Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I am elected president I will get our troops out of Afghanistan that will be the first thing I'll do you can take that to the bank. That lie is okay?
Killing 175 Pakistani children with his drones do anything for those families values?
Clean up your own house, it's filthy.
What the hell are you talking about? Obama campaigned in 2008 on getting out of Iraq and refocusing on Afghsnistan an Al Qaeda.
Tell us where you are getting the information about HeadStart being successful. As I have said, I have talked to teachers; they say, HeadStart kids enter kindergarten ahead of kids in similar enviornment but by third grade they are at the same level as those who have not had any early education. I guess it depends on whether you pay attention to reports and studies or pay more attention to those involved in a situation.
And by the way I do not want to starve anyone, Heck I work (volunteer) helping those in need. Dont' try and tell me what I do and do not want to do? I am sure you give hours a week to volunteering helping those who need help, right?
You've exactly proven my point - Head Start does work but if the resources to sustain them aren't there - it doesn't mean that Head Start is a failure.
Excerpts:
The focus on the so-called ‘drop-off’ in elementary years is based solely on cognitive achievement, which data shows is less than half the equation for success. It also overlooks the fact that many Head Start children move from a nurturing early education environment into low quality elementary schools. … Yet, throughout the course of their education and lives, Head Start graduates tend to be more persistent in their education, more inclined to healthy behaviors and less inclined to be involved in criminal activity. Early Head Start and Head Start are programs on which to build and improve—not to cut. ”
A raft of long-term studies of Head Start reaches the same conclusion: Head Start students graduate from high school, go to college and get jobs at higher rates than their at-risk peers who do not experience early childhood education. The fact is that Head Start does work for a vast majority of children.
As for charity and volunteerism, I commend you. However, if you are suggesting that charities can substitute for social programs, that is a myth. Americans would have to make at least 10 times the donations they currently give to charity to fully replace government social spending. And there is no reason to believe that people who so bitterly hate paying taxes would gladly surrender an equal amount to charity. Arguments that charities can do the job better than government are naïve - most charities are small, highly localized and ill-suited to responding to national disasters or shifting economic trends. About 90 percent of charity funds are both collected and spent locally, which means that rich communities tend to have well-funded charities, and poor communities tend to have poorly funded ones. For this reason, only 10 percent of all charitable donations are directed to the poor. Re-allocating charity donations to the communities that need them most will incur intense political opposition from the communities that fund them.
You've exactly proven my point - Head Start does work but if the resources to sustain them aren't there - it doesn't mean that Head Start is a failure.
Excerpts:
The focus on the so-called ‘drop-off’ in elementary years is based solely on cognitive achievement, which data shows is less than half the equation for success. It also overlooks the fact that many Head Start children move from a nurturing early education environment into low quality elementary schools. … Yet, throughout the course of their education and lives, Head Start graduates tend to be more persistent in their education, more inclined to healthy behaviors and less inclined to be involved in criminal activity. Early Head Start and Head Start are programs on which to build and improve—not to cut. ”
A raft of long-term studies of Head Start reaches the same conclusion: Head Start students graduate from high school, go to college and get jobs at higher rates than their at-risk peers who do not experience early childhood education. The fact is that Head Start does work for a vast majority of children.
As for charity and volunteerism, I commend you. However, if you are suggesting that charities can substitute for social programs, that is a myth. Americans would have to make at least 10 times the donations they currently give to charity to fully replace government social spending. And there is no reason to believe that people who so bitterly hate paying taxes would gladly surrender an equal amount to charity. Arguments that charities can do the job better than government are naïve - most charities are small, highly localized and ill-suited to responding to national disasters or shifting economic trends. About 90 percent of charity funds are both collected and spent locally, which means that rich communities tend to have well-funded charities, and poor communities tend to have poorly funded ones. For this reason, only 10 percent of all charitable donations are directed to the poor. Re-allocating charity donations to the communities that need them most will incur intense political opposition from the communities that fund them.
ok, so you want to see Head Start continue forever with these kids? Are you suggesting they spend extra time before or after school in these programs? Do you really think these kids, especially the inner city kids are going to buy that for one second? We are not talking after school child care programs for working parents? That is a totally different topic..
As for paying taxes, no one has ever suggested not paying taxes or shutting off all government programs. I don't know where libs get their ideas. We all know there has always been a need for some public assistance and there will always be that need, we are talking about wasted money, programs that are not successful, programs that encourage dependency on the government and we realize there is only so much money available.
Obviously you see this from one side and I see it from another, we will just have to agree to disagree.
ok, so you want to see Head Start continue forever with these kids? Are you suggesting they spend extra time before or after school in these programs? Do you really think these kids, especially the inner city kids are going to buy that for one second? We are not talking after school child care programs for working parents? That is a totally different topic..
As for paying taxes, no one has ever suggested not paying taxes or shutting off all government programs. I don't know where libs get their ideas. We all know there has always been a need for some public assistance and there will always be that need, we are talking about wasted money, programs that are not successful, programs that encourage dependency on the government and we realize there is only so much money available.
Obviously you see this from one side and I see it from another, we will just have to agree to disagree.
Your comment on Head Start is characteristic of the slippery slope argument.
As for taxes, you probably haven't met too many libertarians who think taxes are theft (I have). And you might not have heard of Marvin Olasky who has recommended charities to serve in place of government programs - I am referring to that in my posts. President Bush (the son) actually had a stab at trying to get faith-based charities into the act (for a short while).
What the hell are you talking about? Obama campaigned in 2008 on getting out of Iraq and refocusing on Afghsnistan an Al Qaeda.
lol I keep doing that. I meant Iraq. (Funny how I don't get called on that. You may be the first.)
It went from right away, to ~20 months, to ~30 then he basically used Bushes timetable and it took 3 years.
Well, a lot of GOP politicians love to talk about how much they love the family, and preach family values, but do little to support policies that actually help families - such as funding for schools and health care.
"Sure, they're "pro-life." They believe life begins at conception and ends at birth."
Don't look to politicians to run your life.
We spend a ton on educating children in the public sector yet those in the private sector with less funding per student receive a better education.
Politicians don't care about health care costs. Since government has been involved costs have sky rocketed.
lol I keep doing that. I meant Iraq. (Funny how I don't get called on that. You may be the first.)
It went from right away, to ~20 months, to ~30 then he basically used Bushes timetable and it took 3 years.
It was never going to be right away, you are making things up yet again. The plan from the start was a 18 month or so drawdown.
Only a idiot would see democrats speaking of issues as "race-bating".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
