|
Coaster
BaĘżal



Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 33,501
Loc: Deep in the Valley
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
|
Ron Paul is FOR public schools
#7812463 - 12/30/07 01:43 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
i see lots of people saying he wants to do away with them, but really he wants to make them much better and richer with less money then the DOA is using.
--------------------
|
bhamlaxy
Shroomerite


Registered: 01/23/05
Posts: 714
Loc: Nevada
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Coaster]
#7816943 - 12/31/07 12:39 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
This is very true. A lot of people say "He is against education and public schools!" or "he hates poor people because he wants to get rid of welfare!" When in actuality, he believes state and local governments should handle education and welfare.
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: bhamlaxy]
#7816998 - 12/31/07 12:57 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bhamlaxy said: he believes state and local governments should handle education and welfare.
And where, pray tell, is the money going to come from? State and local governments are usually strapped for cash as it is.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Le_Canard]
#7817104 - 12/31/07 01:33 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I believe that a majority of education spending comes from the state level anyways.
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Redstorm]
#7817176 - 12/31/07 01:52 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
True, but the federal government also contributes a goodly portion of it.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Le_Canard]
#7817251 - 12/31/07 02:13 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
At it's highest level ever, the federal government covers 9% of public school costs.
http://www.hoover.org/research/factsonpolicy/facts/4249156.html
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Redstorm]
#7817266 - 12/31/07 02:18 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I stand corrected. They do need that 9% of federal funding though. I thought they gave more. Nevertheless, it is needed as most school systems are strapped for cash.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Le_Canard]
#7817486 - 12/31/07 03:16 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Bullshit. EVERY agency is strapped for cash if you listen to the true believers. Any federal involvement in schools is wealth redistribution. Any state involvement in schools is wealth redistribution. Most funding for schools comes from local property taxes. That's why Scarsdale has great schools and Mount Vernon doesn't. State and federal funding of schools is a method to take money from Scarsdale and give it to Mount Vernon. Similar characterizations can be made in federal funding in NY state and Alabama. Wealth redistribution.
--------------------
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: zappaisgod]
#7817530 - 12/31/07 03:30 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Any federal involvement in schools is wealth redistribution.
Well, I certainly can't dispute that. And I don't mind a little now and then. So I'll just leave it at that.
|
Gijith
Daisy Chain Eater

Registered: 12/04/03
Posts: 2,400
Loc: New York
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: zappaisgod]
#7818574 - 12/31/07 10:32 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Bullshit. EVERY agency is strapped for cash if you listen to the true believers. Any federal involvement in schools is wealth redistribution. Any state involvement in schools is wealth redistribution. Most funding for schools comes from local property taxes. That's why Scarsdale has great schools and Mount Vernon doesn't. State and federal funding of schools is a method to take money from Scarsdale and give it to Mount Vernon. Similar characterizations can be made in federal funding in NY state and Alabama. Wealth redistribution.
This is bad because... we wouldn't want to give any handouts to those lazy freeloading 8 year olds?
-------------------- what's with neocons and the word 'ilk'?
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Gijith]
#7818781 - 01/01/08 12:22 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Agreed in full.
Education is the one area where I depart far, far from libertarians. People say that the real equality in the US is the equality of opportunity, but if Jamal is sitting in his science class with 45 other dirt poor kids using 15 year old science books while Perrywinkle the Third is in a class of 10 having a video conference with the latest Nobel Prize winner, something is fucked up here.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Le_Canard]
#7818830 - 01/01/08 01:06 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ToiletDuk said: I stand corrected. They do need that 9% of federal funding though. I thought they gave more. Nevertheless, it is needed as most school systems are strapped for cash.
No, they don't need that federal funding, and what they certainly don't need is a huge, costly, federal bureaucracy ineffectively presiding over education. Holding state schools accountable to a federal bureaucracy is unconstitutional in the first place.
If you really care about education, here's a tip - don't let the federal government take the money out of the state in the first place. That is what Ron Paul stands for. Then the schools won't need to rely on that small percentage of federal funding, and, as the center of government will be closer to the hands of the people, the government will be more capable of representing the people and their needs, and will be capable of being held more accountable as well.
The further the government is centered away from the people, the more tyranny there is. This is a natural fact - freedom and tryanny are opposing ends of the same spectrum.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: fireworks_god]
#7819283 - 01/01/08 08:33 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
No, they don't need that federal funding
Saying so doesn't make it true. Why don't they need the money?
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Redstorm]
#7819944 - 01/01/08 12:46 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Good question.
|
Gijith
Daisy Chain Eater

Registered: 12/04/03
Posts: 2,400
Loc: New York
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: fireworks_god]
#7820004 - 01/01/08 01:06 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I agree with you on the inefficient bureaucracy thing, and I certainly don't like the idea of Mike Huckabee having the right to force me to teach intelligent design in a science classroom, but I disagree on the money. I think there's something like a 50% difference in the per capita income of states like Massachusetts and Missouri. That's a bit of a gap in taxpayer revenue. I'm for redistributing whatever needs to be redistributed to help kids have an equal opportunity in schools.
-------------------- what's with neocons and the word 'ilk'?
|
SFsorrow
Is Born


Registered: 11/11/07
Posts: 259
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Coaster]
#7822114 - 01/01/08 11:42 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Coaster said: i see lots of people saying he wants to do away with them, but really he wants to make them much better and richer with less money then the DOA is using.
Sir, how does he want to do that by eliminating the Department of Education? Please explain!
|
BrAiN
Art Fag


Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: SFsorrow]
#7822759 - 01/02/08 06:51 AM (16 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Dept of Education is a Federal department.... just because he wants to do away with it on a federal level doesn't have anything to do with how well students will perform. He just wants things to get back to a state-run level.
I mean look how well the feds have done with our schools' The "No Child Left Behind" policy is a total sham. That crap is doing more harm than good to the education of our children.
People seem to think that just because Paul wants to do away with a federal level department, that he wants to do away with the thing that department was running which isn't true. He just wants to get rid of federal regulations on whatever the topic is.
|
xFrockx



Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 11 days, 12 hours
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Redstorm]
#7822850 - 01/02/08 07:59 AM (16 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Because the federal government forces them to spend much more than that 9% in making irrational and impossible demands of testing compliance with the NCLBA. Under No Child Left Behind, no matter what special needs or disability a child has, they need to score just as well as everyone else. This causes schools to waste a lot of money on people who will never pass the tests, instead of on the general population who could do so much more with the help of the money.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Gijith]
#7822930 - 01/02/08 09:00 AM (16 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Gijith said: I agree with you on the inefficient bureaucracy thing, and I certainly don't like the idea of Mike Huckabee having the right to force me to teach intelligent design in a science classroom, but I disagree on the money. I think there's something like a 50% difference in the per capita income of states like Massachusetts and Missouri. That's a bit of a gap in taxpayer revenue. I'm for redistributing whatever needs to be redistributed to help kids have an equal opportunity in schools.
Equal opportunity in schools is a great intention, but I think it only makes sense to consider that giving federal funding to state schools is why there is a federal bureaucracy that seeks to hold state schools accountable to it. From what I recall regarding No Child Left Behind, doesn't it threaten to remove federal funding of schools that don't perform up to the Department of Education's expectations?
I think the federal government has no authority to do this, but it is justifying it by way of funneling federal money into state schools. I'm not so sure that this is even Constitutional, but I'm not a scholar on the matter. You might be for redistributing income to poorer states, but others who are taxed might not be for doing so. There are fifty states, but only one federal government, and once you cross that line, it becomes exponentially more difficult to represent the people.
Of course, it could be argued that this is why each state puts forth representatives to the federal government to make these decisions on what states will collectively engage in, and I think that agreeing to contribute funds to the federal government to be redistributed to poorer states is something that most states would agree to...
... but what I'm realizing quite clearly in this moment, is that a federal tax, directly from the people to the federal government, is exactly how the role of the individual state governments is bypassed. Our representatives in Congress aren't worth much to their states because instead of entering into Congress with the ability to put forth state money into federal funds, they enter into Congress to fight for federal funds back.
The federal income tax is the reason why the federal government has become so expansive and malignant. When I say that these state schools do not need federal funding, it is because this money is obtained in the wrong way and is counter-productive to the needs of the state schools, and the state itself.
Disparity of wealth is a pressing concern when it comes to schools, but we don't see very many people advocating that the federal government addresses the disparity of wealth in general. The simple fact is that the top-down manner of government we have now is very detrimental to this country, and a top-up manner of government is not going to make it so that people do not have equal opportunities in public education in Arkansaw as they will in Rhode Island. Well, the idea of an equal opportunity in education is a fallacy anyways, but you know what I mean.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
gluke bastid
Stinky Bum



Registered: 12/20/00
Posts: 3,322
Loc: Charm City
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: Ron Paul is FOR public schools [Re: Redstorm]
#7822964 - 01/02/08 09:21 AM (16 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: Agreed in full.
Education is the one area where I depart far, far from libertarians. People say that the real equality in the US is the equality of opportunity, but if Jamal is sitting in his science class with 45 other dirt poor kids using 15 year old science books while Perrywinkle the Third is in a class of 10 having a video conference with the latest Nobel Prize winner, something is fucked up here.
Same here. States redistributing tax money to underfunded schools in poor areas has proven effective. Read any of the research by Jonathon Kozol or peers and you will find that education is one of the few sectors in which throwing money at the problem is highly effective. More money means better supplies and facilities, a higher teacher to student ratio, and even more involvement from parents (worth more than gold in the area of education).
--------------------
Society in every form is a blessing, but government at its best is but a necessary evil - Thomas Paine
|
|