Do the poor really have no wealth?

[auditor0007]

Nothing is free. Not even education.

Are you saying in a libertarian state there'd be no more public schools? I know how you hate giving out "free" stuff and all. Why should the rest of us have to educate someone else's children, right? Seems like that's theft of my hard earned money.

That's right. Private educations when not hampered or in competition with the "free" public institutions is a far superior system. It promotes the best educations at the best pricing because competition runs the day.

So, yes. No public schools.

That would work real well when twenty or thirty percent of our kids didn't go to school at all because their parents couldn't afford it. Some of you are just plain retarded, and that's actually an insult to retards. And the reason private schools generally perform better is that they can turn away kids who underperform, have behavioral problems, or learning disabilities. Public schools have to educate these kids, and it costs more to educate them. Of course, when those same kids bring down test scores for public schools, you fools then tell us how private schools do such a better job at a lower cost. You're all brain dead.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And the reason private schools generally perform better is that they can turn away kids who underperform, have behavioral problems, or learning disabilities.

Did the liberal present evidence to support his reason??? NO!!!

100% stupid and liberal as usual. Of course PH.D researchers know to compare apples to apples rather than apples to oranges.

But even after you control for SES,( socioeconomic status) Catholic schools run by holy orders (not those overseen by the local bishop) turned out to perform better than other schools studied. True, as the study says, there are only a small number of religious-order schools. But the data suggests that the type of school a kid attends does affect how well he will do — and that we could learn something from how holy orders run their schools. The Center on Education Policy, however, is an advocacy group for public schools, so it didn't look into why holy-order schools are succeeding where others fail.

The center also downplays another finding: While controlling for SES eliminated most public school/private-school differences in achievement test scores, it did not eliminate differences in the most widely used test of developed abilities, the SAT. (As I explained more fully here, developed abilities are those nurtured through schoolwork, reading, engaging a piece of art, and any other activities that spark critical thinking. Developed abilities aren't inborn traits but honed competencies, more akin to athletic skill gained through practice rather than raw IQ. By contrast, achievement tests measure the amount of material students have committed to memory in any particular field.) Combined with high-school grades, SAT scores are the best predictor of how kids will do in their freshman year of college. And the data in the new study shows that private-school students outperform public-school students on the SAT.

Isn't that just because richer private-school kids can afford to be coached more before the SAT? No — remember that this study carefully controlled for socioeconomic status. Rather, it appears private schools do more to develop students' critical-thinking abilities — not just the rote memorization required to do well on achievement tests.

In short, today's study shows that sending your kid to private school — particularly one run by a holy order like the Jesuits — is still a better way to ensure that he or she will get into college. Just don't expect all education experts to agree.

See pictures of the college dorm's evolution.

See TIME's special report on paying for college.



Read more: Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME

 

[Toronado3800]

And the reason private schools generally perform better is that they can turn away kids who underperform, have behavioral problems, or learning disabilities.

Did the liberal present evidence to support his reason??? NO!!!

100% stupid and liberal as usual. Of course PH.D researchers know to compare apples to apples rather than apples to oranges.

But even after you control for SES,( socioeconomic status) Catholic schools run by holy orders (not those overseen by the local bishop) turned out to perform better than other schools studied. True, as the study says, there are only a small number of religious-order schools. But the data suggests that the type of school a kid attends does affect how well he will do — and that we could learn something from how holy orders run their schools. The Center on Education Policy, however, is an advocacy group for public schools, so it didn't look into why holy-order schools are succeeding where others fail.

The center also downplays another finding: While controlling for SES eliminated most public school/private-school differences in achievement test scores, it did not eliminate differences in the most widely used test of developed abilities, the SAT. (As I explained more fully here, developed abilities are those nurtured through schoolwork, reading, engaging a piece of art, and any other activities that spark critical thinking. Developed abilities aren't inborn traits but honed competencies, more akin to athletic skill gained through practice rather than raw IQ. By contrast, achievement tests measure the amount of material students have committed to memory in any particular field.) Combined with high-school grades, SAT scores are the best predictor of how kids will do in their freshman year of college. And the data in the new study shows that private-school students outperform public-school students on the SAT.

Isn't that just because richer private-school kids can afford to be coached more before the SAT? No — remember that this study carefully controlled for socioeconomic status. Rather, it appears private schools do more to develop students' critical-thinking abilities — not just the rote memorization required to do well on achievement tests.

In short, today's study shows that sending your kid to private school — particularly one run by a holy order like the Jesuits — is still a better way to ensure that he or she will get into college. Just don't expect all education experts to agree.

See pictures of the college dorm's evolution.

See TIME's special report on paying for college.



Read more: Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME

Nice post sir.

As one who attended both I feel the private school's greater ability to eliminate trouble makers and controll enrollment levels gives them an advantage. Also parents who PAY EXTRA for their kids to attend the school probably care more. Not all but on average.

Since we mostly agree please be polite so as not to turn off others towards our opinions.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As one who attended both I feel the private school's greater ability to eliminate trouble makers and controll enrollment levels gives them an advantage. Also parents who PAY EXTRA for their kids to attend the school probably care more. Not all but on average.

as a liberal you left out the best reason of course. Private schools are competitive. Parents can shop for the best school and the wrost go bankrupt. Life and death is often motivating!!

Since we mostly agree please be polite so as not to turn off others towards our opinions.

you want me to be polite to those who spied for Stalin and gave him the bomb, and to those who elected Barry twice despite 2 communist parents and voting to the left of Bernie Sanders??

Are you polite to murderers too??

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The libturds act as if they have no wealth, as if the defense budget only protects the rich!! Let them live in the Congo and see their families slaughtered by invaders and then say they have no wealth here, let them live without state of the art medical care and say they have no wealth. Let them live without free education and Social Security and say they have no wealth.

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?

The bottom 40% have 0.2% of the wealth.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The libturds act as if they have no wealth, as if the defense budget only protects the rich!! Let them live in the Congo and see their families slaughtered by invaders and then say they have no wealth here, let them live without state of the art medical care and say they have no wealth. Let them live without free education and Social Security and say they have no wealth.

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?

The bottom 40% have 0.2% of the wealth.

Total BS of course!! What about the $15 trillion needed to get them all the welfare entitlements. Is $15 trillion .2 % of the wealth? A poor family with 3 kids in schools is spending $45000 a year just on education!! Is that .2% of the wealth. Is another $40,000 on state-of-the art medical care .2 % of the wealth???

See why we must be 100% positive a liberal will be slow???

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The libturds act as if they have no wealth, as if the defense budget only protects the rich!! Let them live in the Congo and see their families slaughtered by invaders and then say they have no wealth here, let them live without state of the art medical care and say they have no wealth. Let them live without free education and Social Security and say they have no wealth.

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?

The bottom 40% have 0.2% of the wealth.

BS of course!! What about the $15 trillion needed to get them all the welfare entitlements. Is $15 trillion .2 % of the wealth? A poor fa,ily with 3 kids in schools is spending $45000 a year just on education!! IS that .2% of the wealth.

See why we must be 100% positive a liberal will be slow???

You don't even know what wealth is.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The bottom 40% have 0.2% of the wealth.

BS of course!! What about the $15 trillion needed to get them all the welfare entitlements. Is $15 trillion .2 % of the wealth? A poor fa,ily with 3 kids in schools is spending $45000 a year just on education!! IS that .2% of the wealth.

See why we must be 100% positive a liberal will be slow???

You don't even know what wealth is.

if one family is given $90,000 a year for education and health care and another must save $90,000 for education and health care the liberal will tell you one family has no wealth so he has a excuse to give them even more welfare!!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Are you saying in a libertarian state there'd be no more public schools? I know how you hate giving out "free" stuff and all. Why should the rest of us have to educate someone else's children, right? Seems like that's theft of my hard earned money.

That's right. Private educations when not hampered or in competition with the "free" public institutions is a far superior system. It promotes the best educations at the best pricing because competition runs the day.

So, yes. No public schools.

That would work real well when twenty or thirty percent of our kids didn't go to school at all because their parents couldn't afford it. Some of you are just plain retarded, and that's actually an insult to retards. And the reason private schools generally perform better is that they can turn away kids who underperform, have behavioral problems, or learning disabilities. Public schools have to educate these kids, and it costs more to educate them. Of course, when those same kids bring down test scores for public schools, you fools then tell us how private schools do such a better job at a lower cost. You're all brain dead.

If you had even half a workign brain cell, you would know that competition entails innovation. So all those special needs kids you're talking about would have otheer private schools to teach them. And since that it takes more, that cost would be on the consumer. And since the competition brings the prices down and offers the best, there is no logic ihn saying all of those kids would not get any type of education because every single private school would turn them away. What, no private school wants to turn a coin educating special needs students?

What a dumb **** you are.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

That would work real well when twenty or thirty percent of our kids didn't go to school at all because their parents couldn't afford it.

dear, today a liberal government school produces about $500,000 per classroom. My guess is that competitive private education would be about 20% of the cost, so everyone could afford it. Maybe it would be even less with internet classrooms coming on so strongly.

Also, if we had more capitalism we'd have far more wealth so again the tuition would be easier to come by!!

After that if you had to subsidize a few deserving people, so what, the cost would be so little it would not matter.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The libturds act as if they have no wealth, as if the defense budget only protects the rich!! Let them live in the Congo and see their families slaughtered by invaders and then say they have no wealth here, let them live without state of the art medical care and say they have no wealth. Let them live without free education and Social Security and say they have no wealth.

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6ZsXrzF8Cc]Tax the Rich: An animated fairy tale - YouTube[/ame]


​

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You'd do best to ignore these liberals... as best you can. They lie, distort, besmirch, etc. In their world no level of spending is ever too much, every problem we have is due to 1% of the population not paying enough taxes. SS is fine, defense spending should be slashed to $0.... and if you voice any disagreement you are immediately called a racist, bigot or homophobe.

They're hopeless.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

In their world no level of spending is ever too much, every problem we have is due to 1% of the population not paying enough taxes.

1) the top 1% pay 40% of all Federal taxes


2) Barry wants to raise taxes by repealing the Bush Tax cuts when in fact the tax cuts produced huge revenue increases.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You'd do best to ignore these liberals... as best you can. They lie, distort, besmirch, etc.

....and, WIN!!!!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

[Doc91678]

Compare the American poor to the rest of the world. Why these poor Americans can't do without two or three bedroom homes with two TV's and two cars parked in front. While Maobama's half brother has to live in a tin shack on $500.00 a year. What Maobama wants to do is bring every American down to his half brother's status, then he'll be happy.Even his illegal alien uncle and aunt are living higher on the hog than most Americans. In fact his uncle with so be immune from deportation if DHS has anything to do about it.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

In their world no level of spending is ever too much, every problem we have is due to 1% of the population not paying enough taxes.

1) the top 1% pay 40% of all Federal taxes


2) Barry wants to raise taxes by repealing the Bush Tax cuts when in fact the tax cuts produced huge revenue increases.

No to mention that if you confiscated every $ the 1% posess... you'd net a one-time gain of less than $1 trillion.

Then what?

It's laughable.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Compare the American poor to the rest of the world. Why these poor Americans can't do without two or three bedroom homes with two TV's and two cars parked in front. While Maobama's half brother has to live in a tin shack on $500.00 a year. What Maobama wants to do is bring every American down to his half brother's status, then he'll be happy.Even his illegal alien uncle and aunt are living higher on the hog than most Americans. In fact his uncle with so be immune from deportation if DHS has anything to do about it.

.

.

.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You'd do best to ignore these liberals... as best you can. They lie, distort, besmirch, etc.

....and, WIN!!!!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

but even the liberal Hitler won an election and so did the big government liberal who is trying to take over Egypt.

Can a liberal make or win a logical argument in support of liberalism?

Please show us or admit to lacking the IQ to do so.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You'd do best to ignore these liberals... as best you can. They lie, distort, besmirch, etc.

....and, WIN!!!!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

but even the liberal Hitler won an election and so did the big government liberal who is trying to take over Egypt.

Can a liberal make or win a logical argument in support of liberalism?

Show us admit to lacking the IQ to do so.

Don't quote the Sheman!!!!!

Here is what 99% of us see:

Mr. Shaman
This message is hidden because Mr. Shaman is on your ignore list.

Mr. Sheman is functionally retarded.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

....and, WIN!!!!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

but even the liberal Hitler won an election and so did the big government liberal who is trying to take over Egypt.

Can a liberal make or win a logical argument in support of liberalism?

Show us admit to lacking the IQ to do so.

Don't quote the Sheman!!!!!

Here is what 99% of us see:

Mr. Shaman
This message is hidden because Mr. Shaman is on your ignore list.

Mr. Sheman is functionally retarded.

....and, WINNING!!!!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.