Is cutting education a good idea???

[presluc]

it's not "tax revenue" it's greed.

Ah Hell, back to this again.

Ok forget about trying to keep this thread on track.
Discuss what you will ask what you will.

As for tax revenue being greed?
Tax revenue comes from workers paychecks not much today.
Greed , well check the top 10% that where the majority of money is.

 

[presluc]

the same could be said about the pension funds and social security we need to audit them and make sure the money is being spent in the right (or left lol) place.

Did you want to have that audit before 2000 or after 2008?

Perhaps check who got a raise in Wisconsin politics while teachers salary gets cut?

 

[presluc]

Well, that question cannot be answered "yes" or "no" until certain terms are defined.

What is meant by "education"?

Is it meant the effective infusion into the young of the ideas, facts, and valid conclusions from the fields of math, science, economics, history, art, literature, and music that form the basis of Western civilization in general and the United States in particular so the graduating student has the skills to participate in the economic and political discourse of the nation as a confident and self-supporting individual? Or are you referring to the modern practice of minimizing the acquisition of practical skills and relevant knowledge in preference to brainwashing and conformity to left-wing dogma?

Again, is "progress" moving in the direction the Progressives wish the nation to go, or does it mean ensuring the people have their freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness not impeded by an intrusive government determined to seize power not authorized by the Constitution and thereby driving the nation into the receeivership of foreign nations to pay the unsustainable debt?


A properly educated America is an America able to resist the demands of the left for unearned wealth, for unconstitutional spending, for a return to serfdom.

Not to mention the fact that under the Constitution the states, not the federal government, are the sole providers of educational funding in their state.

So, my answer is an unequivocal "yes".

Well I was going to respond point for point on your post until I got to a certain phrase you stated.

"A properly educated American is an American able to resist the "demands" of the left for unearned wealth?"

Let me get this straight are you saying the educated Americans are all Republicans aka the "right"???

If it is as you say American educated is an American able to resist the demands of the "left" for unearned wealth.
Then perhaps you could answer a small question
Why in the Hell are Republican "right" governors cutting education???

 

[presluc]

Hear hear...spot on

Well first I do not support Obama's insirance ad ...er I mean health care bill.

However although the left side has made their mistakes.
The left side ask for more jobs the right more outsourceing.
The right believe in the trickle down theory the left believe in work job get money now.

To date the right and some lefts has supported outsourceing, small business tax cuts for the rich, bailouts, budget cuts for the middle and working poor and poor class.
How's that working out for America today?
I mean where is America economy wise today now????

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Ah yes, I forgot that anyone who isn't Conservative to the point of absurdity MUST be extremely liberal.

As someone who lives in a college town whose college was voted #1 by high times, I can tell you with certainty you have NO idea where the middle of the spectrum lies.

More importantly, any honest assessment of the positions of McCain and Bush over their whole careers must conclude that those men are driving in Japan or England, not in the United States, and that's independent of the feelings of those who also drive on the left but can't see past the "R" some lefties wear, like Bush and McCain.

NO ONE who supports "amnesty" or in modern euphemism "comprehensive immigration reform" is on or in the right. They're leftists and they're wrong.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Its hard for me to discuss cutting the little we spend on education while ignoring that we waste so much more on needless wars and military occupations around the world.

The following numbers come from usgovernmentspending.com

$750B Pensions
$821B Health Care
$847B Defense
$140B Education
$196B Interest
$502B Welfare

Of the above, only Defense and pensions are Constitutional.

The interest payments wouldn't exist if the government wasn't spending $2213 billion out of $3060 billion on items the Constitution does not permit under Article I, Secion 8.

No, Education is not a Constitutionally valid expense. Read Jefferson's sixth State of the Union address. He admitted that federally funding for education was not Constitutional and requested Congress pass an amendment authorizing it. The amendment was not written, it was not ratified, Jefferson's Congress did not allocate funds for public education. Since it was unconstitutional then, it's unconstitutional now.

As for the wars, well, the Leftist Bush dragged us into Iraq. We should never have bothered with that place the second time. Now our president is dragging us into a third war, this time in Libya, where all sides hate the US. That's not reflected in the numbers. But, basically, your argument was really nothing but a non-sequitur anyway. If federal funding for education were Constitutional, the debate would be properly over how much should be spent or cut. Since the federal government not allowed to fund education, the argument is moot. Federal education dollars should be cut by 100.00000% until such time as it becomes lawful for the federal government to allocate funds in that manner.

Mayor Snorkum would expect that if the Constitution were obeyed, there would be an amendment passed and ratified in short time allowing federal funding of education.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Well I was going to respond point for point on your post until I got to a certain phrase you stated.

"A properly educated American is an American able to resist the "demands" of the left for unearned wealth?"

Let me get this straight are you saying the educated Americans are all Republicans aka the "right"???

If it is as you say American educated is an American able to resist the demands of the "left" for unearned wealth.
Then perhaps you could answer a small question
Why in the Hell are Republican "right" governors cutting education???

No. A properly educated American is aware that "American" isn't a political party, and that Republicans are only slightly less desirous of harming the nation if by doing so they can acquire political power. There were enough Americans, both Republican and Democrat, in the House to stop continued efforts by Bush, backed by McCain, to grant amnesty to invaders from the southern border, for example. For the most part those ..ummm..PEOPLE! in Congress don't act like Americans, sometimes they do.

One time the US Senate acted like Americans and rejected the Kyoto Treaty by a vote of 98-0 against.

Another time the US Senate decided to not be Americans and ratified START II.

For politicians the urges are transient and the only definable motivation for any elected official is money, power, and perks. What's good for America is coincidental to those drives.

But, for real Americans who aren't disgusting enough to run for elected office, there's ummm...PEOPLE! who want freebies, and who vote almost exclusively Democrat or Green or some such silliness, and there's some few who vote Republican becuase they work in a defense or space sector, too. And then there's the Americans who are voting to get government out of the trick and treat game of politics today, who don't want gifts paid for by taxes on themselves or their children, and who want what the original Americans wanted in 1776, to be left alone to live their own lives with minimal government intrusion.

THOSE are the Americans. Damn few Republicans in that batch.

A properly educated American doesn't swallow the stereotypes presented by the myth-makers of the two halve of the One-Party.

 

[maquiscat]

The left side ask for more jobs the right more outsourceing.

Both side are advocating for more jobs and both sides are claiming the other is killing them. I've never heard any "right winger" asking that more jobs be outsourced. Could you provide a concrete example? Best I can see is that the public in general is asking for lower prices on products. Since there is a minimum wage, plus required insurance, plus taxes (both worker and business) here then to lower the cost of creating the product is to outsource in order to compete with those sources already outside of the US. Basically, the public wants its cake (domestic production) with icing (minimum wages and legally required benefits) and to eat it too (lower prices than foreign competition)

The right believe in the trickle down theory the left believe in work job get money now.

Ok the sentence structure is terrible here (and in most of the post). Please try again in proper English grammer AND mechanics.

small business tax cuts for the rich,

You realize that phrase is practically an oxymoron yes? Very few small business owners are "rich" except for how it looks on paper. Since all the business revenue is reported on the owner's personal income, what the owner actually takes home to live on and what is used for the business are mixed together. The business may do well over the $250,000 mark (that seems to be the magical number of "richness" lately) but the owner may only be able to take home an annual personal income of $40k to $75K.

 

[Catawba]

The following numbers come from usgovernmentspending.com

$750B Pensions
$821B Health Care
$847B Defense
$140B Education
$196B Interest
$502B Welfare

Our unending "war on terror" - $3 trillion and counting!!!

 

[presluc]

The following numbers come from usgovernmentspending.com

$750B Pensions
$821B Health Care
$847B Defense
$140B Education
$196B Interest
$502B Welfare

Of the above, only Defense and pensions are Constitutional.

The interest payments wouldn't exist if the government wasn't spending $2213 billion out of $3060 billion on items the Constitution does not permit under Article I, Secion 8.

No, Education is not a Constitutionally valid expense. Read Jefferson's sixth State of the Union address. He admitted that federally funding for education was not Constitutional and requested Congress pass an amendment authorizing it. The amendment was not written, it was not ratified, Jefferson's Congress did not allocate funds for public education. Since it was unconstitutional then, it's unconstitutional now.

As for the wars, well, the Leftist Bush dragged us into Iraq. We should never have bothered with that place the second time. Now our president is dragging us into a third war, this time in Libya, where all sides hate the US. That's not reflected in the numbers. But, basically, your argument was really nothing but a non-sequitur anyway. If federal funding for education were Constitutional, the debate would be properly over how much should be spent or cut. Since the federal government not allowed to fund education, the argument is moot. Federal education dollars should be cut by 100.00000% until such time as it becomes lawful for the federal government to allocate funds in that manner.

Mayor Snorkum would expect that if the Constitution were obeyed, there would be an amendment passed and ratified in short time allowing federal funding of education.

How about the US SPENDING FOR AIG, GMC,3PM EXXON

Perhaps I missed the part of the constitution where it says bailout PRIVATE corporations so CEO'S get bonuss?

Perhaps if an amendment were passed just a few yrs ago we would have federal funding for education today.

 

[presluc]

No. A properly educated American is aware that "American" isn't a political party, and that Republicans are only slightly less desirous of harming the nation if by doing so they can acquire political power. There were enough Americans, both Republican and Democrat, in the House to stop continued efforts by Bush, backed by McCain, to grant amnesty to invaders from the southern border, for example. For the most part those ..ummm..PEOPLE! in Congress don't act like Americans, sometimes they do.

One time the US Senate acted like Americans and rejected the Kyoto Treaty by a vote of 98-0 against.

Another time the US Senate decided to not be Americans and ratified START II.

For politicians the urges are transient and the only definable motivation for any elected official is money, power, and perks. What's good for America is coincidental to those drives.

But, for real Americans who aren't disgusting enough to run for elected office, there's ummm...PEOPLE! who want freebies, and who vote almost exclusively Democrat or Green or some such silliness, and there's some few who vote Republican becuase they work in a defense or space sector, too. And then there's the Americans who are voting to get government out of the trick and treat game of politics today, who don't want gifts paid for by taxes on themselves or their children, and who want what the original Americans wanted in 1776, to be left alone to live their own lives with minimal government intrusion.

THOSE are the Americans. Damn few Republicans in that batch.

A properly educated American doesn't swallow the stereotypes presented by the myth-makers of the two halve of the One-Party.

George W. Bush at one time wanted to turn over America's port security to Dubai a company known to deal with terrorist.
Not the brightest move for a president since America was at war with Terrorist at the time. messed up
Nixon Watergate, need I say more messed up
Reagan trickle down theory, need I say more. messed up

As for the Democrats just to show I show no favorvitism
Johnson Viet Nam enough said messed up
Carter wimp, indecisive, Iran messed up
Clinton Nafta still realing from that deal messed up.

So in the real world Republican , Democrat, even Independent all have been known to screw up all are human.
The key is when they start screwing up stop them ASAP.

An educated person does not follow the crowd either.
True intellectuals look at actions not people or parties.eace

 

[presluc]

The left side ask for more jobs the right more outsourceing.

Both side are advocating for more jobs and both sides are claiming the other is killing them. I've never heard any "right winger" asking that more jobs be outsourced. Could you provide a concrete example? Best I can see is that the public in general is asking for lower prices on products. Since there is a minimum wage, plus required insurance, plus taxes (both worker and business) here then to lower the cost of creating the product is to outsource in order to compete with those sources already outside of the US. Basically, the public wants its cake (domestic production) with icing (minimum wages and legally required benefits) and to eat it too (lower prices than foreign competition)



Ok the sentence structure is terrible here (and in most of the post). Please try again in proper English grammer AND mechanics.



You realize that phrase is practically an oxymoron yes? Very few small business owners are "rich" except for how it looks on paper. Since all the business revenue is reported on the owner's personal income, what the owner actually takes home to live on and what is used for the business are mixed together. The business may do well over the $250,000 mark (that seems to be the magical number of "richness" lately) but the owner may only be able to take home an annual personal income of $40k to $75K.

Well, maybe the right didn't ask for mre outsourceing but GMC outsourced a lot.
When GMC. ask for money who approved it?
I remind you sir this was in Sept. 2008 the veto power was still in effect.

My bad I'll rephrase.
Left pay as you go, the right WELL?

Yes I realize that phrase is a oxymoron.
My question is why doesn't the right Republicans know this?
They keep talking about small business , but they keep giveing bailouts and money to big business.
Small business loans today , think red tape, lots of red tape.
Yet AIG, GMC and the other big business says our profits are down and presto they get money, taxpayer money.
Hell, even when Exxon had record profits a Republcan government gave them more money, taxpayer money
So you tell me what is the real oxymoron here???

 

[mac]

George W. Bush at one time wanted to turn over America's port security to Dubai a company known to deal with terrorist.
Not the brightest move for a president since America was at war with Terrorist at the time. messed up
Nixon Watergate, need I say more messed up
Reagan trickle down theory, need I say more. messed up

As for the Democrats just to show I show no favorvitism
Johnson Viet Nam enough said messed up
Carter wimp, indecisive, Iran messed up
Clinton Nafta still realing from that deal messed up.

So in the real world Republican , Democrat, even Independent all have been known to screw up all are human.
The key is when they start screwing up stop them ASAP.

An educated person does not follow the crowd either.
True intellectuals look at actions not people or parties.eace

Dubai is an Emirate...part of the UAE, dude, not a company. Can you go get some of that education and learn how to write?

 

[presluc]

Dubai is an Emirate...part of the UAE, dude, not a company. Can you go get some of that education and learn how to write?

Ok, my mistake .

If Bush had his way and granted port security to Dubai the Emirate would it have been good for America??

I do not think so

If you do perhaps you could drop a E-mail to the CIA stateing this.

 

[mac]

Ok, my mistake .

If Bush had his way and granted port security to Dubai the Emirate would it have been good for America??

I do not think so

If you do perhaps you could drop a E-mail to the CIA stateing this.

Actually what happened was a company put in a bid to provide the port security for the US...when it was found out to be a foreign owned company, the bid was refused. You're partisanship is clouding your history.

 

[maquiscat]

My bad I'll rephrase.
Left pay as you go, the right WELL?

Every right wing pundit I hear is talking about how the gov't needs to be running its budget as if it were a business or a household. And while the left talks about how the budget is out of control, I don't see much being forwarded except for military even as the pres throws more troops around the world.

I am personally tired of them both.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Our unending "war on terror" - $3 trillion and counting!!!

yeah, that's the way to refute a factual post that shreds your argument, say something irrelevant.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

How about the US SPENDING FOR AIG, GMC,3PM EXXON

Perhaps I missed the part of the constitution where it says bailout PRIVATE corporations so CEO'S get bonuss?

Perhaps if an amendment were passed just a few yrs ago we would have federal funding for education today.

You also missed the part where Mayor Snorkum promotes corporate welfare.

Oh.

Wait.

Mayor Snorkum doesn't support welfare in any form. So you're just stumped with the terrible facts I presented and wanted to punt the hockey puck.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

George W. Bush at one time wanted to turn over America's port security to Dubai a company known to deal with terrorist.

The actions of that left of center politician regarding his flawed national security policy is relevant to the discussion of federal funding for education in what way?

Not the brightest move for a president since America was at war with Terrorist at the time. messed up

Mayor Snorkum has always been pleased he didn't vote for that lefty.

Nixon Watergate, need I say more messed up

Yes, another leftist.

Reagan trickle down theory, need I say more. messed up

Well, there you're wrong, but if you weren't wrong you'd stay closer to the topic, now wouldn't you?

The correct term is "supply side economics", and it never failed. GHW Bush took us off that program to have his war in the Gulf.

An educated person does not follow the crowd either.

What if the ball game is over?

Educated people seek ways to puncture silly metaphors.

True intellectuals look at actions not people or parties.eace

True intellectuals understand that parties are groups of people and groups of people don't have intelligence, they have herd instincts. Then they examine the relevant facts and discover that someone's whining about the size of the military budget is merely a cover for their ignorance of the relative sizes of the major budget items and the legality of those items as defined by the Constitution.

Can it be said that Mayor Snorkum supports a cut in education funding when Mayor Snorkum understands that the federal government isn't Constitutionally allowed to spend one penny on education in the first place? The states, thay have the lawful authority to spend on the education of their residents as they see fit, and the federal government has no authority to set either basement spending levels for the states or to define the curricula in the various states.

A true intellectual understands the concept of federalism.

 

[presluc]

Actually what happened was a company put in a bid to provide the port security for the US...when it was found out to be a foreign owned company, the bid was refused. You're partisanship is clouding your history.

History, Bush supported this bill, in an era of no bid contracts.
That would make anybody sweat.

You do remember what Bush said about the Iraq mess," bad intelligence"?

 

[presluc]

Every right wing pundit I hear is talking about how the gov't needs to be running its budget as if it were a business or a household. And while the left talks about how the budget is out of control, I don't see much being forwarded except for military even as the pres throws more troops around the world.

I am personally tired of them both.

You're preaching to the choir, man I changed to Independent a few months ago.

 

[presluc]

You also missed the part where Mayor Snorkum promotes corporate welfare.

Oh.

Wait.

Mayor Snorkum doesn't support welfare in any form. So you're just stumped with the terrible facts I presented and wanted to punt the hockey puck.

Tell me, did Mayor Snorkum ever find those WMDS in Iraq, maybe the uhh Smoking gun or the uhh Mushroom Cloud???

 

[presluc]

The actions of that left of center politician regarding his flawed national security policy is relevant to the discussion of federal funding for education in what way?



Mayor Snorkum has always been pleased he didn't vote for that lefty.



Yes, another leftist.



Well, there you're wrong, but if you weren't wrong you'd stay closer to the topic, now wouldn't you?

The correct term is "supply side economics", and it never failed. GHW Bush took us off that program to have his war in the Gulf.



What if the ball game is over?

Educated people seek ways to puncture silly metaphors.




True intellectuals understand that parties are groups of people and groups of people don't have intelligence, they have herd instincts. Then they examine the relevant facts and discover that someone's whining about the size of the military budget is merely a cover for their ignorance of the relative sizes of the major budget items and the legality of those items as defined by the Constitution.

Can it be said that Mayor Snorkum supports a cut in education funding when Mayor Snorkum understands that the federal government isn't Constitutionally allowed to spend one penny on education in the first place? The states, thay have the lawful authority to spend on the education of their residents as they see fit, and the federal government has no authority to set either basement spending levels for the states or to define the curricula in the various states.

A true intellectual understands the concept of federalism.

The actons of any politician reguarding money is relevent to all Americans, especially government contracts.

Republican, Geoge W. bush ran on the Republican ticket not the uhh "LEFTY ticket
If you are a registered Republican "which I think you are" you voted for Bush.

Seems like when ever a Republican screws up he becomes a lestist.
Tell me does that change take time or is it the second they get caught screwing up.

History does not lie Mayor,
1999 SURPLUS
2008 DEBT

I don't know what this has to do with ball games, this ain't no game out here.
Educated people seek jobs to work get paid and make a living

Mayor Snorkum does realize the the U.S. Government isn't Constitutionally allowed to spend one penny on any private corporation that does not have a government contract.
The government has no authority to spend taxpayer dollars on private big business that is privately owned by any private person outside the U.S. Government.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Tell me, did Mayor Snorkum ever find those WMDS in Iraq, maybe the uhh Smoking gun or the uhh Mushroom Cloud???

No, Mayor Snorkum didn't go to Iraq to find what Mayor Snorkum didn't care about in the first place. The good Mayor was aware that not one reason given by Bush for his proposed invasion of Iraq was justification. The only valid justification, the establishment of a military cordon around Iran prefatory to elimination of yet another terror-exporting government, was never mentioned by any government official.

And you believe your posts are relevant to the unconstitutional disbursement of tax dollars for education because...?

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

History does not lie Mayor,
1999 SURPLUS
2008 DEBT

Politicians lie all the damn time. Like when they claimed a "surplus" in 1999, even though they counted FICA taxes are revenues and refused to subtract accrued future Social Security payouts as expenses. When Bernie Madoff tried similar games, he finally went to jail.

No surpluses in the last forty years, at least.

Also, have you EVER examined what the term "surplus" implies? It implies tax rates are too high. Thus, people bragging about the non-existent "surplus" are showing their hypocrisy when they then condemn Bush for cutting tax rates.

The existence of a surplus should never become justification for spending more, as is always the case, even when the alleged surplus is fake, as it was under Clinton.

Finally, because tax rates were too high, as was necessary to generate this surplus, what happened in the last quarters of Clinton's presidency? That's right, Clinton's excessive taxation caused a recession.

BALANCED budgets are what's needed, when those budgets are also in agreement with the Constituiton.