• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Boo Radley said:
And I did not say there wan't. And I specifically made a point of noting that such could be accepted and they could still discriminate for other reasons, making them different than a public school that could not.
Click to expand...

What is your point? Is that if we empower a more localized, bottom-up approach to education, that somehow all the nation's troubled youth will find themselves forced out of an education? That is an exaggeration based on the actions of a few private schools. Again, I'll repeat. There are private and charter schools whose entire existence has been to improve the achievement rates of troubled youth.

And this direct accountability in part is do to this ability to discriminate.
Click to expand...

Yes, the parent's ability to discriminate against certain schools. That's the kind of discrimination that weeds out bad schools or learning institutions that are deemed undesirable. Parents should have the ultimate choice of schooling.

The private school can decide the size, who they will accept and be rid of, and so on.
Click to expand...

Yes, to a certain extent. But again, you're implying that the majority operate in this sort of fashion. They don't. There are thousands upon thousands of parents playing the lottery so that their child can have a decent education. The schools attached to such lotteries are your average private schools, and the kids playing the lottery are your average inner-city kids. The difference is the concern of parents who strive to make something better for their children. In a consumer-driven educational market, concerned parents will see a better result in their child's education while unconcerned parents will notice little to no change. I'm willing to make that exchange for it is better to educate a significant portion of kids rather than to impose a below-mediocre education on all of them.
Public schools can't do any of that, so it is more than just the layers, though I've never had any problem being heard at any of the public schools my children went to.
Click to expand...

Given that you are a teacher, I don't doubt it. However there's a major difference between a board hearing your complaints and a school considering your complaints.
 
Last edited:
ElijahGalt said:
What is your point?
Click to expand...

That either private schools will come to look more like public schools, with no help as we merely moved the problem. Or they will lose a number of young people altogether.

Yes, the parent's ability to discriminate against certain schools. That's the kind of discrimination that weeds out bad schools or learning institutions that are deemed undesirable. Parents should have the ultimate choice of schooling.
Click to expand...

I think I spoke to something different. Schools can discrimnate against problem students in a way public schools cannot.


No, I believe largely they do. They don't over extend. Classroom sizes are kept down. Problem students are set free. And parents on the whole miss a lot. The dealings I've seen with parents are more give the grade and not teach the child. Private schools don't have a different education method. An English teacher in both teach the same content in much the same way. There is no magic. The difference is in the population and the ability to set the parameters of who attends.
 
Boo Radley said:
That either private schools will come to look more like public schools, with no help as we merely moved the problem. Or they will lose a number of young people altogether.
Click to expand...

Where's your evidence? The evidence is piled against you. Again, numerous learning institutions and schools are created solely to reach out to troubled youth and under-performing youth. You seem to generalize ALL private schools as represented by the most elite establishments that are catered to a higher economic bracket. Private schools like Horace Mann and Phillips Academy Andover represent a microscopic fraction of all private schools nation-wide.

I think I spoke to something different. Schools can discriminate against problem students in a way public schools cannot.
Click to expand...

Maybe the rules are a little different in your district. In my district, troubled youth are almost immediately removed from the large-scale suburban high schools and placed directly in the hands of charter-like establishments that are intended to improve the achievement rates of students.

No, I believe largely they do.
Click to expand...

And there's the basis of your argument- FAITH.


Then explain to me why there are about a dozen private schools in a single square mile of the poorest developing country while there exists a public FREE school? I've brought this up before and you've never been able to respond. People who are making a dollar a day are spending 3-7$ a month (on average) so that their children can attend a private school. This is DESPITE the existence of a free public school. Certainly school choice makes a load of difference.
 

that's BS from what I saw-I spent all my school years in private schools the only people booted were

1) two guys caught selling/buying speed in the bathroom

2) two tenth graders who beat up and then pulled pocketknives on an 8th grader

the kids who did poorly got extra tutoring etc

the guy second to last or last in my class got good boards, got into vanderbilt and graduated summa cum laude
 

what would you accept as evidence? Look at the schools. The teachers are all trained at the same places the same way. They don't use any different methods for teraching. So, they can not offer anything different in that area. What they offer is smaller class size, no acceptance of bad behavior because they can discriminate, and more parental involvement as a rule for acceptance.



That is not the case everywhere.


And there's the basis of your argument- FAITH.
Click to expand...

No. Not faith.



To answer I would have to know more. My experience tells me there are many reasons for a private school. In mississippi there's a private school where white parents don't want to go to school with black students. I don't say there are a large number of schools like that, but there is one with that reason. I would have to know the population better to have any clue as to why. Maybe they give parents the grades they want their students to have. I can't say without knowing more.

I was listening to a study the other day. Later I'll try and find the link that said most people thoght their school we good, but most would leave if they were given the option. Most favor a charter school, but didn't know what oen was. It is quite possible that many really don't understand the real differences and are just responding to the rhetoric.

But again, I can't say without knowing more.
 

You have just named three major differences that private schools offer as an alternative to public schools. First of all, small class sizes are a good thing. If a private company is over flooded with an excess number of students, they have the capability and power to build another school. Second, I believe we've already agreed that bad behavior should no tbe tolerated anywhere, regardless of public or private affiliations. There's no changes in the private sector necessary to meet this standard. If you would like to see public schools discriminating against bad behavior, then you'll need to take the issue up with your local bureaucrats. But both of have agreed in the past that discriminating against bad behavior is a step in the right direction, and if students refuse to learn than so be it. Finally, more parental involvement in the education of students is quite positive. It is, after all, the parent's child and not the schools.

That is not the case everywhere.
Click to expand...

It is the case in my district. But again, what is the ultimate outcome you'd like to see? You don't like it when private schools are able to expel misbehaving children and you've noted in the past that you don't like it when public schools are forced to keep such students, so what is the ultimate outcome you wish to see? You seem to be applying a double standard.

No. Not faith.
Click to expand...

You said "I believe" and belief is the basis of faith, not knowledge.

To answer I would have to know more. My experience tells me there are many reasons for a private school. In mississippi there's a private school where white parents don't want to go to school with black students.
Click to expand...

That's horrible, but ultimately it is the right of parents to decide where their kid will be taught. I'm all for integration but forced integration and forced busing hasn't led to any major improvements in the education system.


Then perhaps you should take a look at the study, yourself. The book is called The Beautiful Tree by James Tooley. And PS, the public school system in the countries where the study was conducted had horrible rates of attrition and achievement. The problem isn't bad schools giving phony grades, but rather bad schools tolerating bad habits (i.e. allowing teachers to read a newspaper and/or sleep while the children do busy work). And again, it is the right of parents to send their children to whatever school they deem is appropriate. If stupid parents wish to send their kids to a diploma mill, then we must let them. School choice must triumph over imposed slavery.


And I wonder who was behind such a study. That's pretty condescending and elitist, if you ask me. You're implying teachers and administrators know what's best for a child more so than their own parents.
 
Catawba said:
For the wealthy, you and me pay more of the share so they can pay less. And you seem to be happy about that.
Click to expand...

You are wrong

Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes — The American, A Magazine of Ideas

The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.
 

Now stop it, liberals don't want to hear facts like that as they prefer to demonize the rich, right Catawba?
 

What statistics? Was your grandfather African American? How many different ethnic groups and individuals with learning disabilities attended his school, what were the class sizes, and was the church subsidizing some of the cost? You have to look at all the factors involved with the task that underfunded public schools must deal with.


You can send your child anywhere you want to under our present system.

Private school must not be reserved for only the wealthiest of Americans.
Click to expand...

You get what you pay for. You put as much money per student into public schools you would get the same results.

Again with the education! You seem to think that a degree entitles you to a job.
Click to expand...

I have never said that, nor do I think that. But, I do believe a college education is a minimum requirement for teaching our children, and I don't expect a teacher, who has one of the most important, and most difficult jobs in our country to be paid less than a college educated professional would be paid in any other field.
 

The point is when a democrat freezes wages no complaint but when a GOP does what he said he would big blowout. Seems more like partisan politics by democrats
 

I don't know of any study which determines the degree to which private and charter schools engage in this practice but from my experience I think it would be most of them. We will have to agree to disagree until the facts come to light, but what is clear is that you lack the evidence to support the assertions that private schools do any better.
 

That chart where you got your figures was the Internal Revenue Service was from 2004. That is not the latest data. Let's look at the IRS data from 2006.

Distribution of Income - Top 1%=21.3%, Next 19%=40.1%, Bottom 80%=38.6%.

The Bush tax cuts were very, very kind to the wealthy and they certainly did pay off for us, didn't they? Look at all the jobs the Bush tax cuts created.

Source: http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_589.pdf
 

Bush tax cuts went into effect during the 2001 recession that he inherited and then had 9/11. Prior to 2008 his economy created over 8.5 million jobs according to bls. If you have a problem with those numbers then take it up with the bureau of labor statistics. The rich AFTER the Bush tax cuts are paying a higher percentage of the taxes than they were before and 47% of the income earners don't pay any Federal Income taxes at all. If you don't want your Bush tax cut send it back and let the govt. waste if for you.

Employment numbers by month

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143142 143444 143765 143794 144108 144370 144229 144631 144797 145292 145477 145914
2007 146032 146043 146368 145686 145952 146079 145926 145685 146193 145885 146483 146173
2008 146421 146165 146173 146306 146023 145768 145515 145187 145021 144677 143907 143188
2009 142221 141687 140854 140902 140438 140038 139817 139433 138768 138242 138381 137792
2010 138333 138641 138905 139455 139420 139119 138960 139250 139391 139061 138888 139206
2011 139323
 
Last edited:

since you tax hikers constantly whine about job creation I have two questions
can you prove making the rich pay even more of the tax burden wll result in more jobs

two

why do the rich have a duty to pay more than what they use and more of their share of the income tax than their share of the income even if it does "help society"?

we could spay and neuter the poorest 10% and that would clearly help society in terms of less welfare and less crime but that would be "unfair"

so is making a small group pay more and more taxes so the shirkers and slackers don't have to
 

There was no recession in the United States until 2002. Furthermore, you provide no evidence to support the notion that the tax cuts lead to an increase in the percentage the rich were paying. In fact, that is a ludicrous and unfounded statement to make. Last, the employment numbers you posted are meaningless without the labeling to indicate what the numbers mean.

I would say this is the trashiest post I have ever seen you make.
 

Never question my data, NBER says differently

Last Four Recessions and their Durations
12/07 - 6/09 18 months
3/01 - 11/01 8 months
7/90 - 3/91 8 months
7/81 - 11/82 16 months


Since you don't buy that information why would you buy IRS information? Actually the trashiest post ever made here comes from liberals who continue to post opinions as fact.
 

I would have fully expected that you know what employment means. In January 2001 there were 137.7 million people working in the country, in January 2008 that was 146.4 million that is an 8.7 million job increase.

Now as for the tax liability, read it and weep.

From
The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data

 

So rather than saying that the class size reduction did not work - it indeed may have worked. They just cannot pin it down for sure.
 
from turtle

we could spay and neuter the poorest 10% and that would clearly help society in terms of less welfare and less crime but that would be "unfair"
Click to expand...

Those terms are used for animals - NOT for human beings.

I believe your usage was intentional and deliberately inflammatory and the worst sort of trolling. This is beyond the pale even for you.
 
haymarket said:
from turtle



Those terms are used for animals - NOT for human beings.

I believe your usage was intentional and deliberately inflammatory and the worst sort of trolling. This is beyond the pale even for you.
Click to expand...


sarcasm-look it up
and the hysterical taking offense nonsense is getting old
 
haymarket said:
from turtle



Those terms are used for animals - NOT for human beings.

I believe your usage was intentional and deliberately inflammatory and the worst sort of trolling. This is beyond the pale even for you.
Click to expand...

The real crime and worst sort of activity is liberalism wasting all the money they have spent in the name of compassion but never generating compassionate results. Keeping people dependent is what liberal politicians do and call that compassion. then the arrogance comes out when one group of liberals claims another group didn't spend ENOUGH. The distortion of the bill in Wisconsin is staggering and dishonest liberals will never set the record straight.
 
TurtleDude said:
sarcasm-look it up
and the hysterical taking offense nonsense is getting old
Click to expand...

That was the worst sort of racist comment and far over the line. Even for the likes of you.

I do take offense and I see that others do also. This is the worst sort of trolling and baiting.
 
haymarket said:
That was the worst sort of racist comment and far over the line. Even for the likes of you.

I do take offense and I see that others do also. This is the worst sort of trolling and baiting.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll bite, what is racist in Turtle's comment?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…