thoughts on education cuts? (Beaver, Penn: appointed, employment, cost)

[ML North]

Originally Posted by hempfield mania

Nope, just a typical liberal that can't handle the truth!

Spend, spend, spend....keep on spending, lets spend some more...ok, time to go home for the day...

I'm calling for the moderator because this thread is full of fallacies and belligerent arguing and has been irrecoverably derailed from the original topic (regrettably I've partially contributed to this). No one needs to hear about some shrub paying $14,000 in property taxes for the ninth time.

I voted for Corbett, and support spending cuts including some to education funding, but this has been a circus that I would love to see end.

[BrianTH]

Just a random note, but one of the interesting contrasts between professions like doctors and lawyers versus teachers is that doctors and lawyers tend to have long periods in their career when they are near their peak compensation, whereas teachers tend to approach peak compensation only right at the end. So, doctors and lawyers are making even more in relative terms than a comparison of peak salaries would imply, because they spend so much longer at or near their peak compensation.

[Copanut]

Originally Posted by ML North

I'm calling for the moderator because this thread is full of fallacies and belligerent arguing and has been irrecoverably derailed from the original topic (regrettably I've partially contributed to this).

Sheesh, grow a pair.

[ex-burgher]

Never thought I'd be capable of starting a thread that goes on for 28 pages!

[hempfield mania]

Originally Posted by ex-burgher

Never thought I'd be capable of starting a thread that goes on for 28 pages!

Awesome, isn't it? Sure makes the time go by quicker....

[gg]

Originally Posted by hempfield mania

Nope, just a typical liberal that can't handle the truth! .

I always get a kick out of people that say something like "typical liberal" and talk about spending money. Guess you weren't around for the bankrupting bush 8 years of pure... well you can fill in the blank. Labeling "liberal" and "conservative", has become more and more silly and the words pretty much are meaningless.

[Yac]

The moderator believes you are all adults and in theory, are capable of handling small things yourself. The moderator is also lurking around in case things stop being so small. Finally, you wouldn't want the moderator to step in too often, you'd call him a nazi or some other silly name
Yac.

[Aqua Teen Carl]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Labeling "liberal" and "conservative", has become more and more silly and the words pretty much are meaningless.

Agreed. When I see people going back and forth calling each other "LIBERAL!!!" and "CONSERVATIVE!!!!" it makes me think how much better this country would be if we weren't so damn divided. The worst part is that the population divides themselves from one another on a voluntary basis.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by Aqua Teen Carl

When I see people going back and forth calling each other "LIBERAL!!!" and "CONSERVATIVE!!!!" it makes me think how much better this country would be if we weren't so damn divided. The worst part is that the population divides themselves from one another on a voluntary basis.

I think you're in very good company - many Americans feel the same. I think partisan difference is a good and necessary aspect of modern democracy, and without partisan division it wouldn't be possible to conduct the sort of serious debate on public issues which a proper democracy requires.

Political parties among the other English-speaking peoples generally have clear ideological positions which are expressed concretely in election manifestos and in turn are generally converted into actual legislative agendas laid out in the opening session of a new legislature (the "Throne Speech").

The problem here is that the ideological distinction between these American catchwords "liberal" and "conservative" isn't very clear or meaningful, in part because the parties which are generally associated with these weak ideologies are vague "big tent" collections of interest or tendency rather than political movements in the usual sense. This in turn, I think, derives from the retarded constitutional development of the U.S.

Division in and of itself is what democracy is about. What makes division invidious is when it turns more on veiled self-interest than ideas about the public good.

[BrianTH]

It also doesn't help that the structure and practice of our federal government often gives the the current minority party a lot of power to obstruct action. In most countries, the majority party basically has complete control over policy and can be held responsible for the results. In our system, a minority party can more or less deliberately screw things up, and then hope the voters will blame the majority party for the outcome.