Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

[Conservative65]

You keep making claims about how well you did yet provide no proof. Where's the proof. Without it, your claims are invalid. What about that do you not get? It's easy to understand. Anyone stupid enough to support a social experiment like Obama for President doesn't understand reality.

What's in it for me, if let's say, I sent you my W-2? I can't think of any good reason to let a fucking sociopath have my real name and address... So when you can think of a way I can prove it that doesn't let the crazies know where I live, let me know.

Oh Obama won because Bush fucked up everything. I know you have selective amnesia about that.

Those that argue Trump is a minority President either don't understand the system or are so pissed they lost they can't face reality.

If things were the way the losers said, the team gaining the most yards and getting the most first downs would win the game and points wouldn't matter. In a Presidential election, the points (electoral votes) are what matters and yards gained aren't.

This isn't a game. You see, if it worked the way the Founding Slave Rapists wanted it to, some states could just not even hold a vote, and just pick electors through the legislature, which is what a lot of them did in the 19th century.

But we had a national election asking EVERYONE who they wanted for President, not just the residents of a few swing states. And the people pretty clearly said No to Trump. But he won some swing states with the help of Russian hackers...

This is what Joe and his ilk do not understand. We were not playing to see who can hit the most balls in, we were playing to hit certain balls in. If we were playing to hit the most balls in regardless of what balls they were, we would have played the game differently.

Um, no. We were playing to see 'Who did the people want".

Now, here's the thing. We still have this anachronism called an electoral college... and we probably need to fix that given the disastrous results like Bush and Trump it causes.

Could we get disastrous presidents through a popular vote. Yup. But we'd have no one to blame but ourselves.

You see, we've never had a case where we ignored the will of the people and things turned out fine. Usually, when the EC picks a president over the will of the people, it's a disaster.

What's in it for you? Being a man and proving what you claim. If you're not willing to prove your claims, the only thing that can be said is you're a liar.

If you want to get rid of the electoral college, there is a process to do that outlined in the Constitution. If it means that much to you, get to stepping. If you don't, then all you're doing is whining because in the end, YOUR BITCH LOST.

 

[JoeB131]

What's in it for you? Being a man and proving what you claim. If you're not willing to prove your claims, the only thing that can be said is you're a liar.

Actually, um. No. I know what the truth is, and you haven't even stated what you'd consider "Proof". I mean, I could send you my 1040, but you'd just say I made it up... so what's the point.

If you want to get rid of the electoral college, there is a process to do that outlined in the Constitution. If it means that much to you, get to stepping. If you don't, then all you're doing is whining because in the end, YOUR BITCH LOST.

Again, guy, I'm just reminding everyone- America got it right. The system got it wrong. And when we watch Trump fumble through even the basics of his job, we will see how much the system got it wrong.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Consider: http://archive.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/1126coulson1126.html

Educating Our Children: Catholic Schools Doing More With Less

Great article! [\sarcasm]

Let's see the national stats instead of a blanket statement without any support. BTW, Catholic schools are not the only private schools.

*sigh* That whooshing noise you just heard was the point flying over your head.

Prove me wrong then!

I spent three years studying this in graduate school. How about you?

Studying what? How to totally misunderstand what people say? I didn't realize they actually taught a course in that.

Let me help you out here, hon. At no point in time did Thunderbird suggest or imply that Catholic schools are the only private schools in the country. He offered them as an example of how it is possible to provide good education without throwing a ton of taxpayer money at it. Furthermore, the statement "private schools are often cheaper than public schools" does not require "national stats" to prove it, because he didn't say they were ALWAYS cheaper, or cheaper EVERYWHERE.

Finally, my educational background is none of your business unless and until I choose to make it so. Graduate school is not required to have common sense or understand simple English grammar. In fact, I find that it's sometimes counterproductive to those things.

I misunderstood what? I made myself clear.

The claim is ludicrous! Some Catholic schools do a great job, but cherry-picking that tidbit to support a claim that private schools offer a better education at a cheaper cost simply is NOT true.

I guess your educational background being suspect is the reason for your confusion.

*sigh* Only in the United States of Me-Monkeys does one assume that "You misunderstood" referred only to understanding THEMSELVES.

Work with me here, Chuckles.

You may not have noticed, but you were conversing with ANOTHER PERSON (Thunderbird), just as you are NOW conversing with another person (Cecilie). You may understand the bilge emanating from your keyboard, but you are clearly not comprehending any of the words coming from our keyboards, which is what I, in fact, said.

One more time, and then I abandon you to your pigheadedly determined ignorance.

Thunderbird did not claim that "private schools offer better education at a cheaper cost". He claimed that OFTEN, private schools can offer better education for less money. And then he offered an example of that happening. Please note the word "Often", and go look it up in the dictionary. I'll wait here.

Furthermore, you demanded national numbers. Had you read and comprehended Thunderbird's link, you would see that, in fact, it DID discuss national numbers. Specifically, the link stated that "Catholic school students outscored their public school counterparts by an average of 23 points" on the critical reading portion of the SATs. It also stated that "Catholic high schools spend more than $2,000 less per pupil than public schools." Those are both national numbers. In the last paragraph of the link, it even tells you "The average cost of tuition per pupil in a catholic elementary school is $3,383 while secondary education costs $8,182" and "In 2010, the public education system spent approximately $10,614 per pupil." Maybe they teach math differently where you grew up, but that does look like Catholic schools cost less to ME.

And finally, the link even tells you that Jack Jennings, of The Center on Education Policy, ADMITS that public schools do not have the test scores of private schools. So clearly, by at least one measurement, Catholic schools DO often (there's that word again) get better results with less money, which is what Thunderbird said.

Now, if you have some reasonable objection to WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID, please feel free to bring it forth.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I spend most of my waking hours educating an 8-year-old, and I can tell you that he is not NEARLY as difficult as educating the drivelers on this board. HE grasped the concept of the Electoral College the first time around.

That's right, fruitcakes. You are struggling to wrap your brains around something a second-grader already grasped and moved on from. Be proud.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Great article! [\sarcasm]

Let's see the national stats instead of a blanket statement without any support. BTW, Catholic schools are not the only private schools.

*sigh* That whooshing noise you just heard was the point flying over your head.

Prove me wrong then!

I spent three years studying this in graduate school. How about you?

Studying what? How to totally misunderstand what people say? I didn't realize they actually taught a course in that.

Let me help you out here, hon. At no point in time did Thunderbird suggest or imply that Catholic schools are the only private schools in the country. He offered them as an example of how it is possible to provide good education without throwing a ton of taxpayer money at it. Furthermore, the statement "private schools are often cheaper than public schools" does not require "national stats" to prove it, because he didn't say they were ALWAYS cheaper, or cheaper EVERYWHERE.

Finally, my educational background is none of your business unless and until I choose to make it so. Graduate school is not required to have common sense or understand simple English grammar. In fact, I find that it's sometimes counterproductive to those things.

I misunderstood what? I made myself clear.

The claim is ludicrous! Some Catholic schools do a great job, but cherry-picking that tidbit to support a claim that private schools offer a better education at a cheaper cost simply is NOT true.

I guess your educational background being suspect is the reason for your confusion.

*sigh* Only in the United States of Me-Monkeys does one assume that "You misunderstood" referred only to understanding THEMSELVES.

Work with me here, Chuckles.

You may not have noticed, but you were conversing with ANOTHER PERSON (Thunderbird), just as you are NOW conversing with another person (Cecilie). You may understand the bilge emanating from your keyboard, but you are clearly not comprehending any of the words coming from our keyboards, which is what I, in fact, said.

One more time, and then I abandon you to your pigheadedly determined ignorance.

Thunderbird did not claim that "private schools offer better education at a cheaper cost". He claimed that OFTEN, private schools can offer better education for less money. And then he offered an example of that happening. Please note the word "Often", and go look it up in the dictionary. I'll wait here.

Furthermore, you demanded national numbers. Had you read and comprehended Thunderbird's link, you would see that, in fact, it DID discuss national numbers. Specifically, the link stated that "Catholic school students outscored their public school counterparts by an average of 23 points" on the critical reading portion of the SATs. It also stated that "Catholic high schools spend more than $2,000 less per pupil than public schools." Those are both national numbers. In the last paragraph of the link, it even tells you "The average cost of tuition per pupil in a catholic elementary school is $3,383 while secondary education costs $8,182" and "In 2010, the public education system spent approximately $10,614 per pupil." Maybe they teach math differently where you grew up, but that does look like Catholic schools cost less to ME.

And finally, the link even tells you that Jack Jennings, of The Center on Education Policy, ADMITS that public schools do not have the test scores of private schools. So clearly, by at least one measurement, Catholic schools DO often (there's that word again) get better results with less money, which is what Thunderbird said.

Now, if you have some reasonable objection to WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID, please feel free to bring it forth.

I have a suggestion for you. Why don't you shut up telling me what somebody else meant?

Also, I suggest you look up the term "cherry-picking" as applied to data.

I will further expose your blatant ignorance! Your claim about the 23 points outscored on the SAT means nothing. Do you know how few questions that is on a test with a HUGE 600 point score range?

The answer is 2 questions!

I did a little Googling for tuition at our two local Catholic high schools. Both were over $13,000 a year. It seems your data is off by about $5000. BTW, that is called "cherry-picking" your data.

 

[Cecilie1200]

*sigh* That whooshing noise you just heard was the point flying over your head.

Prove me wrong then!

I spent three years studying this in graduate school. How about you?

Studying what? How to totally misunderstand what people say? I didn't realize they actually taught a course in that.

Let me help you out here, hon. At no point in time did Thunderbird suggest or imply that Catholic schools are the only private schools in the country. He offered them as an example of how it is possible to provide good education without throwing a ton of taxpayer money at it. Furthermore, the statement "private schools are often cheaper than public schools" does not require "national stats" to prove it, because he didn't say they were ALWAYS cheaper, or cheaper EVERYWHERE.

Finally, my educational background is none of your business unless and until I choose to make it so. Graduate school is not required to have common sense or understand simple English grammar. In fact, I find that it's sometimes counterproductive to those things.

I misunderstood what? I made myself clear.

The claim is ludicrous! Some Catholic schools do a great job, but cherry-picking that tidbit to support a claim that private schools offer a better education at a cheaper cost simply is NOT true.

I guess your educational background being suspect is the reason for your confusion.

*sigh* Only in the United States of Me-Monkeys does one assume that "You misunderstood" referred only to understanding THEMSELVES.

Work with me here, Chuckles.

You may not have noticed, but you were conversing with ANOTHER PERSON (Thunderbird), just as you are NOW conversing with another person (Cecilie). You may understand the bilge emanating from your keyboard, but you are clearly not comprehending any of the words coming from our keyboards, which is what I, in fact, said.

One more time, and then I abandon you to your pigheadedly determined ignorance.

Thunderbird did not claim that "private schools offer better education at a cheaper cost". He claimed that OFTEN, private schools can offer better education for less money. And then he offered an example of that happening. Please note the word "Often", and go look it up in the dictionary. I'll wait here.

Furthermore, you demanded national numbers. Had you read and comprehended Thunderbird's link, you would see that, in fact, it DID discuss national numbers. Specifically, the link stated that "Catholic school students outscored their public school counterparts by an average of 23 points" on the critical reading portion of the SATs. It also stated that "Catholic high schools spend more than $2,000 less per pupil than public schools." Those are both national numbers. In the last paragraph of the link, it even tells you "The average cost of tuition per pupil in a catholic elementary school is $3,383 while secondary education costs $8,182" and "In 2010, the public education system spent approximately $10,614 per pupil." Maybe they teach math differently where you grew up, but that does look like Catholic schools cost less to ME.

And finally, the link even tells you that Jack Jennings, of The Center on Education Policy, ADMITS that public schools do not have the test scores of private schools. So clearly, by at least one measurement, Catholic schools DO often (there's that word again) get better results with less money, which is what Thunderbird said.

Now, if you have some reasonable objection to WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID, please feel free to bring it forth.

I have a suggestion for you. Why don't you shut up telling me what somebody else meant?

That's not a suggestion. That's a question. The answer is "Because you're not going to understand it without help, obviously."

For the record, if you didn't want anyone to comment on or disagree with the things you say, is a public message board on the Internet maybe not the best place for you to say them?

Also, I suggest you look up the term "cherry-picking" as applied to data.

I already know what cherry-picking means. That's how I know that providing you with national averages doesn't qualify.

I will further expose your blatant ignorance! Your claim about the 23 points outscored on the SAT means nothing. Do you know how few questions that is on a test with a HUGE 600 point score range?

"Further" implies that you have already done so. The only blatant ignorance you've exposed so far is your own of the English language.

Actually, the Evidence-Based Reading and Writing section of the SAT test has a maximum possible score of 800, not 600. Just so you know.

The answer is 2 questions!

It may not make a great deal of difference if I personally score 23 points higher on the reading half of the SATs than you personally do, although if we're both wanting to apply to Harvard, it may make a great deal of difference, particularly if you're 23 points below their cutoff acceptance level.

But in this case, we're talking about an average across ALL the SAT takers across the nation. Catholic school students score AN AVERAGE of 23 points higher. While it is only one of many possible measurements of a schools effectiveness, it IS an important one.

I did a little Googling for tuition at our two local Catholic high schools. Both were over $13,000 a year. It seems your data is off by about $5000. BTW, that is called "cherry-picking" your data.

Yes, cherry-picking is exactly what you did. And MY data isn't off at all, because I never said the two schools in your area charged $8000. Once again, you misunderstood. I said that THE AVERAGE cost of secondary tuition - that would be an average across ALL Catholic schools in the nation; did your school bother to teach you what averages are? - is $8000.

And before you even go there, I am well aware that the figure wasn't exactly $8000. I wasn't interested in scrolling back up for the exact dollar amount.

 

[Thunderbird]

I'm just upset that stupid fucks like you were so racist and misogynistic that you put him in a position to do it to start with.

Actually the Clinton dynasty is far more racist.

TRUMP IS A RACIST! TRUMP IS A RACIST!! TRUMP IS A RACIST!!!

But you are a brain-dead partisan tool so you don't know this.

 

[Thunderbird]

Guy, you don't link to a misogynistic anti-abortion website and pretend you made a point.

You seem to feel a little childish name-calling will negate the facts as presented by John Hunt, Ph.D.

And the abortion industry is the greatest enemy of the female gender in history: 160 Million and Counting

So pro-abortion tools like yourself are the misogynists.

Nazi Germany, the penalties for abortion were increased again.

Do you deny that the Nazis were condemned at the Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal for encouraging abortion in the occupied territories. Yes or no?

The Avalon Project : Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Volume 11

Guy, you can't quote Kirstin Powers, who has her kneepads on for the right wing, and still be credible on an issue.

Again you just dismiss information that doesn't confirm your prejudices.

 

[Thunderbird]

Why would they do that? "Hey, they're hiring at the new private school! They are paying less money and you can be fired at will, but it's totally worth it to quit your nice union job!"

A voucher system would bring better pay for private school teachers. And good teachers are not worried they'll be fired for incompetence.

Naw, most teachers quit because they discover children are actually little bastards, mostly.

Your hatred of small children is noted. And please recognize that discipline problems are largely a result of the current public school monopoly and political correctness. In the current system no one is held accountable.

YOu mean she got upset that some little creep was filming them without their permission? I think that's most people, actually.

Your feeble defense of someone who hates free speech is also noted.

No, guy, we have seen it's true.

No guy we haven't.

Success Stories | School Choice Ohio

Forty-one percent of all private schools that participated in the Milwaukee private school voucher program between 1991 and 2015 failed,

So some schools had trouble educating/attracting students and went out of business. That's how the system should work. Failed public schools just keep going on and on destroying the hopes of so many students.

Except that it hasn't worked yet, after we spend a billion a year on Voucher Scams.

Quote: Students attending private schools in Milwaukee with publically funded vouchers showed stronger gains in achievement than their public school counterparts, according to the latest release from a University of Arkansas sponsored, and State of Wisconsin authorized, longitudinal study.

Link: Official State of Wisconsin Study Confirms Choice Schools' Success

And how much have we spent on the public school monopoly that often fails students?