View Full Version : Refuse to send your kids to school in the ghetto = jail time.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/ohio-mom-jailed-sending-kids-school-district/story?id=12763654
Williams-Bolar said she did it to keep her children safe and that she lived part-time with her dad.
"When my home got broken into, I felt it was my duty to do something else," Williams-Bolar said.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/ohio-mom-jailed-sending-kids-school-district/story?id=12763654
C'mon, what kind of example does that send to other inner city parents about wanting the best for their kids? It's not fair she wanted them away from the gangsters and drug dealers. :rolleyes:
Because there are probably no gangsters or drug dealers in front of her house. :rolleyes:
rickrock305
01-28-11, 16:42
The worst part is the school district went so far as to hire a private investigator. Sure, we can't afford computers or textbooks, but we can damn sure afford a PI! :rolleyes:
What a crock of bullsh*t.
Because there are probably no gangsters or drug dealers in front of her house. :rolleyes:
And there totally aren't any gangsters and drug dealers in suburban schools... :rolleyes:
Really though, this is an insanely disturbing story. It is a perfect example of late 20th and early 21st century government in the United States. The woman lied, and she did so to attempt to better her own children's lives, and nothing changes the fact that she did this. But, that's not the issue, the issue is that this nation has appalling schools as a result of unethical tax practices, and ignorance on the part of the American populace regarding the importance of education.
jklaughrey
01-28-11, 17:30
What about the parent or even school coach who circumvents the district policy to make sure a star athlete plays for a certain school program/coach. We have a similar situation in my area. One high school is known for baseball and many kids get scholarships from that school. The other HS is across state lines, yet parents and school "coaches/boosters" will do everything to get a kid who is a star onto the good HS team. I know of 3 kids who are from the other state HS that now attend the HS with the program because an "assistant coach/booster" has the boys live with him. Approved and legal by the school board who of course are also wanting the school top stay state champs.
How is this any different. On one hand it is "allowed" for sports, but not for academics?
This countries school systems are corrupt and self serving.
But, that's not the issue, the issue is that this nation has appalling schools as a result of unethical tax practices, and ignorance on the part of the American populace regarding the importance of education.
Unethical tax practices? The problem with our education system is in large part the teachers unions who have strangled attempts at introducing school choice, performance based pay, yada yada yada. We spend a ton of money on education per student in this country, unfortunately most of it goes to overpaying school teachers and wasted on administrative and other bureaucratic costs instead of improving the education of the end user.
And there totally aren't any gangsters and drug dealers in suburban schools... :rolleyes:
Wow. Time to up the meds Mac. I could drive somebody from a school in Rainier Valley a few miles up the highway to a school in Sammamish and it would be a no brainer which school the person would want their child to attend afterwards. You are so far out of reality you don't realize that there are big differences between schools in bad neighborhoods and schools in the burbs? Really?
Does anyone from Washington want to bet on which schools get higher bids on their contracts because contractors put money in for tools stolen off the jobsites by the students and random druggies in the neighborhood? LOL. Yeah sorry there is reality, not all schools are equally safe Mac.
jklaughrey
01-28-11, 17:56
While I agree with the talking heads getting overpaid. The teacher's by and large are not. Granted there are some Teacher Unions that have the district and taxpayers' by the short and curly's. This is however minute compared to the many who are overworked and underpaid. My wife teaches 9th grade HS English and she puts in way too many hours compared to her pay. Why? Because she actually gives a shit about your children.
While I agree with the talking heads getting overpaid. The teacher's by and large are not. Granted there are some Teacher Unions that have the district and taxpayers' by the short and curly's. This is however minute compared to the many who are overworked and underpaid. My wife teaches 9th grade HS English and she puts in way too many hours compared to her pay. Why? Because she actually gives a shit about your children.
Yeah and with performance based pay she would get paid more, but the teachers unions want all teachers paid the same, including the lazy and stupid ones your wife makes up for.
Because there are probably no gangsters or drug dealers in front of her house. :rolleyes:
So I guess she should have just pulled her kids out of school completely and have her daughters out turning tricks for crack.
:rolleyes:
You can't always help where you live. She did try to beat the system by lying about her residence so her kids could go to a safer school. Damn shame when the real solution is to kick all the dealer and gang bangers out of every school but that will never happen.
And isn't this what that bussing crap was all about? I remember inner city kids being bused to suburban schools and suburban kids being sent to ghetto schools (magnet program).
jklaughrey
01-28-11, 18:04
Yes, she should but since she teaches at a Title1 school so she doesn't get it because the State Superintendent just cut their pay by 4%, raised insurance costs by 20%, and cut all reimbursements and doesn't allow performance increases for Title 1 schools. But gave himself a 16% pay increase and gave money to the schools in his home district. Tell me again how my wife gets more money? PS, we have performance pay for non Title 1 schools and her union is good, but had to negotiate to save jobs for special education and funding for disabled learning students. Hence why they took pay cuts, in order to HELP THE STUDENTS!
Yes, she should but since she teaches at a Title1 school so she doesn't get it because the State Superintendent just cut their pay by 4%, raised insurance costs by 20%, and cut all reimbursements and doesn't allow performance increases for Title 1 schools. But gave himself a 16% pay increase and gave money to the schools in his home district. Tell me again how my wife gets more money?
I don't think we have any argument. Like I said the problem is mainly with the bureaucracy and the entrenched unions that fight against performance based pay and school choice. My experience in school was that about 1/4 of the teachers were outstanding and probably deserved to make more, about 1/2 were so so and the other 1/4 should have been fired and their pay given to the ones who are truly gifted at what they do.
jklaughrey
01-28-11, 18:10
That I can agree with. There are always shit birds in any state/gov't agency just living off the fat, and the difficulty the boards have to fire a tenured educator. But performance based pay won't work across the board on the whole, due to subjective reviews. Hence why Title one don't get them is because the students score lower on average than the state and federal mean of the standardized tests. Performance is based solely on how many students you can make pass a test, not on your teaching ability.
Git on back tuh Uncle Sam's plantation... *whip!*
With any luck, this will will go to the SCOTUS.
Under 'separate but equal' geographical districting will be found unconstitutional and any school district will have to accept a student from another district. Oh fun!
This should lead us down the road to 'school choice'/vouchers in short order.
FromMyColdDeadHand
01-28-11, 20:58
If a local private school were smart, they'd give her kids a free ride. If you care about your kids that much, its worth it to give her a shot.
My mom is the school secretary for an affluent suburban grade school and they are serious about education. They have like two or three Nobel prize winners that went there. She is responsible for ferreting out the people that don't belong in the district. It really comes down to resources. The more of these kids that get in, the less resources there are for 'native' kids. Property taxes ain't cheap and adding in people not paying their share just makes the situation worse.
$30,000 grand in back tuition or 10 days in jail. Uhmm, I think I can keep my cheeks clenched for 10 days. So when she is in jail, do the kids live with the grandpa in the good school district?
With any luck, this will will go to the SCOTUS.
Under 'separate but equal' geographical districting will be found unconstitutional and any school district will have to accept a student from another district. Oh fun!
This should lead us down the road to 'school choice'/vouchers in short order.
I REALLY like the way you think...
Odds are that jackwagon school district pays the PI more than it would cost to educate that kid from K through 12.
School districts should be merely the default option - I was a rare case where I was the academic version of sport stud - I could bring in enough hardware to go to the school of my choice, but it took thousands of dollars worth of grants I won for my middle school to convince them of that.
Public schools are for the children of the residents in that school district. If you don't want your kids to go to a free school in "the ghetto", (a) move somewhere else, or (b) send them to a private school.
Public schools are for the children of the residents in that school district. If you don't want your kids to go to a free school in "the ghetto", (a) move somewhere else, or (b) send them to a private school.
Again, 'separate but equal' has already been declared unconstitutional. Many people live physically closer to a school in a better locality but are districted in a worse school district.
To take it down to brass tacks, I wait with baited breath for 'integration' of predominantly white school districts by black students from other districts. Oh, fraptious day!
The fact of the matter is that most 'open minded' people are wildly bigoted, they just don't like to be forced to admit it.
I live in the Baltimore-Washington corridor. I see everyday where people drive two hours to work so they can send their kids to a whiter school district in PA, DE, or VA. Most of these folks have very good govt jobs in and and around DC but they will not live there because they don't to send their kids to schools in that area. Basically, people are FULL OF SHIT.
All we need now is a SCOTUS decision. Hopefully ol' girl lodges an appeal.
variablebinary
01-29-11, 01:50
Nevermind
Just know, zoning is bullshit.
FromMyColdDeadHand
01-29-11, 12:37
Again, 'separate but equal' has already been declared unconstitutional. Many people live physically closer to a school in a better locality but are districted in a worse school district.
To take it down to brass tacks, I wait with baited breath for 'integration' of predominantly white school districts by black students from other districts. Oh, fraptious day!
The fact of the matter is that most 'open minded' people are wildly bigoted, they just don't like to be forced to admit it.
I live in the Baltimore-Washington corridor. I see everyday where people drive two hours to work so they can send their kids to a whiter school district in PA, DE, or VA. Most of these folks have very good govt jobs in and and around DC but they will not live there because they don't to send their kids to schools in that area. Basically, people are FULL OF SHIT.
All we need now is a SCOTUS decision. Hopefully ol' girl lodges an appeal.
What that woman did is no more noble than stealing a BMW because you think it would be safer for your kids than the Buick you have right now.
And the people driving two hours are paying property taxes thru the nose for it. It ain't racist, it a money thing. You just want something for nothing. You probably want to put section 8 housing in upper middle class neighborhoods too. I'm getting sick and tired of supporting deadbeats you won't pony the price for a McDonalds burger, but want Morton t-bone dinners.
You want to start busing kids all over the place to equal out racial numbers, be my guest. Was done back in the 60s and 70s and the only people that made out where the bus companies, Catholic schools, and realtors and farmers who made out on the middle class (both white and black) movement to new suburbs. I don't care, I send my kids to private school
You want to start busing kids all over the place to equal out racial numbers, be my guest. Was done back in the 60s and 70s and the only people that made out where the bus companies, Catholic schools, and realtors and farmers who made out on the middle class (both white and black) movement to new suburbs. I don't care, I send my kids to private school
Exactly. It's a free country and nobody's forcing that woman to live in whatever undesirable district she's in.
Lying was the wrong way to take responsibility for her kids' education. She could have run for the local school board. She could have joined the PTA. She could have home schooled. She could have put them in private school. She could have moved. She could have used f!@$ing birth control. Now she's a criminal. Way to go, mom, way to go.
Regarding busing, black kids DO NOT WANT to be sent to white school districts. They do not want to integrate. I won't bother to look up a study right now, but they are out there.
And is there any evidence that black kids learn more when bused to a white school district? We know there is evidence that it causes harm to the white kids bused to the black school district but the liberals seem to think that is ok.
If my kids were going to be bused to a black school district I would move the heck away even if it meant I could only get a job at 7-11 and had to live in a 1965 trailer with no heat.
The worst part is the school district went so far as to hire a private investigator. Sure, we can't afford computers or textbooks, but we can damn sure afford a PI! :rolleyes:
What a crock of bullsh*t.
My high school in my junior year re-did the track, football field, stands, and installed an extremely expensive lighting system. The track alone cost a couple hundred thousand. The total cost was just south of $1M. Not to mention the year after there was a strike for more money for the teachers.
Meanwhile, our books were falling apart and 15 years old, there were leaks in the roof, etc.
Organized sports shouldn't be a part of school, at least not while class sizes are growing and nobody has bought a new book in 10 years.
It's unfortunate that this woman is going to jail for wanting better for her children. Compared to a lot of parents in ghettos, this alone deserves praise. She might not even ostracize them if they become white collar professionals!
Thomas M-4
01-29-11, 14:31
What that woman did is no more noble than stealing a BMW because you think it would be safer for your kids than the Buick you have right now.
Bullshit.. The local government should have no part telling you which school you should send your kid to.
And the people driving two hours are paying property taxes thru the nose for it. It ain't racist, it a money thing.
This is also bullshit argument. I know for a fact that at one time you could pay to attend a school that was out side you district the fee was to compensate the school system from the property tax that they didn't get from you. And from what I remember they were very happy to get it. The problems you state can be very easily worked out with out screwing the tax payer. The large inner city school systems are the ones that do not want this because they are the ones loosing money.
mom did what she had to do. I don't know why some of you are making her out to be the bad guy. Lying to get your kids into better schools is far more common than you think.
And let's not turn this in black school vs white school thing. It's a urban vs suburban issue and the sociology in these areas.
Maybe I need to clarify this...
What that woman did is no more noble than stealing a BMW because you think it would be safer for your kids than the Buick you have right now.
She didn't steal anything from anyone. She may have lied on a govt form but that is not the same as stealing someones car.
In the particular case of MD, all school funds go into the general fund then the state redistributes the wealth. Every school district gets the same per student funding.
In many places the family lives physically closer to a school in another county but the are zoned for another district. I don't see the big deal in sending a kid to the school they are closer to.
And the people driving two hours are paying property taxes thru the nose for it. It ain't racist, it a money thing.
Not racist - bigots. There is a difference. The fact of the matter (in my particular area). Taxes of all types and the cost of living is higher in DC, MD, and NOVA. People commute from PA, DE, WV, and deep in VA where taxes are much lower. Honestly, I don't think this cost averages out when you factor in commuting costs and loss of sanity. And, many of these more upscale suburban areas are every bit as expensive as living downtown. So why the long commutes?...
You probably want to put section 8 housing in upper middle class neighborhoods too.
I don't want the govt to subsidize anything - to include that monument to govt subsidized 'defense' contractors they have built in Crystal City VA.
I'm getting sick and tired of supporting deadbeats you won't pony the price for a McDonalds burger, but want Morton t-bone dinners.
Me too! In fact, it should be a condition of govt employment that you have to live in the district that you work. It would vastly shorten my commute and take all of those other asshats off the road!
You want to start busing kids all over the place to equal out racial numbers, be my guest.
God no. I hate the idea of busing. I just think people should have a choice as to where they go to school. In fact, I would personally love to see an end to the yellow school bus entirely. Give parents vouchers and let them choose where they send their kids to school. Ending the districting rule would have the same net effect of issuing vouchers. And, it only requires SCOTUS ruling as opposed to going through the legislative sausage mill.
Bottom line, 'separate but equal' is already unconstitutional. It is only a matter of getting this particular case in front of the Court. The will be no less a game changer than Brown v Board of Ed.
People in this thread are seriously comparing property-tax subsidized public schools with segregation? :no:
That dog just don't hunt friends.
Local schools are paid for and run by locals. Non-locals need to do what needs to be done to improve their own schools instead of foisting their problems off on others. These problems usually don't involve money ironically. The problem is cultural. Ghettos are ghettos not because of their physical location but because of the people living in them, the same can be said for schools in ghettos.
If you feel your children aren't being properly educated, you need to pony up your own chips and send your kid to a private school or home school them, not CHEAT and STEAL from the productivity of others. You DO have a choice.
With any luck, this will will go to the SCOTUS.
Under 'separate but equal' geographical districting will be found unconstitutional and any school district will have to accept a student from another district. Oh fun!
I believe Massachusetts already does this (after I grew up and got the hell out). I have heard from people back home that my high school (NMRS) is full of kid from Fitchburg and Lunenburg now... The money follows the kid.
Utah does something similar if I am not mistaken. My kid is technically a student in a school district in St George (hours a few hundred miles away). (It is an online public school based in a school district in St George and is open to any kid in Utah -- classes are at home through a provided online school). I know of people who send their kids to other than their normal area school though I don't know the details.
forced schooling in public schools is the problem... But that is another topic for another day.
(I am not railing on education -- just our Prussian attitude toward it to make good little slaves of our children to serve the state)
variablebinary
02-02-11, 03:12
People in this thread are seriously comparing property-tax subsidized public schools with segregation? :no:
That dog just don't hunt friends.
Local schools are paid for and run by locals. Non-locals need to do what needs to be done to improve their own schools instead of foisting their problems off on others. These problems usually don't involve money ironically. The problem is cultural. Ghettos are ghettos not because of their physical location but because of the people living in them, the same can be said for schools in ghettos.
If you feel your children aren't being properly educated, you need to pony up your own chips and send your kid to a private school or home school them, not CHEAT and STEAL from the productivity of others. You DO have a choice.
You're wrong. More often than not the education money is pooled and distributed to districts based upon a board decision. If this were not the case, sparsely populated areas would be forced to have mud huts for schools compared to urban areas.
Ask your county for an audit of its educational dollars. Money will without a doubt have come from sources outside the county.
Bottom line, 'separate but equal' is already unconstitutional. It is only a matter of getting this particular case in front of the Court. The will be no less a game changer than Brown v Board of Ed.
Not to worry. Public school districts are neither separate nor equal. All are held to certain minimum standards. Beyond that, it's up to the state, local school boards, and their taxpayer-fueled budgets to determine how to go beyond meeting the minimum standards.
School districts in the ghetto have to contend with higher crime rates, broken children from broken families, and weaker tax bases. Usually the state makes up for the funding difference through grants, and these schools typically meet the bare minimum standards.
Better public school districts generally have better demographics. This isn't about race. It's simply children who are healthy and motivated, coming from families who support them and contribute more in the way of taxes per child.
Busing is bullshit, unless the neighboring districts compensate each other accordingly. Suppose district A spends $10 per student, while district B spends $6 per student (the numbers are made up... just bear with me). So the kids in district B want to get bussed to district A so they can have AP classes or jazz band or whatever else the fancy district offers. If the bussing takes place, the taxpayers in district B owe district A $10 per child, which is $4 more than they'd have spent if the kids went to their own school.
Bottom line: there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, and cheating is wrong.
And let's not turn this in black school vs white school thing. It's a urban vs suburban issue and the sociology in these areas.
The demographics are mere facts. Urban = black schools the vast majority of the time.
Belmont31R
02-02-11, 14:03
Here school districts have taxing authority so the money they get is directly from the people they serve. We don't have state income taxes so everything is paid for via sales taxes and property taxes.
I pay about 3k a year in property taxes, and about 50%-65% of that is from the school district.
As far as lying to send your kid to another district....here that would be theft because you aren't paying into that district yet still getting services. Its not a big pool where the district gets money from the state and not directly from the citizens. Like I said...here the districts have taxing authority. I think they do get some state tax dollars but most of the money comes from locals.
I also don't like sports being paid for by the schools (and thus the people). We're talking about a handful of kids who live in the city getting millions spent on them to throw a ball around. This district we are in has spent over 45 million in the last 3 years on two football stadiums yet the program my kids are in now is supposed to get defunded from the state. Im not sure if that means they'll cut the program or the district will keep it going despite the cuts from state. Its a pre-k early learning program for kids with speech issues. If they are spending over 45 million on sports stadiums and cut this program Ill be ****ing pissed. The amount of waste in districts is really astounding while useful programs get cut before the sports ever will.
Ultimately the solution is not to send your kids to this school or that school but to make ALL schools a safer environment.
That means we need to shitcan all the "get them off the streets" programs which were naively intended to make "bad kids" into "good kids" and get back to getting the "bad kids" out of the schools so they are a safe haven for the "good kids."
Of course this means we have to be willing to call all the bad kids "bad kids" and put them in jail as necessary. And most people aren't willing to do that.
Belmont31R
02-02-11, 14:11
Ultimately the solution is not to send your kids to this school or that school but to make ALL schools a safer environment.
That means we need to shitcan all the "get them off the streets" programs which were naively intended to make "bad kids" into "good kids" and get back to getting the "bad kids" out of the schools so they are a safe haven for the "good kids."
Of course this means we have to be willing to call all the bad kids "bad kids" and put them in jail as necessary. And most people aren't willing to do that.
In the district I went to we had a bad kids school. If anyone had any serious disciplinary problems they yanked them out and sent them there. The parents would be responsible for transporting them.
Im not sure how this district we are in now does it but you're right...if there are problem kids they don't need to be bringing down the rest of the students, causing issues, and influencing otherwise good kids.
Some of you guys are horribly miss-informed on how schools are paid for.
Your school budget comes from a combination of Federal, state, and local taxes. Look at your state general fund budget for education. Most states will give you a handy pie chart to show just how the schools are paid for.
I am pretty sure there is not a school district in the country that could survive without Federal funding. Again, nothing is being stolen from you that wasn't already 'stolen' from someone else. Everyone has to pay property tax but not everyone has kids. Why should a single gay man with no kids pay property tax so your kids can go to school?
Now, I am all for the ending of the Department of Education and Federal education subsidies to states! I think every American should be paying about 2-3x the property tax they currently pay.
rickrock305
02-02-11, 22:23
Everyone has to pay property tax but not everyone has kids. Why should a single gay man with no kids pay property tax so your kids can go to school?
IMO schooling is one of those areas where we should ALL be ponying up money, regardless if we have kids or not. Because in schools we are supposed to be teaching our kids science, math, etc., and preparing them for the real world and higher education, so they can get good jobs and invent things and come up with the next scientific discovery for the world to depend on, which in turn leads to a better and more prosperous country for us all so that we all benefit.
Now the argument could be made that schools are currently doing a piss poor job of that, and I completely agree. But I don't think thats an excuse to completely defund them all by removing education subsidies. I would gladly pay more taxes if I was sure that money would be going to schools. Unfortunately it seems as though school boards would rather build football stadiums and pay themselves high salaries instead of buying books and computers for the kids.
Ultimately the solution is not to send your kids to this school or that school but to make ALL schools a safer environment.
That means we need to shitcan all the "get them off the streets" programs which were naively intended to make "bad kids" into "good kids" and get back to getting the "bad kids" out of the schools so they are a safe haven for the "good kids."
Of course this means we have to be willing to call all the bad kids "bad kids" and put them in jail as necessary. And most people aren't willing to do that.
When I was a kid I saw districts try to "solve" that problem by sending trouble kids off to the vocational-technical (vo-tech) high school. That resulted in a generation of white collar kids who turned up their noses at working an honest blue collar trade and (perhaps unconsciously) associated manual labor with being a delinquent lowlife. In other words, massive failure :(
When I was a kid I saw districts try to "solve" that problem by sending trouble kids off to the vocational-technical (vo-tech) high school. That resulted in a generation of white collar kids who turned up their noses at working an honest blue collar trade and (perhaps unconsciously) associated manual labor with being a delinquent lowlife. In other words, massive failure :(
Yeah, that was a bad idea too.
I was thinking of something more along the lines of a correctional facility with classes. If they manage to pass those classes they have an education, if they don't then they graduate directly the adult jail.
Now, I am all for the ending of the Department of Education and Federal education subsidies to states! I think every American should be paying about 2-3x the property tax they currently pay.
Actually I shouldn't have to pay any of that nonsense because I'm not sending any kids to school. The more kids a person has, the more they should pay for their education. And if I don't have any kids I shouldn't have to pay a dime.
It's no coincidence that every time there is a state or federal school power grab, the grades go down. Most kids who graduate from a university couldn't pass a pre-1950's grade school exam.
Education needs to be kicked back to the counties and cities.
Actually I shouldn't have to pay any of that nonsense because I'm not sending any kids to school. The more kids a person has, the more they should pay for their education. And if I don't have any kids I shouldn't have to pay a dime.
Sorry, public education is one thing that I never understood the libertarian stance on. Education is as important as freedom of speech and guns for ensuring individuals' freedom. In fact I think public education needs to go a step further, into higher education.
Sorry, public education is one thing that I never understood the libertarian stance on. Education is as important as freedom of speech and guns for ensuring individuals' freedom. In fact I think public education needs to go a step further, into higher education.
I'm reading my copy of the Constitution and I'm just not seeing anything about a guaranteed right to tax payer funded education. Now I agree that education is very important and probably comes right after food, clothing and shelter. But you will notice that you pay for those more important things yourself. So each person should simply pay for their own childs education. And just like it is expensive to feed 8 kids out of your own pocket, it might be expensive to educate them as well.
But the most important point is I shouldn't have to pay to educate somebodies 8 kids, I should only have to pay for my own. And if you can't afford it...don't have them.
RancidSumo
02-03-11, 13:00
This thread makes me really glad I grew up in Wyoming where there is usually only one school per town (and then usually an alternative school). The vast majority of them are good schools too with the exception of Rock Springs, WY :haha:.
Sorry, public education is one thing that I never understood the libertarian stance on. Education is as important as freedom of speech and guns for ensuring individuals' freedom. In fact I think public education needs to go a step further, into higher education.
The more the "public" (read "state") gets into education, the worse it is. Education is vitally important. That is one big reason to keep the government out of it.
And I agree with SteyrAUG -- no where do I see the public being allowed into education by our Constitution.
And once you realize where the notion of public education comes from (Prussia) you realize why the left likes it. You get a lot of worker drones who are brainwashed into supporting the state as supreme.
Not that anybody cares, but if it isn't a federal responsibility, and it isn't prohibited, then it is left to the states or the people.
Yep, and as such it should be fully funded by the 'individual states and The People themselves.' As should most everything else that is currently federally funded.
The more the "public" (read "state") gets into education, the worse it is. Education is vitally important. That is one big reason to keep the government out of it.
And I agree with SteyrAUG -- no where do I see the public being allowed into education by our Constitution.
And once you realize where the notion of public education comes from (Prussia) you realize why the left likes it. You get a lot of worker drones who are brainwashed into supporting the state as supreme.
Most people who use this argument balk when you start talking about legalizing drugs. Your stance?
Seriously, the constitution is a good basis, but was not intended to be the beginning and end of law and role of government.
Most people who use this argument balk when you start talking about legalizing drugs. Your stance?
You must be new around here.
While drugs are dumb and stupid, I am 100% for legalization.
(And no, I have never used illegal drugs or even alcohol in my life and balked even at pain killer narcotics when I had ankle surgery, though I gave in and used them minimally as needed)
Seriously, the constitution is a good basis, but was not intended to be the beginning and end of law and role of government.
What? The Constitution is the guiding law of the land. If a law is not in harmony with the Constitution, out it goes.
RancidSumo
02-03-11, 20:46
You must be new around here.
While drugs are dumb and stupid, I am 100% for legalization.
(And no, I have never used illegal drugs or even alcohol in my life and balked even at pain killer narcotics when I had ankle surgery, though I gave in and used them minimally as needed)
What? The Constitution is the guiding law of the land. If a law is not in harmony with the Constitution, out it goes.
Make that two of us who believe in keeping the government out of education while legalizing drugs.
Regarding the recent Senate vote on the health care monstrosity, some community organizer type of person was giving an interview and saying that health care is a RIGHT.
If that is the case, then why would Obomacare make me buy health insurance? If it is a right, shouldn't it be free?
Most people who use this argument balk when you start talking about legalizing drugs. Your stance?
Seriously, the constitution is a good basis, but was not intended to be the beginning and end of law and role of government.
Ummm, the Constitution isn't a list of what the government can do, it is a list of what it can't. And since it EXPRESSLY doesn't give them the power to take my money for redistribution for the education of other peoples children then they don't ever get such power according to the Constitution.
It also isn't a "basis", it is strictly defined limitations.
Basically you are NOT entitled to my money. And just because you decide to have a dozen kids doesn't make you somehow "more entitled" to my money.
Belief that we are somehow due "free stuff" from the government is how we ended up with Obama Health Care (those retards who voted for it actually thought it would be free).
We should only have to pay for the things we all use like police, fire departments and ambulance service. If you send your kids to private school or don't have kids, you shouldn't have to pay a dime.
And if you absolutely MUST have your socialism, then I want socialized small arms and ammunition. I want the government to distribute 10,000 of 5.56 and an M-16 rifle to each and every qualified (non felon, etc.) male citizen of the United States and I want every other person taxed accordingly so we don't actually have to pay for it.
And if you don't think people should have to pay for such things because they don't happen to be qualified citizens and thus don't enjoy the benefits, well that is exactly how I feel about public schools.
RancidSumo
02-03-11, 23:06
Ummm, the Constitution isn't a list of what the government can do, it is a list of what it can't. And since it EXPRESSLY doesn't give them the power to take my money for redistribution for the education of other peoples children then they don't ever get such power according to the Constitution.
Actually, it is a list of what it can do. It is a very small and comprehensive list of what they are allowed to do and anything that isn't in that list if off limits.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.