Quote :

" My position is based on the mathematics of the reality of the situation we're currently in, and yours is based on an apparently shortsighted adherence to a philosophy that has no basis in reality."

I can't believe I agree with you. Indeed, the gap between rich and poor is getting wider. And I personally don't believe it's because the poor are getting lazyer. "Free market capitalism", by definition, favors those with capital. The great equalizer should be education, but ability to get a good education tracks with socio-economic advantage. Most of the people that believe we have a true meritocracy weren't born poor.

If this country provided a free education through the Bachelor degree, including room and board for every citizen that wants one, I'd be a lot more free market.

10/20/2008 11:26:46 PM

I might be wrong, but I think the trend in many European countries, especially those whose economies are struggling, is to lower taxes on businesses in order to stimulate economic activity.

Quote :

"2007: According to a provision in the Corporate Income Tax Act, which parliament passed on a second reading debate, Bulgaria has lowered the corporate tax rate from 15 to 10 percent starting in 2007, when the country joins the European Union, the parliament decided Asked how the gap of 290 million levs will be filled, Deputy Finance Minister Georgi Kadiev said he is not worried, because when taxes are cut, more and more businesses of the grey economy come out to light and start to pay taxes. The economy is going well and the corporation tax generates more and more revenue. "

[Edited on October 20, 2008 at 11:27 PM. Reason : .]

10/20/2008 11:27:21 PM

^^^ There are multiple graphs at the link i posted, which are you referring to?

Quote :

"I think its economic theory that if you want less of something, tax it. If you want more, subsidize it. That real enough for ya? "

More meaningless talking points, just what this country needs.

Quote :

"Why don't you answer this question: What do you think will happen if the trends in those graphs continue unabated? Could it possible be good for our country in the middle or long term? "

[Edited on October 20, 2008 at 11:35 PM. Reason : ]

10/20/2008 11:27:34 PM

Quote :

"haha, I love when you all say this. So not only are you libs interested in others money but also how they spend thier time. "

Me a liberal hahahaha what a joke. I am to hedonistic and lack the altruism to be a liberal.

I prefer to be realistic and pragmatic. This gives me advantage to oscillate between favoritism of the two parties when it suits my needs.

10/20/2008 11:42:22 PM

10/21/2008 12:57:40 AM

I think I'm starting to understand how things work.

We all share the basic idea that America should be the land of opportunity. The argument could be made that "land of opportunity" is nothing more than an advertising slogan created to lure cheap labor across the Atlantic many years ago. But anyway, regardless of how unrealistic the "opportunity" bit is, it's still an integral part of our national identity. And we truly want opportunity for all. However, the doors of opportunity slam shut in the face of certain realities--like poverty.

In an effort to alleviate poverty and promote opportunity, we've taken action in a number of directions. We give incentives to big businesses in the hopes of creating jobs. We provide public education. We give some folks healthcare. We distribute foodstamps. We give money directly to folks who need it. And on and on...

Our efforts are not in vain. Conditions have improved. However, we still debate on how high or low the basic standard of living should be, whether or not our efforts are effectively spreading opportunity, and whether or not our efforts are maximized in terms of efficiency.

For example, foodstamps are great, but they don't go very far when they're used to buy nutritionless crap and when they're used at stores owned by hardcore opportunists. Public education is great, but it struggles if you're not going to fund it: some teachers are great, but many are not and we could weed them out if the job entailed more than $30,000/year. Welfare checks are good, but they're often mismanaged, just like the tax cuts and incentives to businesses don't seem to do the trick.

So it's all tied up in the government where party politics, abstract theory, and individual egos twist everything into an impotent mess. And the motivation to agree on what to do and how to do it isn't particularly high cause the folks who suffer (the children) don't have the vote.

(To be clear, the wealthy are getting wealthier on programs intended to help the poor. I mean, we're spending a whole lot of money and the results don't reconcile...sure, there are inefficiencies...but come on...how many times are we gonna incentivize a manufacturing plant and then get all confused when the jobs don't pay shit and dry up altogether after the incentive period ends?)

[Edited on October 21, 2008 at 2:03 AM. Reason : sss]

10/21/2008 1:57:59 AM

Quote :

"Public education is great, but it struggles if you're not going to fund it"

The problem isnt funding, we spend more money than anyone in the world and Bush actually spent alot more than clinton on education. Its time we stop throwing money at issues and actually get these industries away from ineffiecent and ineffective bureaucracies.

The problem, in my opinion brid, is that people are looking towards the govt to fix thier own problems and then shocked when they are wasteful and ineffective with thier efforts.

10/21/2008 9:25:55 AM

Quote :

"Obama is a socialist"

10/21/2008 10:26:15 AM

A lot of the problems with our public education system occured when the Federal gov't started meddling around.

10/21/2008 11:35:47 AM

I feel the same way with other industries.. esp healthcare. So MORE govt isnt the answer, imo.

10/21/2008 11:41:49 AM

^^ How should the government retreat from the Public Education systems in the states?

Just curious.

10/21/2008 11:58:51 AM

The hilarity inherent here is that Healthcare costs pales in comparison to Congressional earmarks for a ton of other things. You guys rant and rail against free healthcare, a program I view as being for the national good, yet where are the threads against farm subsidies, business subsidies, billion dollar highway projects, and 'defense' spending on two wars that have no real end?

This country is far more socialist then you think, yet you rant and rave against the one socialist program thats actually useful.

I'm personally for reducing government as much as possible and increasing state legislative power to handle local economic and social issues rather then trying to find a Federal solution to everything. I actually don't even want the Federal government to provide any type of welfare and social security- welfare being better handled by state and local governments as a social net, and personal retirement better being handled by the general populace (provided that they are given education on how to do so).

The only thing I personally see as being necessary is healthcare specifically because employer provided healthcare unnecessarily burdens corporations and ultimately reduces my paycheck more then if government provided healthcare.

Which, by the way, wouldn't require more taxes if all the other garbage programs were cut.

Don't look for either candidate addressing any of this though.

[Edited on October 21, 2008 at 12:04 PM. Reason : >.<]

10/21/2008 12:04:03 PM

I agree with alot of what you said santa.

But i disagree again with healthcare being "free". Its ridiculous on one acccount and a recipe for disaster on another.

A direct buyer-seller market is the answer to healthcare. Instead you have thirdparty currently which leads to three main problems, which will only worsen with furthering the reach of govt.

1. Fraud, leading to financial waste
2. Lack of choice and control, leading to frustration
3. Lack of personal responsiblity, leading to bad health


I believe most of this is solved if we can get back to a buyer-seller market. In order to do so we have to shift responsiblity back to individuals, which is bucking the trend the nation seems to be moving in. Instead we have a system where individuals have little information on the cost or quality of thier healthcare, have no financial incentives for wise consumption, and have thier decisions made for them.

Newt gingrich, once said that the decision in 1943 to go to a third party system turned health care into a rental car. THe problem is, almost no one washed a rental car. And almost no one feels personally responsible for their own health in our current system.

10/21/2008 12:20:25 PM

i'm a socio-capitalist

but if i had to choose between the two, i'd say socialist

10/21/2008 12:21:24 PM

Quote :

"This country is far more socialist then you think"

its not socialism when its going towards a war machine. there's another word for that.

10/21/2008 12:24:04 PM

hitler posed no immediate threat to the united states, but that fucking war monger FDR got involved

10/21/2008 12:29:04 PM

^Are you comparing the War in Iraq to WWII?

Quote :

"eyedrb: The problem isnt funding, we spend more money than anyone in the world and Bush actually spent alot more than clinton on education. Its time we stop throwing money at issues and actually get these industries away from ineffiecent and ineffective bureaucracies. The problem, in my opinion brid, is that people are looking towards the govt to fix thier own problems and then shocked when they are wasteful and ineffective with thier efforts."

I agree the problem isn't all funding. I know that in Wake County the administration is huge and bloated with high salaries that teachers, principals, vice-principals, TAs, office staff, etc...probably couldn't even fathom. Besides administrators, we've also seen money thrown away on nonsense. A couple of failing high schools in Greensboro got multi-million dollar makeovers, and the kids are still failing. And the building contracts always seem sketch, and the supplies the schools get seem to cost more than they do me when I go to the store. And, even when all this is accounted for, it still feels like somebody's stealing.

Now, I'd like you to acknowledge that I was right about what I said: teachers are not paid enough.

[Edited on October 21, 2008 at 12:44 PM. Reason : ?]

10/21/2008 12:43:53 PM

Quote :

"hitler posed no immediate threat to the united states, but that fucking war monger FDR got involved "

Nothing says "no immediate threat" like a country declaring war on you.

10/21/2008 12:44:56 PM

^like Iran?

Quote :

"teachers are not paid enough."

the US spends more money than any other country on education...is throwing even more money at education going to correct our shitty shitty test results?

10/21/2008 12:47:36 PM

Quote :

"....but the best way to grow the economy is to cut taxes for corporations and help companies create jobs! Even if the middle class has no money because they are spending it all on gas, health insurance, and food. They are going to have to learn to live within their means!!!! It is not like they need money to spend at businesses, businesses can stay open solely off low taxes and do not need the consumers to actually have any money to spend."

10/21/2008 1:16:30 PM

^^Yes, I get that. And I agree that money doesn't fix everything. Of all the money spent on education, it seems very little makes it into the hands of our teachers. Are you willing to agree that we don't pay our teachers enough?

10/21/2008 1:30:21 PM

Quote :

"the US spends more money than any other country on education...is throwing even more money at education going to correct our shitty shitty test results?"

A lot of the money the US spends on education is shitty and useless waste. Failing schools have had money thrown at them for better facilities or supplies which in the end don't do shit to help education.

Raising teacher salary is something that would actually show tangible results. The reason public education is so bad right now is because very few outstanding people are becoming teachers... there is very little economic incentive for very intelligent college students or graduates to become teachers, which is causing the teaching industry to become more highly populated by mediocre, or in some cases unqualified, people. It would be great if it were possible to simply raise standards for who is allowed to be employed as a teacher, but doing that now would cause a huge shortage in teachers. First, salaries must be raised or there will be no reason for a smart, highly educated person to become a teacher, unless it is their lifelong passion.

Just look at a lot of engineering fields for an example of employment without passion. I'm sure there's a ton of people out there who don't have a passion for living in cubicles, but they do it because the job pays well. I'm also sure that there are some people out there who would not mind being teachers, but who choose not to be because they know they would not be paid very much.


v true, eyedrb, there are teachers out there that are being very overpaid... these for the most part are the unqualified teachers... which is why a plan including a raise in teacher salaries would also include raising the standards for employment within public school after 5-10 years or so.

[Edited on October 21, 2008 at 1:40 PM. Reason : .]

10/21/2008 1:31:03 PM

brid, I agree SOME arent paid enough, some are overpaid. I really like the idea of vouchers, I think that opens up competition in schools will improve pay and get results in the classroom.

10/21/2008 1:36:41 PM

Quote :

"A lot of the money the US spends on education is shitty and useless waste. Failing schools have had money thrown at them for better facilities or supplies which in the end don't do shit to help education."

Agree partially, but I definitely don't agree that paying for better facilities and supplies doesn't help. I also know that that's not all the money is used for. Money isn't the only thing failing schools need, but they do need it.

Quote :

"Raising teacher salary is something that would actually show tangible results. The reason public education is so bad right now is because very few outstanding people are becoming teachers... there is very little economic incentive for very intelligent college students or graduates to become teachers, which is causing the teaching industry to become more highly populated by mediocre, or in some cases unqualified, people."

This, however, I agree 100% with. My wife's a music teacher, and it's a damn shame how little she gets paid for all of the work she does, not to mention all of the work she DOESN'T get paid for (late nights, band competitions, plays, PTA meetings, holiday concerts...) I don't see her weekends in October at all, because she's chaperoning band competitions, and she doesn't get anything but lunch for her work.

10/21/2008 1:40:06 PM

Education needs to seriously handled by States as it currently is.

I don't know what you'd do about shitty states though. I suppose move?

10/21/2008 4:53:50 PM

moving is exactly what people would do, and it's what they should do. Just as we stop buying DVD players from a company that makes a shitty player, people would stop living in states with shitty education systems. The state would then either devolve or fix the problem in order to attract residents and businesses

10/21/2008 5:48:46 PM

Quote :

"Yes Duke, the financial system is working marvelously. You're right. Of course, you can't back that up with any shred of evidence, and had global governments actually not stepped in then there really wouldn't be a financial market to speak of, but no go right on ahead pulling assertions out of nowhere. Lets pretend the last month didn't happen. And lets pretend that you weren't included in the Bush camp for quite some time, albeit, not as long as TreeTwista. "

I don't really care what the markets and financial systems do in the short term, and last month doesn't bother me at all.

Quote :

"^^ How should the government retreat from the Public Education systems in the states? Just curious. "

A start would be lowering taxes in the amount that is given back to state governments in federal education grants, minus the middleman "fees" inherent to another player working the deal...then not having any more education grants, and the states handling their education as they see fit.

now i know one of you fucking retards is not going to digest a single thing I just wrote except for "not having any more education grants", and will think that I'm suggesting that education receive less funding, but i don't feel like explaining what should be a simple concept.

Quote :

"The hilarity inherent here is that Healthcare costs pales in comparison to Congressional earmarks for a ton of other things. You guys rant and rail against free healthcare, a program I view as being for the national good, yet where are the threads against farm subsidies, business subsidies, billion dollar highway projects, and 'defense' spending on two wars that have no real end? "

I'm with you, other than being ok with defense spending (as one of the few legitimate things the Feds are tasked with, I think there are plenty of other places to trim back first), and generally ok with highway projects (maybe a slight stretch of the interstate commerce clause, but whatever).

Quote :

"I really like the idea of vouchers, I think that opens up competition in schools will improve pay and get results in the classroom. "

I agree--I think it should be somewhat regulated, but it's the direction that we should go.

10/21/2008 5:49:04 PM

you guys realize the govt spends more in healthcare than defense.

10/21/2008 6:18:56 PM

I didn't realize that. Mainly because it isn't true.

It might have been true 5 years ago, but not anymore. Thanks, W.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

10/21/2008 6:24:13 PM

from your link, unless im reading it wrong.

Healthcare 958.2 B

Defense 806 B

10/21/2008 6:38:17 PM

Quote :

"I don't really care what the markets and financial systems do in the short term, and last month doesn't bother me at all."

if what has happened in the last month or year, not just the falling market, which happens now and again, but what has really gone down inside the economy and on Wall Street, doesn't bother you, then you don't really understand the severity of the problems we are facing.

10/21/2008 6:44:34 PM

well, it depends on which column you are looking at. The total column, yes, healthcare is more. Federal, however, spends more on defense.

10/21/2008 6:45:04 PM

Quote :

""Obama is a socialist""

10/21/2008 6:45:50 PM

well, he is...

10/21/2008 6:48:00 PM

0

[Edited on October 21, 2008 at 6:52 PM. Reason : .]

10/21/2008 6:52:06 PM

Quote :

"I didn't realize that. Mainly because it isn't true. It might have been true 5 years ago, but not anymore. Thanks, W. "

LOL

eyedrb

why did you become a doctor?? You seem to have a lot of ill will in you to be the type to enter a profession to help peeps.

10/21/2008 8:24:46 PM

Quote :

"moving is exactly what people would do, and it's what they should do. Just as we stop buying DVD players from a company that makes a shitty player, people would stop living in states with shitty education systems. The state would then either devolve or fix the problem in order to attract residents and businesses"

nope

10/21/2008 8:58:17 PM

nice rebuttal. Yes, let's have one monolithic, bureaucratic educational system that fails to meet anyone's needs and that has no competition to make it better, as opposed to having 50 systems, which though they may be different, serve the needs of their people far better and actually provide a system to determine which practices are best. Moreover, let's not have a system that encourages improvement. Good work

10/21/2008 9:02:24 PM

Didn't expect you to see it.

10/21/2008 9:15:11 PM

I think the option to buy a different DVD player and to pack up and move the entire family to a different state are rather two different things. Don't you agree?

10/21/2008 9:58:28 PM

Quote :

"moving is exactly what people would do, and it's what they should do. Just as we stop buying DVD players from a company that makes a shitty player, people would stop living in states with shitty education systems. The state would then either devolve or fix the problem in order to attract residents and businesses"

Hard to imagine that would happen, considering people still live in North Carolina. In fact, I'm pretty sure the population continues to grow in spite of the terrible K-12 schools here.

10/21/2008 10:03:46 PM

yes. it grows because there is no alternative.

and no, buying a DVD player is not entirely different than packing and moving to an area where your children might actually succeed. if anything, people's decisions on where to live might be more heavily influenced by the schools.

10/21/2008 10:10:04 PM

Quote :

"I think the option to buy a different DVD player and to pack up and move the entire family to a different state are rather two different things. Don't you agree?"

Eh, people move all the time for their child's education. Why do you think the school system your house is in is considered important information when you're buying or selling a house?

10/21/2008 11:04:56 PM

With these charges of socialism flying, Jon Stewart dug up footage of McCain saying that wealthy people should pay higher taxes because they can afford them. This was at a town hall setting in response to an audience member asking in frustration why her brother, a doctor, should have to pay higher taxes. Lol.

10/21/2008 11:14:26 PM

Quote :

"In fact, I'm pretty sure the population continues to grow in spite of the terrible K-12 schools here. "

I thought we were about mid-pack nowadays (and Raleigh was just listed as the 3rd smartest city in the country, although as discussed in that thread, the rating system wasn't the greatest).

10/22/2008 5:16:00 AM

Quote :

"nice rebuttal. Yes, let's have one monolithic, bureaucratic educational system that fails to meet anyone's needs and that has no competition to make it better, as opposed to having 50 systems, which though they may be different, serve the needs of their people far better and actually provide a system to determine which practices are best. Moreover, let's not have a system that encourages improvement."

aaronburro is actually on to something here. GG

Partially thanks to gov't mandated programs, standardized testing, and political correctness our public school system is in the shitter. Compared to the european education system it is a joke.

In a way our education system is a lot more socialist if not analogous to a communist economic system. Spreading one bland vanilla education to all students regardless of abilities, interests, and needs. While Europe is more "capitalistic" in their education system. Everyone gets a basic education. For more money and advanced learning though even at the high school level students face competition and choice.

10/22/2008 7:22:21 AM

Quote :

"and no, buying a DVD player is not entirely different than packing and moving to an area where your children might actually succeed. if anything, people's decisions on where to live might be more heavily influenced by the schools."

Quote :

"Eh, people move all the time for their child's education. Why do you think the school system your house is in is considered important information when you're buying or selling a house?"

No, the type of people that find themselves with an oversupply of crappy schooling typically can't just pack up and move and they certainly can't pay for a private school. It's a reinforcing cycle. The best teachers don't want to go teach at these schools, the kids fall behind, rinse and repeat. The mid/upper middle class and up can indeed pick to live in an area where the schools are excellent versus somewhere else in the county/state where the schools are just decent.

I do agree with the general argument that the Fed has no business in public schools where the States could and should manage it, but your "free market" concept in regard to schooling is rather misplaced.

10/22/2008 11:50:18 AM

^^ Education systems vary fairly drastically state-by-state, and if your mechanism of competition is that parents will move their students, this can happen too (although most people don't have the resources and/or ability to just move like you people seem to think).

10/22/2008 11:55:52 AM

Schools vary by district within a city, even. People with the means to do so (and I emphasize this point specifically) routinely will choose their neighborhood based upon the quality of the schools.

So it's not simply some myth that parents don't regularly choose where to live based upon the education system - generally, any parent with the means to do so already does.

Thus, the objection is not whether this happens, but of what happens to those who lack the means of doing so (i.e., lower-income families).

10/22/2008 12:07:13 PM

^ Finally somebody gets it.

aaronburro, pull out a pad and take notes.

10/22/2008 12:37:04 PM