Ron Paul on the economic crisis

The latter is the main thing. Pay for teachers is very poor, and its hard to attract the brightest people to the field as a result.

People like to say that it's easy work, you get the summers off etc, but that's a bunch of BS. It's hard work, and it's a field that's arguably the most important to the advancement of society. We need to pay them a lot more.
 
I agree.. my parents were inner city High school math teachers and my wife is a teacher.. I know exactly how things work in those areas...
 
The thing about paying teachers better is a valid point, but half the story.

A decade of Democrat "pay teachers more" or Republican "performance-based" policies will show the same result: shitty education, particularly in impoverished areas. The main difference will be the cost to the taxpayer being increased on one end, and nobody applying for inner-city teaching jobs on another due to the inevitably of being shitcanned due to poor performance.

Much of it is out of the control of teachers. Some indeed. Absolutely. But on the other hand, poor education begets poor education on the cultural/family/community end. Communities that show people who have educations not doing shit with their lives due to discrimination, people who don't value education on another, and parents who lack the social capacity to (1) encourage/ensure that homework is done and done properly let alone (2) simply lack the educational background to help their own children with rudimentary reading or mathematics problems (and the social reinforcement that stems from living in communities where this situation is normative) leads to very disparate outcomes.

Annette Lareau's "Home Advantage" is a solid book on the differences in working-class and middle-class education in terms of how education is "done." Both in and out of school; working class parents tend to not get involved in parent-teacher meetings, read evaluations, help with homework, encourage education. They *do* care about education, but they simply don't know/don't understand how to help it. Two-income households also create problems with the absence of parents during or after school to be a part of their child's education.

It goes so far beyond schooling that neither party has a sound policy to change that. "It takes a village" is a mantra reviled by some because Hillary Clinton penned a book under that name. But it's critical to education to keep that mantra in mind.

As for funding, I'd simply reappropriate property taxes evenly amongst school districts based on a per capita measurement. High property taxes in wealthy areas keep schools in wealthy areas a step ahead of schools in low-income areas. Meritocracy is fine and all that, but at what point can we claim meritocracy if, in education, the very foundation for first proving one's work ethic and ingenuity, a select group are already disadvantaged at the starting gate?

So take the funds that go to education and allocate them based on the number of students in a district. To each according to their need, eh? :rofl:
 
Yeah, it's definitely much more than teacher salaries/quality of teachers for sure. I wasn't implying that was the main problem and increasing salaries in the panacea.

The biggest problem is education isn't valued enough in some communities. Hell, look at the bashing of college by some posters here in the other thread--much less in poor areas where many parents don't care if they're even around and not an addict.

Having the best teachers in the world will have limited impact if it's not being reinforced at home, and even less if it's being totally disregarded or belittled at home. But they're still better than having shitty teachers, so it is one part of the problem/solution.

Splitting money equally across districts is a good idea, but there needs to be more money period. If you just allocate it differently then you'll pull some schools up and some down. The ideal is to give all public schools the resources of those in wealthy districts.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Yes. But it's origin is in the carnival. A 'mark' is someone who's hooked into whatever institution is trying to hook them. "This way to the egress" indeed, you know. I'm a mark for the...whatever sort of shady Power Elite you find to be the culprit at the moment, I suppose. Bilderberg, The Jews, The Non-Jew Zionists, The Burger King, Congress, Alien Space Whores, Type O Negative, The Bush Administration, The Other Bush Administration, Rutherford B Hayes Has a Motherfuckin' Posse. Whomever it is at the moment.....
30%? 80%? Care to source those numbers? Otherwise I'm seeing that tired and flawed means of trying to impose factual valuation (statistics) onto a situation where you're just expressing your opinion, or what makes you feel better.



It's to point out how hackneyed, conspiratorial, and unproveable your theories are. Your arguments of the NAFTA Superhighway, or the Amero, or war with Iran, are no different than the "George W Bush has succeeded because we haven't been attacked in the US again!" bullshit. It's an argument with no evidence that effort has been made towards the highway, uniform currency, or an attack on the states. Now, we know people in our government are salivating to bomb Iran. But it's incorrect, something you can't demonstrate the proof of, and pure folly to argue that it's inevitable and that politicians have the same sort of vitriol towards that country.

Why am I here? Because you're an absolute, unadulterated bullshit artist who should be held accountable for your dumbass fucking claims. Whether it's the Amero or "9/11 Was an Inside Job," you don't provide evidence - you just link to another Ron Paul video, or another C&P article from Alex Jones. If you're going to cite radio hosts as evidence, the least you could do is go classy and cull from the Art Bell archives, instead of citing things from this fat hillbilly Orson Welles wannabe.



Wow. Yeah... Sure thing, pops. I'm sure Ron Paul would draw a crowd of 200,000 in Germany, just like Obama did.

Look. You're just cherry picking your nutjob ilk and saying "SEE! THE WORLD KNOWS IT TOO!" which is a naive sort of argument. I can't single out Democrat voters and make reference to "the rest of the Us is beginning to understand that the Republicans are....." because it isn't true.

Your suggestion that the world would (1) accept Paul over Obama is laughably incorrect, and that (2) those who WOULD attack us in the US would suddenly think twice if Paul were elected is so laughably pathetic that I'm beginning to simply feel sorry for you instead of feel ire towards your conspiracies.

If anyone should suspend their "campaign," hombre, it's you.

I bet those troops are fuckin' pissed. You're like those christian fucks who leave a "tip" on the table at a restaurant, but it's a folded up religious pamphlet that looks like money from a distance. The worst part is that you pricks think you're not being a fucking prick, but "doing someone a favor." Well, myah. You're a fucking twat. Why couldn't you just pirate a copy of "Grand Theft Auto" and send that with the game? It would have cost you 10 cents more over sending them a copy of "S2E4 of Tinfoil Hat Motherfuckers In Heat." If you're going to be *cough* "SUB-VER-SIVE" you have to do it nicely. If you think that anybody watched that crap, then you should believe that I won't report your ass the next time you link to a torrent.

Self-righteous cheap-ass fuckin prick. I hated those fuckin' christians' phony sense of self-satisfaction. I'll be sure to hand a $4000 pile of pamphlets to the fuckin' electric company or grocery store and see how far THE POWER OF JESUS gets me in the real world.



Nope. I did try to look it up, so I was curious what the name was.



wrong. But, hey, let's make dichotomies! You're with us or against us, right? Part of the solution or part of the problem, right? A tinfoil hat wearing nutjob or someone who's going to vote for a potential winner in November, right!


[/quote]

Aw shucks, you made me blush!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top