More blatant nonsense from the right, keeping the poor away from their schools

[Rustic]

Why is Trump cutting grants for poor students to go to top schools? | Opinion

"
Why Is Trump Stopping Poor Students From Going to Top Schools?"

"The Administration’s education budget slashes $150 billion in federal student aid over 10 years. This move would cut by half our federal Work-Study program, which helps 675,000 students support themselves through college every year. "

Basically Trump put DeVos in charge at "education" and she's a proponent of school vouchers. Now, for me, school vouchers are just a way of taking money out of schools and giving it to rich people. But the right say it's all about CHOICE. The same people will then dismiss choice elsewhere, and ignore the fact that the UK manages to give choice to kids to go to schools they want to go to WITHOUT school vouchers.

Now, they want choice with school vouchers, and yet.... they're taking away money from poorer kids to go to college. Oh, so, what, wait.... universities will only be for rich kids, so it will benefit the rich and mean they can get the levels of education needed to get higher paid jobs....

Oh, I see, they're preventing choice, once again.

A leader elected not by choice of the people, but by the system, is making sure poorer people don't get to go to school.

My sister has a good job and so does her X, but they put everything they worked for into the education of their two children. My niece and nephew both have college bills that their parents couldn't afford. They will all be paying for my niece and nephews education for many years to come.

It's simply not right that others can walk into college and have an easy ride while others struggle for decades for the same education. There is no law that you have to attend college and never leave until you graduate. You can work for a while, take a couple of courses, rinse and repeat. You can still get college loans, you can do a number of things.

More Than 40% of Student Borrowers Aren’t Making Payments

The problem is Ray, you're looking at this only from the perspective of the individual. What about of the nation, which does need highly educated people who have gone through university?

Take China as an example. They want to win every Olympic medal going, seriously this is their goal. Now, one of the medals is for soccer. It's really under 23's soccer which allows three over 23 year olds to be in the squad. So, you need a decent level of soccer players.

China with a population that far exceeds any other country (except India, and they're absolutely pathetic at sports with the lowest per capita ratio for medals of any country that actually gets a medal) but they can't produce good soccer players. Why not? They pump money into the system, they do all of that. But they simply don't have the kids playing soccer. In Brazil they're all at it, playing all the time and they produce some of the best, but in China, they take rich kids who can pay and put them through sports schools, if they can afford to pay, and then what comes out at the end is a sub-quality level players.

If the US only puts through the rich to university, then the US will end up relying a lot of foreigners who have gone through university. Now, you're looking at places like NASA etc, but even the intelligence community which can't have foreigners, and you'll just end up with poor quality people simply because they were the only ones who could afford it.

But hey Ray, I know, I know, I've spoken with you enough, you're only happy when the super rich feel happy.

There is only so much money to go around, living outside your means it's not an excuse for anything

 

[Rustic]

Why is Trump cutting grants for poor students to go to top schools? | Opinion

"
Why Is Trump Stopping Poor Students From Going to Top Schools?"

"The Administration’s education budget slashes $150 billion in federal student aid over 10 years. This move would cut by half our federal Work-Study program, which helps 675,000 students support themselves through college every year. "

Basically Trump put DeVos in charge at "education" and she's a proponent of school vouchers. Now, for me, school vouchers are just a way of taking money out of schools and giving it to rich people. But the right say it's all about CHOICE. The same people will then dismiss choice elsewhere, and ignore the fact that the UK manages to give choice to kids to go to schools they want to go to WITHOUT school vouchers.

Now, they want choice with school vouchers, and yet.... they're taking away money from poorer kids to go to college. Oh, so, what, wait.... universities will only be for rich kids, so it will benefit the rich and mean they can get the levels of education needed to get higher paid jobs....

Oh, I see, they're preventing choice, once again.

A leader elected not by choice of the people, but by the system, is making sure poorer people don't get to go to school.

My sister has a good job and so does her X, but they put everything they worked for into the education of their two children. My niece and nephew both have college bills that their parents couldn't afford. They will all be paying for my niece and nephews education for many years to come.

It's simply not right that others can walk into college and have an easy ride while others struggle for decades for the same education. There is no law that you have to attend college and never leave until you graduate. You can work for a while, take a couple of courses, rinse and repeat. You can still get college loans, you can do a number of things.

More Than 40% of Student Borrowers Aren’t Making Payments

The problem is Ray, you're looking at this only from the perspective of the individual. What about of the nation, which does need highly educated people who have gone through university?

Take China as an example. They want to win every Olympic medal going, seriously this is their goal. Now, one of the medals is for soccer. It's really under 23's soccer which allows three over 23 year olds to be in the squad. So, you need a decent level of soccer players.

China with a population that far exceeds any other country (except India, and they're absolutely pathetic at sports with the lowest per capita ratio for medals of any country that actually gets a medal) but they can't produce good soccer players. Why not? They pump money into the system, they do all of that. But they simply don't have the kids playing soccer. In Brazil they're all at it, playing all the time and they produce some of the best, but in China, they take rich kids who can pay and put them through sports schools, if they can afford to pay, and then what comes out at the end is a sub-quality level players.

If the US only puts through the rich to university, then the US will end up relying a lot of foreigners who have gone through university. Now, you're looking at places like NASA etc, but even the intelligence community which can't have foreigners, and you'll just end up with poor quality people simply because they were the only ones who could afford it.

But hey Ray, I know, I know, I've spoken with you enough, you're only happy when the super rich feel happy.

Oh, do you mean rich kids like Barack Obama?

It's not up to our government to produce college graduates, it's up to the individual. My sister was never rich,my niece was never rich, my nephew was never rich and neither is his wife. They all attended college.

So what's the difference between them and poor people? My family wanted an advanced education and was willing to pay whatever it took to get it, compared to the poor that lived their lives getting everything they wanted for free.

Only a fool would believe that the people who created a problem will also have the solution to it. Liberal colleges charge so much for education that people pay on that debt nearly half of their life or more. So now the liberal solution to the liberal problem is to have government pay for it.

Our country is 20 trillion in debt and growing. We all would like things for free, but the cookie jar is empty. The cookies have been replaced with IOU's.

Yes, yes, individuals, society is dead, all of that stuff.... I disagree with your desire to kill society.

Individuality and any sort of the freedom cannot exist in a socialist society... fact

 

[Rustic]

Most Republicans now think colleges are bad for America

That will be one of the causes of the next big GOP recession.

Well most colleges are all about Indoctrination... the opposite of individuality and any sort of freedom

 

[LeftofLeft]

Why is Trump cutting grants for poor students to go to top schools? | Opinion

"
Why Is Trump Stopping Poor Students From Going to Top Schools?"

"The Administration’s education budget slashes $150 billion in federal student aid over 10 years. This move would cut by half our federal Work-Study program, which helps 675,000 students support themselves through college every year. "

Basically Trump put DeVos in charge at "education" and she's a proponent of school vouchers. Now, for me, school vouchers are just a way of taking money out of schools and giving it to rich people. But the right say it's all about CHOICE. The same people will then dismiss choice elsewhere, and ignore the fact that the UK manages to give choice to kids to go to schools they want to go to WITHOUT school vouchers.

Now, they want choice with school vouchers, and yet.... they're taking away money from poorer kids to go to college. Oh, so, what, wait.... universities will only be for rich kids, so it will benefit the rich and mean they can get the levels of education needed to get higher paid jobs....

Oh, I see, they're preventing choice, once again.

A leader elected not by choice of the people, but by the system, is making sure poorer people don't get to go to school.

Vouchers would be a non starter if Liberals and Education and Ynion bureaucrats would be more accountable for the money they are spending. Cut the bureaucratic layers and bloat and deliver better results. Vouchers won't matter and requests for more money will be better received. All the taxpayer ever hears is " money for our children" and cries about being held accountable for delivering test scores, graduation rates, college acceptance, college and/or certification, SAFE schools, materials.

I emphasize SAFE schools. How many videos on the Internet show student on student violence and student on teacher violence?

 

[Rustic]

Some 3rd world countries provide public 4 year universities, but we as a 1st world nation cannot provide proper education to our citizens? Education is a right. You cant expect poor to do any better when they dont have the tools to pull themselves out of poverty. Education is the key to people getting out of poverty.

If education was just the basics as it should be, you know reading, writing, arithmetic and so on. But The indoctrination of fucked up socialist views should be up to the individual to pay for if they want, not anyone else...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's an idea, why don't ya'll socialist liberals set up a volunteer grant program to pay for these "poor" peoples schools if you'd like - and those of us who don't want to, don't have to. Ya'll are constantly hyping about how much liberal California makes and how educated and well paid ya'll are, put your money where your mouth is eh?

Or how about this, let's have a vote on it, and if 50% of the people want something, then it happens, if not, it doesn't happen. Someone has suggested this be called DEMOCRACY, but who in the US would know what democracy is?

Vote on what, nationalizing our school system? Isn't the federal too intrusive in our lives already?

As for your 50% of the people voting, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objection. The whole problem with this country is we allow people to vote money out of others pockets to give to them.

Vote on how society is run. Is govt too intrusive? Yes, in some cases it is, and yet the people who say it's too intrusive seem to be okay with much of the negative intrusion and will fight against anything that's positive.

The problem is Ray, you will flip your views at the drop of a hat.

You love the current system because it gives the right wing an advantage, you don't want change because you find it convenient. But then when you find shouting "CHOICE" convenient, you'll do that and use that as the main source of your argument. But here, choice is not what you want, right? You don't care about choice, you care only about getting your own way. Isn't it so?

Yes Ray, part of the problem allowing people to vote money out of others pockets, and YOU are one of those people who have spent how long ignoring, deflecting etc so you can JUSTIFY such an attitude. And yet you come on here now, and you're willing to argue against the very thing you were arguing for a few days back.

Oh, wow.

What very thing is that? I'm consistent with everything I write.

Giving people choice is fine, funding people's choice is not. If I say the federal government should not be buying poor people new cars, you would say I'm denying poor people automobiles.

Why are schools failing in poorer areas? Is it because of the buildings, because of the teachers, because of the streets they are located on? What is it?

For the most part, failing education in poorer areas has to do with the parent and less of the school. All the money in the country is not going to stop that. Where our government is failing is rewarding people to have children they can't afford--promoting single-parent households which are directly related to poverty. That's where government is failing.

The problem IS that the public supports the schools. With public school, once that kid is on the school bus, that's the end of the parents responsibility. People who pay big bucks to send their kids to private school make sure they are getting their moneys worth. They make sure that kid is studying and passing their classes.

So maybe the solution to our problem is less money and not more. If parents started to pay the lions share for their children's education, maybe they would be much more involved and we would get much better results.

 

[Rustic]

Anti American schools shouldn't get a dime of federal money. If poor kids want to be brainwashed by anti American pieces of shit, let them pay for it themselves.
More winning for Trump.

Another ignorant post. Maybe, if you had the ambition to learn, you wouldn't be so angry, envious and frustrated.
View attachment 141048
More losing, by uneducated Trumpsters!

Self employment really takes no higher education to be successful…

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Anti American schools shouldn't get a dime of federal money. If poor kids want to be brainwashed by anti American pieces of shit, let them pay for it themselves.
More winning for Trump.

Another ignorant post. Maybe, if you had the ambition to learn, you wouldn't be so angry, envious and frustrated.
View attachment 141048
More losing, by uneducated Trumpsters!

Self employment really takes no higher education to be successful…

 

[BluesLegend]

Trump took away my free shit All you bleeding heart libs just donate your own money to send these kids to school, go ahead lead by example, no? We thought not.

 

[danielpalos]

Why is Trump cutting grants for poor students to go to top schools? | Opinion

"
Why Is Trump Stopping Poor Students From Going to Top Schools?"

"The Administration’s education budget slashes $150 billion in federal student aid over 10 years. This move would cut by half our federal Work-Study program, which helps 675,000 students support themselves through college every year. "

Basically Trump put DeVos in charge at "education" and she's a proponent of school vouchers. Now, for me, school vouchers are just a way of taking money out of schools and giving it to rich people. But the right say it's all about CHOICE. The same people will then dismiss choice elsewhere, and ignore the fact that the UK manages to give choice to kids to go to schools they want to go to WITHOUT school vouchers.

Now, they want choice with school vouchers, and yet.... they're taking away money from poorer kids to go to college. Oh, so, what, wait.... universities will only be for rich kids, so it will benefit the rich and mean they can get the levels of education needed to get higher paid jobs....

Oh, I see, they're preventing choice, once again.

A leader elected not by choice of the people, but by the system, is making sure poorer people don't get to go to school.

Typical, "right wing hate on the poor"? Yet, tax cuts that benefit the rich and micromanagement of the tax code for personal benefit, and cuts to social spending on the poor, is what the right wing want their, "legacy" to be.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Socialists demand more free stuff!

An echo of Republican, callous conservatives foolishness ^^^

There is no such thing as a free lunch, unless you're a member of Congress or a 1%er. The scofflaws who won't buy the required health insurance know they will be treated for disease or injury at the nearest hospital. They will get a bill, but never pay it; they will wait too long for treatment, and expose the public to communicable disease or a greater cost for illness which festers over time.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why is Trump cutting grants for poor students to go to top schools? | Opinion

"
Why Is Trump Stopping Poor Students From Going to Top Schools?"

"The Administration’s education budget slashes $150 billion in federal student aid over 10 years. This move would cut by half our federal Work-Study program, which helps 675,000 students support themselves through college every year. "

Basically Trump put DeVos in charge at "education" and she's a proponent of school vouchers. Now, for me, school vouchers are just a way of taking money out of schools and giving it to rich people. But the right say it's all about CHOICE. The same people will then dismiss choice elsewhere, and ignore the fact that the UK manages to give choice to kids to go to schools they want to go to WITHOUT school vouchers.

Now, they want choice with school vouchers, and yet.... they're taking away money from poorer kids to go to college. Oh, so, what, wait.... universities will only be for rich kids, so it will benefit the rich and mean they can get the levels of education needed to get higher paid jobs....

Oh, I see, they're preventing choice, once again.

A leader elected not by choice of the people, but by the system, is making sure poorer people don't get to go to school.

Vouchers would be a non starter if Liberals and Education and Ynion bureaucrats would be more accountable for the money they are spending. Cut the bureaucratic layers and bloat and deliver better results. Vouchers won't matter and requests for more money will be better received. All the taxpayer ever hears is " money for our children" and cries about being held accountable for delivering test scores, graduation rates, college acceptance, college and/or certification, SAFE schools, materials.

I emphasize SAFE schools. How many videos on the Internet show student on student violence and student on teacher violence?

The problem here is society. The whole partisan politics thing has reached a point where nothing happens because it's the right thing to do, it happens because someone sees "win" written all over it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Anti American schools shouldn't get a dime of federal money. If poor kids want to be brainwashed by anti American pieces of shit, let them pay for it themselves.
More winning for Trump.

Another ignorant post. Maybe, if you had the ambition to learn, you wouldn't be so angry, envious and frustrated.
View attachment 141048
More losing, by uneducated Trumpsters!

Self employment really takes no higher education to be successful…

View attachment 141057

But not everyone can become millionaires, unless of course money goes through massive deflation.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Here's an idea, why don't ya'll socialist liberals set up a volunteer grant program to pay for these "poor" peoples schools if you'd like - and those of us who don't want to, don't have to. Ya'll are constantly hyping about how much liberal California makes and how educated and well paid ya'll are, put your money where your mouth is eh?

Or how about this, let's have a vote on it, and if 50% of the people want something, then it happens, if not, it doesn't happen. Someone has suggested this be called DEMOCRACY, but who in the US would know what democracy is?

Vote on what, nationalizing our school system? Isn't the federal too intrusive in our lives already?

As for your 50% of the people voting, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objection. The whole problem with this country is we allow people to vote money out of others pockets to give to them.

Vote on how society is run. Is govt too intrusive? Yes, in some cases it is, and yet the people who say it's too intrusive seem to be okay with much of the negative intrusion and will fight against anything that's positive.

The problem is Ray, you will flip your views at the drop of a hat.

You love the current system because it gives the right wing an advantage, you don't want change because you find it convenient. But then when you find shouting "CHOICE" convenient, you'll do that and use that as the main source of your argument. But here, choice is not what you want, right? You don't care about choice, you care only about getting your own way. Isn't it so?

Yes Ray, part of the problem allowing people to vote money out of others pockets, and YOU are one of those people who have spent how long ignoring, deflecting etc so you can JUSTIFY such an attitude. And yet you come on here now, and you're willing to argue against the very thing you were arguing for a few days back.

Oh, wow.

What very thing is that? I'm consistent with everything I write.

Giving people choice is fine, funding people's choice is not. If I say the federal government should not be buying poor people new cars, you would say I'm denying poor people automobiles.

Why are schools failing in poorer areas? Is it because of the buildings, because of the teachers, because of the streets they are located on? What is it?

For the most part, failing education in poorer areas has to do with the parent and less of the school. All the money in the country is not going to stop that. Where our government is failing is rewarding people to have children they can't afford--promoting single-parent households which are directly related to poverty. That's where government is failing.

The problem IS that the public supports the schools. With public school, once that kid is on the school bus, that's the end of the parents responsibility. People who pay big bucks to send their kids to private school make sure they are getting their moneys worth. They make sure that kid is studying and passing their classes.

So maybe the solution to our problem is less money and not more. If parents started to pay the lions share for their children's education, maybe they would be much more involved and we would get much better results.

Yes, you are consistent.

Consistent in supporting partisan nonsense.
Consistent in backing whichever thing you think will win you the argument, even if you've just argued against the very same thing.

Yes, you are consistent Ray, but consistency isn't always a good thing, sometimes it requires something a little more.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's an idea, why don't ya'll socialist liberals set up a volunteer grant program to pay for these "poor" peoples schools if you'd like - and those of us who don't want to, don't have to. Ya'll are constantly hyping about how much liberal California makes and how educated and well paid ya'll are, put your money where your mouth is eh?

Or how about this, let's have a vote on it, and if 50% of the people want something, then it happens, if not, it doesn't happen. Someone has suggested this be called DEMOCRACY, but who in the US would know what democracy is?

Vote on what, nationalizing our school system? Isn't the federal too intrusive in our lives already?

As for your 50% of the people voting, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objection. The whole problem with this country is we allow people to vote money out of others pockets to give to them.

Vote on how society is run. Is govt too intrusive? Yes, in some cases it is, and yet the people who say it's too intrusive seem to be okay with much of the negative intrusion and will fight against anything that's positive.

The problem is Ray, you will flip your views at the drop of a hat.

You love the current system because it gives the right wing an advantage, you don't want change because you find it convenient. But then when you find shouting "CHOICE" convenient, you'll do that and use that as the main source of your argument. But here, choice is not what you want, right? You don't care about choice, you care only about getting your own way. Isn't it so?

Yes Ray, part of the problem allowing people to vote money out of others pockets, and YOU are one of those people who have spent how long ignoring, deflecting etc so you can JUSTIFY such an attitude. And yet you come on here now, and you're willing to argue against the very thing you were arguing for a few days back.

Oh, wow.

What very thing is that? I'm consistent with everything I write.

Giving people choice is fine, funding people's choice is not. If I say the federal government should not be buying poor people new cars, you would say I'm denying poor people automobiles.

Why are schools failing in poorer areas? Is it because of the buildings, because of the teachers, because of the streets they are located on? What is it?

For the most part, failing education in poorer areas has to do with the parent and less of the school. All the money in the country is not going to stop that. Where our government is failing is rewarding people to have children they can't afford--promoting single-parent households which are directly related to poverty. That's where government is failing.

The problem IS that the public supports the schools. With public school, once that kid is on the school bus, that's the end of the parents responsibility. People who pay big bucks to send their kids to private school make sure they are getting their moneys worth. They make sure that kid is studying and passing their classes.

So maybe the solution to our problem is less money and not more. If parents started to pay the lions share for their children's education, maybe they would be much more involved and we would get much better results.

Yes, you are consistent.

Consistent in supporting partisan nonsense.
Consistent in backing whichever thing you think will win you the argument, even if you've just argued against the very same thing.

Yes, you are consistent Ray, but consistency isn't always a good thing, sometimes it requires something a little more.

It has nothing to do with winning arguments or partisanship, it has to do with what I truly believe in. It has to do with experience and actually noticing the world around me, realizing the mistakes we are making, and sounding off about them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Anti American schools shouldn't get a dime of federal money. If poor kids want to be brainwashed by anti American pieces of shit, let them pay for it themselves.
More winning for Trump.

Another ignorant post. Maybe, if you had the ambition to learn, you wouldn't be so angry, envious and frustrated.
View attachment 141048
More losing, by uneducated Trumpsters!

Self employment really takes no higher education to be successful…

View attachment 141057

But not everyone can become millionaires, unless of course money goes through massive deflation.

I never said anyone can become a millionaire, just pointing out that millionaires are not always college graduates; evil rich people taking advantage of the stupid and ignorant among us. Most are hard working people who invested their money and worked their lives for financial success.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Or how about this, let's have a vote on it, and if 50% of the people want something, then it happens, if not, it doesn't happen. Someone has suggested this be called DEMOCRACY, but who in the US would know what democracy is?

Vote on what, nationalizing our school system? Isn't the federal too intrusive in our lives already?

As for your 50% of the people voting, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objection. The whole problem with this country is we allow people to vote money out of others pockets to give to them.

Vote on how society is run. Is govt too intrusive? Yes, in some cases it is, and yet the people who say it's too intrusive seem to be okay with much of the negative intrusion and will fight against anything that's positive.

The problem is Ray, you will flip your views at the drop of a hat.

You love the current system because it gives the right wing an advantage, you don't want change because you find it convenient. But then when you find shouting "CHOICE" convenient, you'll do that and use that as the main source of your argument. But here, choice is not what you want, right? You don't care about choice, you care only about getting your own way. Isn't it so?

Yes Ray, part of the problem allowing people to vote money out of others pockets, and YOU are one of those people who have spent how long ignoring, deflecting etc so you can JUSTIFY such an attitude. And yet you come on here now, and you're willing to argue against the very thing you were arguing for a few days back.

Oh, wow.

What very thing is that? I'm consistent with everything I write.

Giving people choice is fine, funding people's choice is not. If I say the federal government should not be buying poor people new cars, you would say I'm denying poor people automobiles.

Why are schools failing in poorer areas? Is it because of the buildings, because of the teachers, because of the streets they are located on? What is it?

For the most part, failing education in poorer areas has to do with the parent and less of the school. All the money in the country is not going to stop that. Where our government is failing is rewarding people to have children they can't afford--promoting single-parent households which are directly related to poverty. That's where government is failing.

The problem IS that the public supports the schools. With public school, once that kid is on the school bus, that's the end of the parents responsibility. People who pay big bucks to send their kids to private school make sure they are getting their moneys worth. They make sure that kid is studying and passing their classes.

So maybe the solution to our problem is less money and not more. If parents started to pay the lions share for their children's education, maybe they would be much more involved and we would get much better results.

Yes, you are consistent.

Consistent in supporting partisan nonsense.
Consistent in backing whichever thing you think will win you the argument, even if you've just argued against the very same thing.

Yes, you are consistent Ray, but consistency isn't always a good thing, sometimes it requires something a little more.

It has nothing to do with winning arguments or partisanship, it has to do with what I truly believe in. It has to do with experience and actually noticing the world around me, realizing the mistakes we are making, and sounding off about them.

Now Ray, if I thought you believed in anything, I'd respect that. But from what I see of your posts, I don't think you believe in much other than being on one side of the partisan spectrum. You'll say ANYTHING to try and prove your side's position is right.

 

[Nia88]

Very few poor people benefit from college. Those that do have a strong support system at home like Ben Carson whose mother insisted he read books even though she could not read.

The ease of government money has driven up tuition. The poorest and least qualified get substantial loans and have to start college life in remedial classes.

We throw money at shiney objects without being wise.

Absolutely BS. Look at our poor in America. They don't have college degrees. They barely have high school degrees. Those who go and get an education are able to pull themselves out of poverty because a degree provides better pay.

So then the question would be why do they barely have high school degrees?

Because finishing high school isn't mandatory in the US like it is in other countries.Also we as Americans tend to have lax attitude towards education unlike other countries where they take it more seriously. Dropping out of high school is unheard of in other countries.

 

[koshergrl]

Why is Trump cutting grants for poor students to go to top schools? | Opinion

"
Why Is Trump Stopping Poor Students From Going to Top Schools?"

"The Administration’s education budget slashes $150 billion in federal student aid over 10 years. This move would cut by half our federal Work-Study program, which helps 675,000 students support themselves through college every year. "

Basically Trump put DeVos in charge at "education" and she's a proponent of school vouchers. Now, for me, school vouchers are just a way of taking money out of schools and giving it to rich people. But the right say it's all about CHOICE. The same people will then dismiss choice elsewhere, and ignore the fact that the UK manages to give choice to kids to go to schools they want to go to WITHOUT school vouchers.

Now, they want choice with school vouchers, and yet.... they're taking away money from poorer kids to go to college. Oh, so, what, wait.... universities will only be for rich kids, so it will benefit the rich and mean they can get the levels of education needed to get higher paid jobs....

Oh, I see, they're preventing choice, once again.

A leader elected not by choice of the people, but by the system, is making sure poorer people don't get to go to school.

Vouchers would be a non starter if Liberals and Education and Ynion bureaucrats would be more accountable for the money they are spending. Cut the bureaucratic layers and bloat and deliver better results. Vouchers won't matter and requests for more money will be better received. All the taxpayer ever hears is " money for our children" and cries about being held accountable for delivering test scores, graduation rates, college acceptance, college and/or certification, SAFE schools, materials.

I emphasize SAFE schools. How many videos on the Internet show student on student violence and student on teacher violence?

The problem here is society. The whole partisan politics thing has reached a point where nothing happens because it's the right thing to do, it happens because someone sees "win" written all over it.

Wrong. As is everything else you say.

 

[koshergrl]

Very few poor people benefit from college. Those that do have a strong support system at home like Ben Carson whose mother insisted he read books even though she could not read.

The ease of government money has driven up tuition. The poorest and least qualified get substantial loans and have to start college life in remedial classes.

We throw money at shiney objects without being wise.

Absolutely BS. Look at our poor in America. They don't have college degrees. They barely have high school degrees. Those who go and get an education are able to pull themselves out of poverty because a degree provides better pay.

So then the question would be why do they barely have high school degrees?

Because finishing high school isn't mandatory in the US like it is in other countries.Also we as Americans tend to have lax attitude towards education unlike other countries where they take it more seriously. Dropping out of high school is unheard of in other countries.

What piffle. Our graduates exit the schools reading at the sixth grade level.

And bs like this is why:

Conference teaches K-12 educators how to combat ‘whiteness in schools’ - The College Fix