schools have more government funding which have resulted in better facilities, lower high school dropout rates and more university graduates compared to the US. Crazy socialism up here 
[quote]AllieD wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]AllieD wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]AllieD wrote:
Boehner states in the interview that he wants to provide children with the same opportunity he had - to achieve the “American Dream.” He attended public school and paid his way through college during a time in the country when the public schools were comparatively some of the best in the world and college didn’t cost as much thanks to the government… if he continues to cut education more he is setting up the American children (who he gets so weepy over) up for failure. I’m sure he likes kids… he just likes bankers, tobacco companies and insurance CEOs more.
What is SAMA?[/quote]
This post makes no sense.
[/quote]
How so? I’m just saying all the nice stuff he talks about isn’t reflected in the polices he puts forward.[/quote]
Well he studied in a time where there was public education yes, but far less public financing and federal interfering.
If those kids are worse off now I do not think that even more money and/or regulation is the answer.
In fact he is a poster boy for what was possible before governments had their claws completely int the education system.
[/quote]
Actually he graduated from high school prior to Nixon taking office and slashing education funding. He went to school during the Kennedy years and was still reaping the benefits Roosevelt’s “socialism” not yet undone by later presidents (Nixon, Reagan, Bush).
There is far less funding in the education system now which is why American schools are quickly being ranked lower and lower every year… its pretty sad actually.
The only over the top government involvement I see in American schools is sarah palin insisting students learn about creationism as a scientific theory. [/quote]
The US spends more per student than practically everyone else.
If more money was the answer they should kick our collective butts, bu they never do, at least not education wise.
[quote]rageradios wrote:
Can you honestly say that poorly funded schools make better schools? I’m confused by the argument. I understand that obscene gov’t intervention isn’t good and clearly hasn’t functioned properly. Ted Kennedy said that NCLB was one of his greatest mistakes, but to not want there to be a tax paid public education system is insane. It’s an investment in the future, who do you think is going to paid you s.s and medicare if theres no functionally skilled workers?
As for “propagandist brainwashing babysitting service” maybe you should look in to the Texas board of Edu recent decisions to effectively change history, and add parts that blur or completely cross church and state separation lines. [/quote]
“Poorly funded schools” ?
There are kids in India right now who sit on rough wooden benches, 50 kids in a class, no swinmming pool, no drama club, no gasp!, highschool football and I guess they make do without a massage therapist too and yet they learn more in less time.
It is downright shocking what a lack of destractions can do to boost your productivity.
[quote]rageradios wrote:
Can you honestly say that poorly funded schools make better schools? I’m confused by the argument. I understand that obscene gov’t intervention isn’t good and clearly hasn’t functioned properly. Ted Kennedy said that NCLB was one of his greatest mistakes, but to not want there to be a tax paid public education system is insane. It’s an investment in the future, who do you think is going to paid you s.s and medicare if theres no functionally skilled workers?
As for “propagandist brainwashing babysitting service” maybe you should look in to the Texas board of Edu recent decisions to effectively change history, and add parts that blur or completely cross church and state separation lines. [/quote]
Yes and texas is an example of why it should be privately funded, so parents can have an influence into what their children learn.
I completely disagree with someone else being forced to pay for my children’s education, or the fact that I have to pay taxes to an institute with which I completely disagree on many levels giving my child sub par education and also pay for them to go to another school which will actually provide a descent education.
I completely disagree with Government running education. Some of the truancy laws and educational guidelines are absurd. The fact that they can arrest you for not conforming to their practices in education is a violation of rights.
I could go on and on, but am sick of being told by an oppressive rule what is right for me and my family.
[quote]AllieD wrote:
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
oh and how many american public schools have you attended, or your children?[/quote]
None and to be honest I’m glad because Canadian schools have more government funding which have resulted in better facilities, lower high school dropout rates and more university graduates compared to the US. Crazy socialism up here ;)[/quote]
Exactly, which the progressives both republican and democrat, are famous for in our country. Pouring money into failed institutes. And expecting us to just take it. Take them robbing and oppressing us, expecting us to not notice it is going on.
I think some of these people are in for a rude awakening in the next couple of years.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
[quote]rageradios wrote:
Can you honestly say that poorly funded schools make better schools? I’m confused by the argument. I understand that obscene gov’t intervention isn’t good and clearly hasn’t functioned properly. Ted Kennedy said that NCLB was one of his greatest mistakes, but to not want there to be a tax paid public education system is insane. It’s an investment in the future, who do you think is going to paid you s.s and medicare if theres no functionally skilled workers?
As for “propagandist brainwashing babysitting service” maybe you should look in to the Texas board of Edu recent decisions to effectively change history, and add parts that blur or completely cross church and state separation lines. [/quote]
Yes and texas is an example of why it should be privately funded, so parents can have an influence into what their children learn.
I completely disagree with someone else being forced to pay for my children’s education, or the fact that I have to pay taxes to an institute with which I completely disagree on many levels giving my child sub par education and also pay for them to go to another school which will actually provide a descent education.
I completely disagree with Government running education. Some of the truancy laws and educational guidelines are absurd. The fact that they can arrest you for not conforming to their practices in education is a violation of rights.
I could go on and on, but am sick of being told by an oppressive rule what is right for me and my family. [/quote]
You do not have to send your kid to a public school. There are private schools and homeschooling as an option as well.
[quote]AllieD wrote:
give the man a tissue[/quote]
Funny:)
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
[quote]AllieD wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]AllieD wrote:
Boehner states in the interview that he wants to provide children with the same opportunity he had - to achieve the “American Dream.” He attended public school and paid his way through college during a time in the country when the public schools were comparatively some of the best in the world and college didn’t cost as much thanks to the government… if he continues to cut education more he is setting up the American children (who he gets so weepy over) up for failure. I’m sure he likes kids… he just likes bankers, tobacco companies and insurance CEOs more.
What is SAMA?[/quote]
This post makes no sense.
[/quote]
How so? I’m just saying all the nice stuff he talks about isn’t reflected in the polices he puts forward.[/quote]
I tend to agree, he talking out two sides of his mouth. You are either for public education or against, you cannot be for it and cut spending. You can look for improvements, make it more efficient, but if you say you are for it, you should not cut spending right off the bat,
You could however, defund the budget, declare bankruptcy in the department, get rid of the unions and start over with the ability to higher based on skills and ability. Force the system to perform it’s main function, education. Not like the propagandist brainwashing babysitting service it has become.
That is if you believe in a tax paid public education system.
[/quote]
He can be for it and against it , he is a Republican:)