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.
Where do you come up with this crap that "schools spend too much already"? I've been through the Houston ISD budget line by line for the last 12 years, and there was no fat there at all, certainly not enough to make up for the $100 million plus in Title 1 funds the district gets(that sounds like a lot, but there are 215,00 or more students). The result is having to get waivers to have 35 kids in kindergarten and elementary classes, which is ridiculous - you can't effectively teach that many kids of that age with a single teacher. The administration has been downsized continuously, making it difficult for some functions to get everything done - the bills still have to be paid and the reports required by state law still have to be filed on the deadline. Maintenance is deferred, libraries eliminated, nurses cover 5 schools.
It's obvious you have no clue how to run schools.
Total BS. We regularly had 35 students in each class in the 1960s in K-8 and our national achievement test scores were much higher than they are now.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,610,214 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
"Public schools and government in general spend too much money and always want more"
All 1 has to do is look at their bloated bureaucracies.
You have no understanding of the organization of the labor market. Most people are going to be at the lower end of the scale, only so many owners and professionals are needed, most have to be the workers
The "general welfare" portion of that covers the disbursement of funds.
Let's take a look at what the US Constitution actually says, not what you wish it says.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Notice the difference in the words used? "Provide for" is entirely different from "promote." The Fed Gov is supposed to "provide for" the common defense. However, there is no authority in the Constitution for the Fed Gov to "provide for" the general welfare. All that is necessary is to "promote" it. So all social program spending can be scrapped and the Fed Gov can just cut a PSA or two to "promote" the general welfare. Done and 100% Constitutionally sound.
You have no understanding of the organization of the labor market. Most people are going to be at the lower end of the scale, only so many owners and professionals are needed, most have to be the workers
Is that why half of my mom's coworkers in a federal agency can't operate a Teams call when they're in a white-collar role that requires extensive use of technology, and they're the ones being paid the most? She said if you got rid of those idiots you could hire 3x the juniors or get the same work done at a third of the cost.
I'm all for having workers but one of the minimum qualifications for the job is the ability to use the tools required to do the job.
It's called deflection. Congress cannot live within their budget and it's rich people's fault ?
Economic laws were written for the rich, and it's still not their fault.
I don't see why the rich would oppose a Constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget.
But I imagine some would oppose term limits, or banning payoffs; known as campaign contributions.
Economic laws were written for the rich, and it's still not their fault. I don't see why the rich would oppose a Constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. But I imagine some would oppose term limits, or banning payoffs; known as campaign contributions.
The balanced budget requirement would have to come with strict limits on taxation, otherwise they'd just tax their way to a balanced budget.
Total BS. We regularly had 35 students in each class in the 1960s in K-8 and our national achievement test scores were much higher than they are now.
No, you did not have 35 kids in K-8. that's a misrememebring. And, you almost certainly went to a school where all the kids were middle class whites. Try having 35 kids in any urban school today, and it will be a disaster. State law in Texas limits elementary school classes to 22, because that's the most one teacher can reasonably handle. But, since the State refuses to fund schools properly, Houston ISD has waivers to have 25 to 27. This has caused issues with achievement, and prevents teachers from providing one on one help to students that need it.
Let's take a look at what the US Constitution actually says, not what you wish it says.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Notice the difference in the words used? "Provide for" is entirely different from "promote." The Fed Gov is supposed to "provide for" the common defense. However, there is no authority in the Constitution for the Fed Gov to "provide for" the general welfare. All that is necessary is to "promote" it. So all social program spending can be scrapped and the Fed Gov can just cut a PSA or two to "promote" the general welfare. Done and 100% Constitutionally sound.
That's the preamble, which explains why the Constitution was created. Let's look at Article 1, Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Notice, provide for the common defence and general welfare? You didn't read the relevant words, did you?
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,610,214 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat
Just when do the poor say, "okay, I'll start paying some taxes"?
Same time.
Poor don't have disposable income with which to pay taxes, you can't get blood from a stone
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.
