Republicans want to cut education by 25 percent.

[OohPooPahDoo]

No, Republicans want to cut federal government spending in education by 25%. Increases in government spending over the past 40 years have done absolutely nothing to help educate the population.

In 1970 a Pell Grant would cover 70% of the cost of a college education.
Now it covers 1/3.

Why Is College So Expensive? : NPR


By you're logic, since we are paying 4 x as much for gasoline as we did 20 or so years ago, yet (given the same car) our cars don't go any further, clearly, more gasoline isn't the answer for getting further.

The reason education costs are going up is precisely because of government spending in education.

If that were true tuition at private Universities would be rising faster than those at public Universities - that's not the case. Adjusted for inflation, tuition at private Universities has actually not changed much in the past few decades.

Why is this the case?

Spending on public Universities at the state level has decreased Recession Pushed State and Local Higher-Ed Spending to 25-Year Low in 2010 - Government - The Chronicle of Higher Education
leaving those attending public universities with a greater share of the tab to pick up.

Offering easy money in education (these government grants) put the same upward pressure on prices as easy money in the housing market. Sallie Mae (gee, sound familiar) is the institution providing these government student loans, just as Fannie Mae providing housing loans. The parallels between education and housing are striking if you take the time to look at them. The government programs were modeled off of each other, and you get the same results: massive price inflation.


And this isn't just about college education, it is about all education, in free public schools as well. Government has been spending more and more money each year, but results are not improving. Obviously what they are doing is not working.

A) That's only true for federal spending, state and local spending trends have gone up and down depending on state and locality. And if you go to any state its inevitable that the school districts with the most revenue per student have the better schools - that's almost common sense. If you want your kid in a better public school you move to the district with more money available per student for public schools.

B) The mission of public education is not the same as private. Public education seeks to education any child without charging tuition - no matter if the child is a criminal miscreant, a severely physically or mentally handicapped person, etc. If you have a kid that needs an attendant with them at every moment of the school day - the public school has to foot the bill for that, while the private school almost always will not. If you child misbehaves in a private school, the private school can expel him and be done - the public school can only expel the kid into another public school.

My argument is precisely that more spending does not increase the quality of education.

If that is in general true, then one of the two following conclusions must be true
a) it is not possible to increase the quality of eduction
b) the highest quality education comes with zero spending on education

Which is it?

So your example actually serves to disprove your argument. However, your analogy is incorrect. Mileage is determined by engines and car design, not the gasoline. It really makes no sense actually, and even if it did it would only strengthen my case that more spending on education does not mean higher quality education, just as more spending on gasoline does not mean higher quality gasoline.

Actually all gasolines are not equal - the higher priced ones tend to have cleaning agents in them that keep your fuel injectors clean. But that's another story, and I concede, it was a poor analogy.

 

[Warrior102]

Because Budget Resolution 34 doesn't include detailed breakdowns of Function 500 spending reductions, it's impossible to determine exactly how much of the cuts are proposed to come out of the education budget. Further, the plan itself, in resolution form, does not dictate exact spending levels, but instead sets the maximum amount that can be spent. Congressional committees and floor votes determine the rest.

Still, because education spending makes up such a large proportion of the total Function 500 costs – over 90 percent – it's safe to assume most of the cuts from this category would come from education.

With that in mind, the percentages don't lie. The Ryan budget proposal included more than 25 percent funding cuts every year between 2016 and 2021, and it proposed a total 24 percent funding cut between 2012 and 2021, within range of Axelrod’s 25 percent figure. Axelrod's figures are correct if you include everything in the category, most of which is education, but it also includes items that are not education.

We rate Axelrod's claim Mostly True.

PolitiFact | Obama adviser Axelrod says Republican want deep education cuts

Start by going state by state and you will find that everywhere Republicans have taken control of the state legislature, they slashed funding for education. Think people. Why would they do this?

HELENA — The Republican majority on an education subcommittee on Thursday cut $4 million in proposed state funding for programs such as those for gifted and talented students and providing vocational education, a move that jeopardizes an equivalent amount of federal money.

Education subcommittee Republicans cut school funding

Stop sugar-coating the education cuts

To downplay the impact that devastating budget cuts will have on higher education and the state's students, Republicans have had to employ some tortured logic.

Concord Monitor

Gov. Rick Scott's proposed education budget: $1.75 billion in cuts

Thousands gather in Michigan to oppose education cuts

---------------------------------------

Why stop at four. Every state Republicans have taken over, they've slashed funding for education. Why? Simple. An ignorant population is easier to control. That's all there is to it.

When it comes to power or what's best for America, Republicans believe they're being in power IS what's best for America. What ever the cost.

And finally, the worst possible thing they could do is replace education with nothing. Which is exactly what they propose. Oh, and make children assistant janitors. Shameful.

You and dipshits like Truthsmathers are the product of pubic, er, public education. 25% is not enough. It should be cut 100% to eradicate dumb fucks like you.

 

[ShackledNation]

In 1970 a Pell Grant would cover 70% of the cost of a college education.
Now it covers 1/3.

Why Is College So Expensive? : NPR


By you're logic, since we are paying 4 x as much for gasoline as we did 20 or so years ago, yet (given the same car) our cars don't go any further, clearly, more gasoline isn't the answer for getting further.

The reason education costs are going up is precisely because of government spending in education.

If that were true tuition at private Universities would be rising faster than those at public Universities - that's not the case.

Why would tuition at private universities have to be rising faster? I disagree with that assumption.

Adjusted for inflation, tuition at private Universities has actually not changed much in the past few decades.

Rising tuition costs is an example of inflation. It makes little sense to adjust for inflation when we are specifically studying the effects of inflation.

Why is this the case?

Spending on public Universities at the state level has decreased Recession Pushed State and Local Higher-Ed Spending to 25-Year Low in 2010 - Government - The Chronicle of Higher Education
leaving those attending public universities with a greater share of the tab to pick up.

Education costs have been rising for several decades. Noticeable spending cuts have only occurred during the recent recession. To explain a multiple decade-long inflation by looking at a trend occurring during the past few years only makes little sense.

Above is a graph that shows the strong correlation between higher federal government spending and rising education costs--since 1976, not in a few years.

A) That's only true for federal spending, state and local spending trends have gone up and down depending on state and locality. And if you go to any state its inevitable that the school districts with the most revenue per student have the better schools - that's almost common sense. If you want your kid in a better public school you move to the district with more money available per student for public schools.

The fact remains that government spending on education has increased dramatically over the past 40 years, far more than any recent state education cuts.

Notice test results have not budged.

B) The mission of public education is not the same as private. Public education seeks to education any child without charging tuition - no matter if the child is a criminal miscreant, a severely physically or mentally handicapped person, etc. If you have a kid that needs an attendant with them at every moment of the school day - the public school has to foot the bill for that, while the private school almost always will not. If you child misbehaves in a private school, the private school can expel him and be done - the public school can only expel the kid into another public school.

Public education does charge tuition: it's called taxes. You also seem to be noting the disadvantages of public schooling systems.

Also, you seem to assume private schools would expell more than public schools. In fact, "Public schools expel students at a greater ratio than private schools. In particular, private schools are less likely to remove a child for behavioral reasons."

Furthermore, the data show that money spent by private schools is far more effective than money spent by public schools. Despite spending less per student, private schools have higher performance results.

"Private schools cost less per student ($4,689 in 1999-2000) than what public schools spend per student ($8,032 in 1999-2000)."


"The fact that private schools achieve greater outputs (student performance) means they are superior to public schools. The fact that they do it with lesser inputs (financial resources) means they are also more efficient. Private schools do more with less, and this makes them a wise place to invest education dollars."

http://www.childrenseducationalliance-mo.org/pdf/research/education_myths.pdf

My argument is precisely that more spending does not increase the quality of education.

If that is in general true, then one of the two following conclusions must be true
a) it is not possible to increase the quality of eduction
b) the highest quality education comes with zero spending on education

Which is it?

Neither of those conclusions must be true! You assume that the only way to increase the quality of education is to change the amount of money that goes into education. That is absurd, and that is why government programs often fail. Where the money is spent matters, and when you get easy credit the money is often spent in wasteful ways. When politics rather than supply and demand control decisions, money is used inefficiently. That is the entire point.

If you give two companies 1 million dollars to make a phone, under your assumptions, both companies will make phones of identical qualities. But of course, that is not what happens in the real world. One company will likely use the money in more innovative ways, and end up producing a better phone.

Not all spending adds equal value to what money is being spent on. You cannot have any understanding of economics until you accept that fact.

So your example actually serves to disprove your argument. However, your analogy is incorrect. Mileage is determined by engines and car design, not the gasoline. It really makes no sense actually, and even if it did it would only strengthen my case that more spending on education does not mean higher quality education, just as more spending on gasoline does not mean higher quality gasoline.

Actually all gasolines are not equal - the higher priced ones tend to have cleaning agents in them that keep your fuel injectors clean. But that's another story, and I concede, it was a poor analogy.

I knew you would bring up that example. Low grade gasoline that was $1 a decade ago has no more cleaning agents in it today than low grade gasoline that is $4 today. More money is spent on it, but quality has not increased. I am comparing the same type of gasoline, not different types. Each type of gasoline, premium or not, is increasing in price. But the quality of that gasoline does not increase with the change in its price over the years.

The evidence is overwhelming. Higher government spending does not correlate with better performance. Where and how money is spent, in other words efficiency, matters. And government bureaucracy is miserably inefficient. The more money you give it, the more money it wastes.

We all have the goal of providing students with better education. We all want to find the best solutions to achieve that goal. Throwing more money at the problem is not one of them.

 

[blimpo]

The reason private schools have less expulsions is because they don't allow felons and thugs enroll. Public schools must roll out the red carpet for them....

 

[midcan5]

These debates grow old, private schools have motivated students whose lives exist in another world than the poor or the working classes. No one seems to notice that obvious fact. But still my wife teaches in a private school and many of the children are simply not motivated. America worships many things before education comes into the picture.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/o...-about-better-parents.html?src=me&ref=general

[repost] Wish I had time to write the stories my wife told me just this week about parent excuses and American student's laziness. Baffling for sure, but telling of why we are growing dumber and dumber as a nation. Oh, by the way, turn on TV too if you want to understand our culture of narcissistic insanity, detective shows, and medical aliments that House can't solve. Then watch Repo shows and whatnot on TruTV for a interesting view of your fellow citizens. Abandon ship, abandon ship!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/educa...ew-of-waiting-for-superman-2.html#post3065163
http://www.usmessageboard.com/education-and-history/108215-education-then-and-now.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/education-and-history/108215-education-then-and-now-2.html#post2074607
http://www.usmessageboard.com/educa...liberals-in-the-classroom-11.html#post1749647
http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/159100-pay-teachers-more.html#post3418935

"Not surprisingly, in a land where literacy and numeracy are considered virtues, teachers are revered. Teenagers ranked teaching at the top of their list of favorite professions in a recent survey. Far more graduates of upper schools in Finland apply for admission to teacher-training institutes than are accepted. The overwhelming majority of those who eventually enter the classroom as a teacher make it a lifelong career, even though they are paid no more than their counterparts in other European countries."

"At the heart of Finland's stellar reputation is a philosophy completely alien to America. The country of 5.3 million in an area twice the size of Missouri considers education an end in itself - not a means to an end. It's a deeply rooted value that is reflected in the Ministry of Education and in all 432 municipalities. In sharp contrast, Americans view education as a stepping stone to better-paying jobs or to impress others. The distinction explains why we are obsessed with marquee names, and how we structure, operate and fund schools." Lessons From Finland: The Way to Education Excellence | CommonDreams.org

 

[FurthurBB]

Because Budget Resolution 34 doesn't include detailed breakdowns of Function 500 spending reductions, it's impossible to determine exactly how much of the cuts are proposed to come out of the education budget. Further, the plan itself, in resolution form, does not dictate exact spending levels, but instead sets the maximum amount that can be spent. Congressional committees and floor votes determine the rest.

Still, because education spending makes up such a large proportion of the total Function 500 costs – over 90 percent – it's safe to assume most of the cuts from this category would come from education.

With that in mind, the percentages don't lie. The Ryan budget proposal included more than 25 percent funding cuts every year between 2016 and 2021, and it proposed a total 24 percent funding cut between 2012 and 2021, within range of Axelrod’s 25 percent figure. Axelrod's figures are correct if you include everything in the category, most of which is education, but it also includes items that are not education.

We rate Axelrod's claim Mostly True.

PolitiFact | Obama adviser Axelrod says Republican want deep education cuts

Start by going state by state and you will find that everywhere Republicans have taken control of the state legislature, they slashed funding for education. Think people. Why would they do this?

HELENA — The Republican majority on an education subcommittee on Thursday cut $4 million in proposed state funding for programs such as those for gifted and talented students and providing vocational education, a move that jeopardizes an equivalent amount of federal money.

Education subcommittee Republicans cut school funding

Stop sugar-coating the education cuts

To downplay the impact that devastating budget cuts will have on higher education and the state's students, Republicans have had to employ some tortured logic.

Concord Monitor

Gov. Rick Scott's proposed education budget: $1.75 billion in cuts

Thousands gather in Michigan to oppose education cuts

---------------------------------------

Why stop at four. Every state Republicans have taken over, they've slashed funding for education. Why? Simple. An ignorant population is easier to control. That's all there is to it.

When it comes to power or what's best for America, Republicans believe they're being in power IS what's best for America. What ever the cost.

And finally, the worst possible thing they could do is replace education with nothing. Which is exactly what they propose. Oh, and make children assistant janitors. Shameful.

You and dipshits like Truthsmathers are the product of pubic, er, public education. 25% is not enough. It should be cut 100% to eradicate dumb fucks like you.

Wow! I am convinced you know something about education

 

[FurthurBB]

That's it? Cuts are good if we can figure out ways of denying education to children of illegal immigrants?

Why can't Republicans figure out ways of building things up instead of just tearing them down? Are they so burned by their disaster in Iraq? They want to rebuild that country. Spend hundreds of billions to create a friend for Iran. But do nothing here. al Qaeda loves it.

They can't figure any way to help the economy besides give bribes to rich people, whether it's tax cuts or subsidies, they amount to bribes.

As i said.... my guess no education cuts would be necessary if money was not wasted on illegals. How hard was that to grasp?

There is not a problem with illegal immigrants in St. Louis City Public schools in Missouri. They have one of the highest amount per student budget. They are one of the worst school districts in the country. This simple thinking on both sides is not going to solve the problem.

 

[Skull Pilot]

We should cut the bloated education bureaucracy by at least 25% by culling overpaid administrators who do not teach.

Let the teachers work 40 hours a week all year round like everyone else and they'll have plenty of time to perform administrative duties

 

[FurthurBB]

Because Budget Resolution 34 doesn't include detailed breakdowns of Function 500 spending reductions, it's impossible to determine exactly how much of the cuts are proposed to come out of the education budget. Further, the plan itself, in resolution form, does not dictate exact spending levels, but instead sets the maximum amount that can be spent. Congressional committees and floor votes determine the rest.

Still, because education spending makes up such a large proportion of the total Function 500 costs – over 90 percent – it's safe to assume most of the cuts from this category would come from education.

With that in mind, the percentages don't lie. The Ryan budget proposal included more than 25 percent funding cuts every year between 2016 and 2021, and it proposed a total 24 percent funding cut between 2012 and 2021, within range of Axelrod’s 25 percent figure. Axelrod's figures are correct if you include everything in the category, most of which is education, but it also includes items that are not education.

We rate Axelrod's claim Mostly True.

PolitiFact | Obama adviser Axelrod says Republican want deep education cuts

Start by going state by state and you will find that everywhere Republicans have taken control of the state legislature, they slashed funding for education. Think people. Why would they do this?

HELENA — The Republican majority on an education subcommittee on Thursday cut $4 million in proposed state funding for programs such as those for gifted and talented students and providing vocational education, a move that jeopardizes an equivalent amount of federal money.

Education subcommittee Republicans cut school funding

Stop sugar-coating the education cuts

To downplay the impact that devastating budget cuts will have on higher education and the state's students, Republicans have had to employ some tortured logic.

Concord Monitor

Gov. Rick Scott's proposed education budget: $1.75 billion in cuts

Thousands gather in Michigan to oppose education cuts

---------------------------------------

Why stop at four. Every state Republicans have taken over, they've slashed funding for education. Why? Simple. An ignorant population is easier to control. That's all there is to it.

When it comes to power or what's best for America, Republicans believe they're being in power IS what's best for America. What ever the cost.

And finally, the worst possible thing they could do is replace education with nothing. Which is exactly what they propose. Oh, and make children assistant janitors. Shameful.

Of course the GOP wants education cuts. As Cheney pointed out, the more educated that people become, the more they are liable to vote liberal. Just goes to show you that there can be too much of a good thing.

In the meantime, little South Korea is graduating more engineers than is the whole of the United States. And China is graduating three or four times as many as we are.

But the 'Conservatives' are just fine with the US becoming a third world country as long as the 1% get to crack the whip.

olfraud you crack me up! The education system has been floundering for decades. The 1927 dated Los Angeles Unified School textbook for High School chemistry which I used (and still have BTW) is significantly better then the college textbooks of today.

Well educated people tend to vote moderate. Too much liberalism is bad and too much conservatism is bad. Poorly educated people tend to vote liberal because they are so incompetent they can't get a decent job so rely on government handouts to get along.

Actually it is a little more complicated than that, but things usually are.

 

[FurthurBB]

You can cut funding for education but how does a political party "cut education"? Maybe by hiring lazy unqualified union teachers?

It is not the unions that produce unqualified teachers. It is the sudden desire that all teachers have degrees in education instead of in a field. My best friend wanted to teach ESL classes in Florida and she has a PhD in English, they made her take 20 credit hours of education classes. So her classes were of course at the graduate level and she said they were so easy, that she has little respect for anyone with an advanced degree in education. She said high school classes are harder.

 

[FurthurBB]

Gee, I have no idea. Could it be because you said it?



Idiot.

Dipshit. Talk about taking things out of context. I don't know what SK pays for their education. Their post seemed to suggest that we should pay what SK pays. But we are a much bigger country. So I was trying to clarify what they were saying. Not the same budget as ours, but what is paid per student. Not only that, but "scale" was mentioned. You don't pay a teacher in upper New York, the same as a teacher in rural Georgia because the standard of living is so different. Then entire post was confusing to me.

How you get "You mean per person" to mean, fuck, now you've got me lost.

Go ahead, believe what you want. You're a dipshit. THAT I know.

Taking it out of context?

I know for a fact that the US spends more per student than any country in the world. On the average, we spend twice as much as anyone else, and, as you so conveniently point out, still graduate fewer engineers and scientists than anyone. Yet you, for some obscure reason, think the solution is to spend more money, even though every time we spend more we get less.

You claim to be an engineer, would you continue to spend more on a system that gives an inferior product, or would you scrap it and look for something that works?

It is funny that you know something that is untrue is a fact because Luxemburg spends the most on primary and secondary education per student and the US is 3rd. Though we do spend the most per student on university level education. Oh, well just another indicator of what we can expect from a US education.

 

[FurthurBB]

We should cut the bloated education bureaucracy by at least 25% by culling overpaid administrators who do not teach.

Let the teachers work 40 hours a week all year round like everyone else and they'll have plenty of time to perform administrative duties

So, you want to cut teachers hours, but give them more administrative work? How is that going to work?

 

[Unkotare]

Let the teachers work 40 hours a week all year round like everyone else

They do (the ones worth keeping anyway). Many more than that.

 

[Unkotare]

US higher education is by far the best in the world. What is the key difference between that level and K-12? Competition.

 

[Skull Pilot]

We should cut the bloated education bureaucracy by at least 25% by culling overpaid administrators who do not teach.

Let the teachers work 40 hours a week all year round like everyone else and they'll have plenty of time to perform administrative duties

So, you want to cut teachers hours, but give them more administrative work? How is that going to work?

Where did I say cut teachers' hours. I said make them work 40 hours a week all year round and cut down the number of overpaid administrators.

 

[FurthurBB]

We should cut the bloated education bureaucracy by at least 25% by culling overpaid administrators who do not teach.

Let the teachers work 40 hours a week all year round like everyone else and they'll have plenty of time to perform administrative duties

So, you want to cut teachers hours, but give them more administrative work? How is that going to work?

Where did I say cut teachers' hours. I said make them work 40 hours a week all year round and cut down the number of overpaid administrators.

Yes, so since most teachers work about 80 hours a week and at least 20 during the summer. You are talking about cutting at least 20 hours. I thought you said the teachers should do the administrative work. If not I apologize, but I still don't see what good cutting their hours would do, unless you want no summer school, because they do get paid differently for that, but often times it is not even in their home district since so much summer school has been cut already.

 

[Full-Auto]

So, you want to cut teachers hours, but give them more administrative work? How is that going to work?

Where did I say cut teachers' hours. I said make them work 40 hours a week all year round and cut down the number of overpaid administrators.

Yes, so since most teachers work about 80 hours a week and at least 20 during the summer. You are talking about cutting at least 20 hours. I thought you said the teachers should do the administrative work. If not I apologize, but I still don't see what good cutting their hours would do, unless you want no summer school, because they do get paid differently for that, but often times it is not even in their home district since so much summer school has been cut already.

es, so since most teachers work about 80 hours a week


Was it necessary to lie to make your point? Now you can be dismissed as a whack job.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Why should the Republicans care? If people can't afford education, the children of the rich will be the only ones allowed to get ahead. For 50 years, all the GOPers have wanted to do is set up an unAmerican aristocracy, a country based on birth rather than worth.

 

[Unkotare]

Why should the Republicans care? If people can't afford education, the children of the rich will be the only ones allowed to get ahead. For 50 years, all the GOPers have wanted to do is set up an unAmerican aristocracy, a country based on birth rather than worth.

Hysterical drama queen loser.

 

[Katzndogz]

The best educational system would be a triage. Stop treating students equally. They aren't equal, will never be equal. It's silly.

Educate the most promising as far as they want to go of whatever background. After all, it should generally be agreed that for all her money, whatever was spent on Paris Hilton's education was a waste. Good thing her family paid for it.

The ones who might learn something with some effort but will never rise very far, get a nice education in the basics of whatever they need to know to get Peter Principle'd out,

The rest should be taught how to read, write their names legibly and count up to 20. They can go to some sort of trade school or learn a craft.

60 cents of every education dollar should go to the students who would most benefit. Everything else is a waste of money, time and effort.