What is "Fair" Public School Funding?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Slavery and segregation were all supported and defended by the democrat party, who, it just so happens, controls our education system through the teachers unions.

In the vast majority of schools in this nation, unions have NOTHING to do with the operation of schools, their curriculum or disciplinary rules. Again, you take that broad brush out and try to paint all public schools as being like those schools in the blue state and cities.

 

[frigidweirdo]

All Democratic policies.

But teaching students that they are unable to succeed because of history is a bad policy also.

That's a little vague, though. What specifically do you think we should be teaching them so that they are tolerent adults?

I now teach behavior and social skills. Prior to that I taught math. I have no trouble at all telling parents or anyone else exactly what I am teaching kids, including a day-by-day update of the curriculum if they want to know. From the advocates of woke education, we get vagueries.

Democrats have been engineering the schools racially since at least the seventies. The schools are as segregated as they ever have been. Can you name one prominent Democrat in DC who supports integration by sending their own children to DC public schools? Those problems need to be addressed, but it should be plain by now to anyone who is awake instead of "woke" that Democrats do it very badly.


Not really sure what you're driving at.

Republicans didn't push the word "woke."

The Democrats co-opted the word "woke" from Africa-Americans who originated it during the times when Democrat lynching was on the rise. It meant at that time to be aware as a black person that there were people who would harm them. Today's Democrats use it to describe themselves in flattering terms, something that they love to do.

"The bottom?"

This is such typical Democrat elitism. You teach success by teaching the value and dignity of work. You provide them with vocational classes, even if those classes do not help them pass standardized state tests. You emphasize the opportunities for people of all skills and abilities.

What you don't do is teach them that they cannot succeed due to the evilness of the U.S. system (which thousands of people risk their lives every week to get to), and the color of their skin. You also don't teach them that "success" means going to college and nothing else and that college is for everyone.

It isn't. At least it should not be.

Sadly, many colleges have dumbed down, in an attempt to make college for everyone. People who could indeed be successful as welders, cosmetologists, plumbers, CNA's, truck drivers, lumberjacks, oilfield workers, carpenters, and many other well-paid trades are being shamed into attending college. Then they major in some version of Woke Studies, instead of a major with the job title in its name. They can't find work in the field of "being woke" or whatever it would be, so they grow bitter and demand that those welders, truck drivers and lumberjacks pay off their student loans.

Alright.

Lets see some of your attacks on Democrats. Let's see how you respond to the name calling that you will inevitibly be subjected to and how long you stick to whatever attack you make. Start a thread where you attack Democrats, if you are sincere.

And yes slavery and segregation were CONSERVATIVE policies. That you come up with "all Democratic policies" shows that you're not really interested in proper debate.

Yes, it's vague because it's a huge subject and I don't claim to have all the answers. It's a discussion for a country to have. The answer of "What should an American adult be like?"

For example - law abiding, having skills to get a job, a good parent, a good spouse.

Then, how do we achieve this?

And again, another jibe. You teach behavior, and yet you come on here and you're full of crap.

I can't be bothered to be honest.

 

[Seymour Flops]

That is one of the biggest lies that public education bashers use to justify vouchers. When I taught in Florida, the state had vouchers. No private schools were created. Charter schools did a quick death when they were mismanaged financially so badly, they were forced to close.

Most large private schools have their own bus transportation system. You are simply ignorant of reality.

Can you link me to a good description of the voucher program they had in florida? I have heard from several people that "vouchers have been tried and they didn't work" but none of them ever seem to be able to link to what they are talking about.

It makes me think that they are not talking about a real voucher program but something that is supposedly a substitute for a voucher program or a voucher program so limited in who is eligible, that it does not issue enough vouchers to affect the free market for private education.

Because it goes against logic that thousands of kids would have vouchers to go to a private school and nobody would open any to serve them. That's the beauty of the free market. The downside for public education is that the better teachers will go to work in the new private schools.

I know for absolute certainty that if Texas had a voucher program, I would immediately open up a school for students with behavior disabilities since that is my area of expertise. It would be perfect because they would not be disrupting non-disabled kids and they would be taught in the way that they can best learn.

 

[presonorek]

What's fair? What the people of Pennsylvania decide.

If they are anything like the people of North Carolina it is left vague and open to interpretation. Local governments are forbidden from making worse schools are better school. They have to provide the same exact level of education to all students. So local governments are always vulnerable to any accusation that they are being unfair. Basically this ensures bureaucrats always have something to hold over the head of local politicians. Do what the bureaucrats say or be sued for being “unfair” and then do what the bureaucrats say. I think there should be a magic number too. You can always accept donations from the public to make up the difference.

 

[Seymour Flops]

And yes slavery and segregation were CONSERVATIVE policies. That you come up with "all Democratic policies" shows that you're not really interested in proper debate.

If it would make you less triggered, I will drop my references to democrats. But I'm not going to pretend that it wasn't Democrats who push for slavery, fought for slavery and then push for Jim Crow laws and disenfranchising of freed slaves. Like it or not, it was Republicans who have traditionally pushed for African American rights.

Yes, it's vague because it's a huge subject and I don't claim to have all the answers. It's a discussion for a country to have. The answer of "What should an American adult be like?"

For example - law abiding, having skills to get a job, a good parent, a good spouse.

Then, how do we achieve this?

Not so hard, really Public Schools used to do that on a consistent basis. We had Civics classes where students learned about the law and how to be a good citizen, we had math and reading so that they were capable of being hired for jobs that required those skills. It used to be that a high school graduate could get a job as a newspaper reporter in a small town and work their way up. Because high schools used to teach students how to write.

How to be a good parent, how to be a good spouse, those subjects are more difficult and will always have an element of controversy. But there are some basic things like empathy and teamwork. This can often be achieved through informal talks by teachers who have experienced either bad or good marriages and bad or good parenting.

And again, another jibe. You teach behavior, and yet you come on here and you're full of crap.

I can't be bothered to be honest.

Not sure what you're upset about, and I don't want to scroll all the way back up. I enjoy debating you and I may have slipped into too much snarkiness. I will do my best to keep it a straight debate.

 

[Seymour Flops]

There is certainly not the strong objection to vouchers in other fields.

When the government needs a new building, do you think it sends a bunch of federal employee construction workers to build it? No they Outsource that, because that's how you get experienced people who know how to build buildings.

When the Air Force needs a hundred new jet fighters, does the government have a factory to produce them? No it gives the Air Force a "voucher" to buy them from a private company.

Because those private manufacturers and contractors, have proven that they are able to produce a far superior product at a far lower price. Anyone who has looked into the issue knows that private schools have proven the same thing for many decades.

Here is what I think motivates the virulent opposition to vouchers. When federal employees work at a job, the government gets to indoctrinate them with sensitivity training and other non-work-related classes.

For a government that likes to do that, obviously public schools are a perfect venue. They can be turned into almost nothing but indoctrination centers. Especially if you do it slowly so that over decades actual education is lost in favor of the propaganda.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If it would make you less triggered, I will drop my references to democrats. But I'm not going to pretend that it wasn't Democrats who push for slavery, fought for slavery and then push for Jim Crow laws and disenfranchising of freed slaves. Like it or not, it was Republicans who have traditionally pushed for African American rights.

Not so hard, really Public Schools used to do that on a consistent basis. We had Civics classes where students learned about the law and how to be a good citizen, we had math and reading so that they were capable of being hired for jobs that required those skills. It used to be that a high school graduate could get a job as a newspaper reporter in a small town and work their way up. Because high schools used to teach students how to write.

How to be a good parent, how to be a good spouse, those subjects are more difficult and will always have an element of controversy. But there are some basic things like empathy and teamwork. This can often be achieved through informal talks by teachers who have experienced either bad or good marriages and bad or good parenting.

Not sure what you're upset about, and I don't want to scroll all the way back up. I enjoy debating you and I may have slipped into too much snarkiness. I will do my best to keep it a straight debate.

What the Democratic Party and Republican Party used to be is neither here nor there.

This is a map of the 1900 US presidential election.

This is a map of the 2020 US presidential election.

Spot the differences? The South is mostly Republican now, it was mostly Democrat then. The north east was totally Republican then, now mostly Democrat. What the Reps and Dems were in the those days matters on a local level, so we see the Mid West is in fact quite similar. However we're talking slavery (Deep South) and segregation (Deep South). It's quite clear to anyone that a slavery Democrat in the 1800s would have been a Republican in the modern era.

Republicans are not now pushing for black rights. The conservatives opposed ending segregation, they imposed laws restricting black people afterwards.

You say it's not hard. I can come up with my own views on what should and what should not be taught. However I'm not arrogant enough to think only my opinions are the right ones. I think that the more people you get together to discuss things, the better the outcome is going to be. I believe there needs to be a debate about such things. Difficult seen how even on a debate forum like this, the vast majority aren't really interested in debate and struggle even if you write more than a few sentences. But still....

The modern world is changing. Reading and Math skills are not enough to get a job these days. What will the job market be like for current elementary school kids? Robotics will be taking off, programming, engineering, other skills are logic skills, mental skills. With robots doing menial jobs, there could potentially be higher unemployment especially among those who are poorly educated. Getting those skills will be important.

Yes, parenting will always be controversial because we don't even try. Imagine sitting down with kids and having them discuss these issues, pushing them towards thought processes, having them sit in small groups of their peers and discussion what they think makes a good partner, a good father, a good adult. It can be done. The problem is too many people pull the "rights card" out and say it's only a job for parents, when parents aren't doing the job.

The informal talk thing will just end up being turned into "they're talking about sex with the teacher" kind of nonsense you hear from people.

 

[pknopp]

There is certainly not the strong objection to vouchers in other fields.

When the government needs a new building, do you think it sends a bunch of federal employee construction workers to build it? No they Outsource that, because that's how you get experienced people who know how to build buildings.

When the Air Force needs a hundred new jet fighters, does the government have a factory to produce them? No it gives the Air Force a "voucher" to buy them from a private company.

Because those private manufacturers and contractors, have proven that they are able to produce a far superior product at a far lower price. Anyone who has looked into the issue knows that private schools have proven the same thing for many decades.

I know you have heard this before and will dismiss it again. Private schools can pick and choose what students they will accept.

Here is what I think motivates the virulent opposition to vouchers. When federal employees work at a job, the government gets to indoctrinate them with sensitivity training and other non-work-related classes.

For a government that likes to do that, obviously public schools are a perfect venue. They can be turned into almost nothing but indoctrination centers. Especially if you do it slowly so that over decades actual education is lost in favor of the propaganda.

How about leveling the playing field? Public vouchers but you must accept the public regardless of why they are?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Democrats have been engineering the schools racially since at least the seventies. The schools are as segregated as they ever have been. Can you name one prominent Democrat in DC who supports integration by sending their own children to DC public schools? Those problems need to be addressed, but it should be plain by now to anyone who is awake instead of "woke" that Democrats do it very badly.


Not really sure what you're driving at.

Republicans didn't push the word "woke."

The Democrats co-opted the word "woke" from Africa-Americans who originated it during the times when Democrat lynching was on the rise. It meant at that time to be aware as a black person that there were people who would harm them. Today's Democrats use it to describe themselves in flattering terms, something that they love to do.

"The bottom?"

This is such typical Democrat elitism. You teach success by teaching the value and dignity of work. You provide them with vocational classes, even if those classes do not help them pass standardized state tests. You emphasize the opportunities for people of all skills and abilities.

What you don't do is teach them that they cannot succeed due to the evilness of the U.S. system (which thousands of people risk their lives every week to get to), and the color of their skin. You also don't teach them that "success" means going to college and nothing else and that college is for everyone.

It isn't. At least it should not be.

Sadly, many colleges have dumbed down, in an attempt to make college for everyone. People who could indeed be successful as welders, cosmetologists, plumbers, CNA's, truck drivers, lumberjacks, oilfield workers, carpenters, and many other well-paid trades are being shamed into attending college. Then they major in some version of Woke Studies, instead of a major with the job title in its name. They can't find work in the field of "being woke" or whatever it would be, so they grow bitter and demand that those welders, truck drivers and lumberjacks pay off their student loans.

Alright.

Lets see some of your attacks on Democrats. Let's see how you respond to the name calling that you will inevitibly be subjected to and how long you stick to whatever attack you make. Start a thread where you attack Democrats, if you are sincere.

Yes, Democrats AND Republicans have been doing social engineering for a long, LONG time. It's inevitable. I'm not going to defend the Dems or Reps on how they've done it.

However as I've said, it's inevitable. Social engineering and schools go hand in hand. How do you not socially engineer at schools?

With that in mind, it's worth accepting this, and getting people together and discussing social engineering and how it can be done in a positive manner.

Say for example: tolerance.
In the UK they teach tolerance. Teachers have to be tolerant, it's part of their work contract. They're not allowed to belong to extreme political parties which spread a message of hate. They're not allowed to promote intolerance.

A positive thing in my view. Society needs to get along together. School is where you teach young open minds to accept other people.

You brought up integration. The problem with "integration" is it's an "image" policy, not a substance policy. Again, back to the UK, they don't have integration. You go to your local school, the school will be a reflection of the community you live in. What they do do is make sure kids in poor areas, because often this isn't about race, it's about poverty, get the education they deserve.

Black African kids have the same education achievement as white kids in the UK. Black Caribbean kids do not. It's not a race issue. It's a social issue. Those kids who do badly are doing badly because of what is going on around them, the UK is struggling to deal with the impact of the Yardies, they stopped the gun crime from the 2000s, however the social impact is still there.

The point you didn't see I was getting is that throwing money at education doesn't work if governments are willing to change the whole of society. You can have a kid from a ghetto at a gold plated school with gold plated teachers, that doesn't mean when he goes him his father isn't there, his mother is working 16 hours a day 8 days a week and his only support network is a gang.

Republican push the word "woke" like it's oxygen. I know where the word "woke" came from, however the version of "woke" most used isn't the version that came from black communities. This version being used almost exclusively these days is a right wing conservative invention.

Woke German Soccer Team Focused on Politics Instead of the Game, Delivered Shock Loss By Japan

So woke Germany lost....he he Congratulations to Japan. :thup: In an effort to prove their wokeness, Germany’s team at the World Cup posed for a photo before their match with Japan with their mouths covered after being told they could not wear “OneLove” anti-discrimination armbands...

www.usmessageboard.com

Here's Skye, so right wing, so lacking in real knowledge:

"So woke Germany lost....he he"

Woke mob smashes windows of Portland Native American coffee shop

Woke mob smashes windows of Portland Native American coffee shop after its owner advertised 'coffee with a cop' event on social media to promote good relations with crime-ridden city's police Coffeeshop owner Loretta Guzman, 52, is trying to pick up the pieces after her small business was...

www.usmessageboard.com

Here's the right wing Daily Mail using "woke"

"Woke mob smashes windows of Portland coffee shop to protest cop-event"

I could go through this forum and find you hundreds, if not thousands of examples of right wingers using the term "woke".

""The bottom?"

This is such typical Democrat elitism. You teach success by teaching the value and dignity of work. "

Why would you bother if there isn't an issue? If there isn't a "bottom", then you don't need to change anything. You know and I know that people working minimum wage in McDonalds are doing so for a reason.

I agree, we need to teach "the value and dignity of work", but to do this you need to start at school.

Like I said, I worked in a HTL in Austria. There were three high school level schools in Austria.
1)The Gymnasium. In England they'd call it the Grammar School. It's where the academically bright kids go. If you don't go to the Grammar School, you're thick and you know it.
2) HTL. Technical school
3) High school.

1+ 2 are equals. In the HTL you can learn things from building, interior design, computer programming. The programming kids are exceedingly smart. The building kids no so much.
3 is for those kids who don't want to go to the HTL and can't get in the gymnasium.

The HTL does not separate kids based on a perceived intelligence. It says "all kids are worth something, let's find what they're good at, and teach them that".

We have different learning styles, and yet for the most part we just give them a one size fits all education. Why? Because it's easier for the politicians to get their heads around.

If they're leaving school at 18 with the skills they need to get a decent job, then everyone's happy.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Alright.

Lets see some of your attacks on Democrats. Let's see how you respond to the name calling that you will inevitibly be subjected to and how long you stick to whatever attack you make. Start a thread where you attack Democrats, if you are sincere.

Before I came back to this forum, I was on another forum that was left wing, and I got attacked for a lot of things and left. I don't seek out those who name call. I block them.

I don't come on here to prove anything. I come on here to debate.

 

[Seymour Flops]

What the Democratic Party and Republican Party used to be is neither here nor there.

View attachment 731298
This is a map of the 1900 US presidential election.
View attachment 731299

This is a map of the 2020 US presidential election.

Got a map of the 50s and 60s? I thought you wanted to drop the whole Democrats versus republicans? If you're going to continue it, then any further complaints about me talking about Democrats will ring hollow. But you are welcome to make hollow complaints, it's a free country

Spot the differences? The South is mostly Republican now, it was mostly Democrat then. The north east was totally Republican then, now mostly Democrat. What the Reps and Dems were in the those days matters on a local level, so we see the Mid West is in fact quite similar. However we're talking slavery (Deep South) and segregation (Deep South). It's quite clear to anyone that a slavery Democrat in the 1800s would have been a Republican in the modern era.

That is absurd.

.It was the Republican party that fought a war to prevent the Southern States from seceding and continuing with the institution of slavery. Whatever other motivations either side may have had, slavery was the key issue of that war and it was Northern Republicans against Southern Democrats with many Northern Democrats known as copperheads supporting slavery in the South.

There is absolutely no history of Republican supporting slavery, or Jim Crow laws. No history of Republicans supporting discrimination as a policy.

What Republicans have opposed since the Democrats decided to continue to be race baiters but supposedly Pro black race baiters is affirmative action, family destroying welfare and crime. Democrats, due to their racist stereotypes of black people, have convinced themselves that being against Crime is being against black people. Of course it was The Biden anti-crime bill enforced by AG Harris thst insured far steeper penalties for black users of crack cocaine than white users of powder. Ironic that if those laws were still in effect Biden's own son might be their victim.

Republicans are not now pushing for black rights. The conservatives opposed ending segregation, they imposed laws restricting black people afterwards.

It was Biden who said desegregation might lead to Public Schools being a racial jungle. Can you quote some prominent current Republican leaders saying similar things?

Republicans Believe In rights for black people, because they believe in rights for everyone. They are just as interested that black parents be able to pick up at school board meetings and not be harassed by the federal government as they are that white parents be able to do the same. They do not want blacks disenfranchised by harvested mail-in ballots fraudulently cast, because they don't want anyone to be disenfranchised by them.

What Republicans have not done is pursued special rights and privileges for black people. That's because they avoid racism.

You say it's not hard. I can come up with my own views on what should and what should not be taught. However I'm not arrogant enough to think only my opinions are the right ones. I think that the more people you get together to discuss things, the better the outcome is going to be. I believe there needs to be a debate about such things.

Yes, exactly. Those debates should happen at school board meetings. Without fear on the part of concerned parents of being investigated and threat tagged by the Department of Justice.

Difficult seen how even on a debate forum like this, the vast majority aren't really interested in debate and struggle even if you write more than a few sentences. But still....

School boards need to listen to parents, and not to the teachers union that Finance their campaigns. That's the first start in having a debate. Not wrestling a parent to the ground because he goes a minute over his time is another step in the right direction.

The modern world is changing. Reading and Math skills are not enough to get a job these days. What will the job market be like for current elementary school kids? Robotics will be taking off, programming, engineering, other skills are logic skills, mental skills. With robots doing menial jobs, there could potentially be higher unemployment especially among those who are poorly educated. Getting those skills will be important.

Yes, but if a potential employee comes to a job interview knowing the basics of Reading Writing math and computer literacy, an employer will be willing to work with them and train them on the specific operation that they will be performing. Workers risk being replaced by robots, when they are unable to perform simple tasks.

Yes, parenting will always be controversial because we don't even try. Imagine sitting down with kids and having them discuss these issues, pushing them towards thought processes, having them sit in small groups of their peers and discussion what they think makes a good partner, a good father, a good adult. It can be done. The problem is too many people pull the "rights card" out and say it's only a job for parents, when parents aren't doing the job.

Parents will be the primary teachers of their kids of how to be parents themselves. Often for the better but sadly often for the worst. I don't know if schools could change that.

The informal talk thing will just end up being turned into "they're talking about sex with the teacher" kind of nonsense you hear from people.

I'm not sure that happened until recently, and only when specific books were introduced into the library of local schools pushing for acceptance of every possible sexual difference.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Can you link me to a good description of the voucher program they had in florida? I have heard from several people that "vouchers have been tried and they didn't work" but none of them ever seem to be able to link to what they are talking about.

It makes me think that they are not talking about a real voucher program but something that is supposedly a substitute for a voucher program or a voucher program so limited in who is eligible, that it does not issue enough vouchers to affect the free market for private education.

Because it goes against logic that thousands of kids would have vouchers to go to a private school and nobody would open any to serve them. That's the beauty of the free market. The downside for public education is that the better teachers will go to work in the new private schools.

I know for absolute certainty that if Texas had a voucher program, I would immediately open up a school for students with behavior disabilities since that is my area of expertise. It would be perfect because they would not be disrupting non-disabled kids and they would be taught in the way that they can best learn.

With all due respect, I don't have the time nor inclination to provide a link to programs that I taught under as a teacher and as a school administrator. The program was ended because it violated the state constitution, not because it sucked, which it did.

Private schools popped up overnight and millions of taxpayer funds were lost when they failed just as fast. These private schools failed because no one they hired was capable of managing their finances.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Got a map of the 50s and 60s? I thought you wanted to drop the whole Democrats versus republicans? If you're going to continue it, then any further complaints about me talking about Democrats will ring hollow. But you are welcome to make hollow complaints, it's a free country

That is absurd.

.It was the Republican party that fought a war to prevent the Southern States from seceding and continuing with the institution of slavery. Whatever other motivations either side may have had, slavery was the key issue of that war and it was Northern Republicans against Southern Democrats with many Northern Democrats known as copperheads supporting slavery in the South.

There is absolutely no history of Republican supporting slavery, or Jim Crow laws. No history of Republicans supporting discrimination as a policy.

What Republicans have opposed since the Democrats decided to continue to be race baiters but supposedly Pro black race baiters is affirmative action, family destroying welfare and crime. Democrats, due to their racist stereotypes of black people, have convinced themselves that being against Crime is being against black people. Of course it was The Biden anti-crime bill enforced by AG Harris thst insured far steeper penalties for black users of crack cocaine than white users of powder. Ironic that if those laws were still in effect Biden's own son might be their victim.

It was Biden who said desegregation might lead to Public Schools being a racial jungle. Can you quote some prominent current Republican leaders saying similar things?

Republicans Believe In rights for black people, because they believe in rights for everyone. They are just as interested that black parents be able to pick up at school board meetings and not be harassed by the federal government as they are that white parents be able to do the same. They do not want blacks disenfranchised by harvested mail-in ballots fraudulently cast, because they don't want anyone to be disenfranchised by them.

What Republicans have not done is pursued special rights and privileges for black people. That's because they avoid racism.

Yes, exactly. Those debates should happen at school board meetings. Without fear on the part of concerned parents of being investigated and threat tagged by the Department of Justice.

School boards need to listen to parents, and not to the teachers union that Finance their campaigns. That's the first start in having a debate. Not wrestling a parent to the ground because he goes a minute over his time is another step in the right direction.

Yes, but if a potential employee comes to a job interview knowing the basics of Reading Writing math and computer literacy, an employer will be willing to work with them and train them on the specific operation that they will be performing. Workers risk being replaced by robots, when they are unable to perform simple tasks.

Parents will be the primary teachers of their kids of how to be parents themselves. Often for the better but sadly often for the worst. I don't know if schools could change that.

I'm not sure that happened until recently, and only when specific books were introduced into the library of local schools pushing for acceptance of every possible sexual difference.

I proved my point. You made a claim that Republicans were the anti-slavery, anti-segregation crowd. My argument is that while yes, these Republicans were liberals back in the day.
If you want to make your argument, go ahead. I made mine. Simple fact is what you're saying is misleading.

"It was the Republican party that fought a war to prevent the Southern States from seceding"

Yep, they were the liberals. First Republican to do well in a US presidential race was against slavery. As I've said repeatedly, the liberals in the Deep South up until 1964 were the Republicans. The conservatives were the Democrats.

How about we do this. Let's not talk about Republicans and Democrats. Let's talk about who was for and against slavery and segregation based on whether they were liberal or conservative, shall we?

List of governors of Georgia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Governors of Georgia.

Prior to the Civil War there was a dude called George W. Towns (1847-1851)

George W. Towns - New Georgia Encyclopedia

George W. Towns, a lawyer, legislator, and U.S. congressman, served as Georgia’s governor from 1847 to 1851. A Unionist and staunch opponent of nullification when he entered politics in 1829, Towns became governor two decades later as a “fire-eating” secessionist who believed that the federal...

www.georgiaencyclopedia.org

"In the campaign Towns cheered President Polk’s policy during the Mexican War (1846-48) and echoed southern secessionists’ threats against the proposed Wilmot Proviso, which would ban slavery in any territories gained from Mexico."

"Two years later Towns won a second term, again by aggressively endorsing “southern rights” and playing to fears about Congressional interference with slavery."

Sounds like a pro-slavery guy to me. I guess I could go on for a long time finding conservatives who were pro-slavery at this time.

"It was Biden who said desegregation might lead to Public Schools being a racial jungle. "

How dishonest can you be. Anyone with half a brain looking at what Biden said will realize that he was worried that a "racial jungle" would appear and he didn't want ANY kid growing up in a "racial jungle".

But I guess you will see what you want to see, rather than what was there.

"Republicans Believe In rights for black people"

Bullshit.

"What Republicans have not done is pursued special rights and privileges for black people. That's because they avoid racism."

A clear example of faking it. Republican policies are designed to keep black people down. They make sure education is bad for the poor, and black people have a much higher rate of poverty, they make sure opportunities are lower for black people, they stopped black people moving into white neighborhoods, they try to stop black people voting.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, exactly. Those debates should happen at school board meetings. Without fear on the part of concerned parents of being investigated and threat tagged by the Department of Justice.

School boards need to listen to parents, and not to the teachers union that Finance their campaigns. That's the first start in having a debate. Not wrestling a parent to the ground because he goes a minute over his time is another step in the right direction.

Yes, but if a potential employee comes to a job interview knowing the basics of Reading Writing math and computer literacy, an employer will be willing to work with them and train them on the specific operation that they will be performing. Workers risk being replaced by robots, when they are unable to perform simple tasks.

Parents will be the primary teachers of their kids of how to be parents themselves. Often for the better but sadly often for the worst. I don't know if schools could change that.

I'm not sure that happened until recently, and only when specific books were introduced into the library of local schools pushing for acceptance of every possible sexual difference.

Yes, debates should happen. However in the US with a two party system and these two parties being exceedingly negative, and using narratives to try and force people to accept their policies, rather than having people dictating what the politicians do, as happens in many proportional representation countries.

Take Germany. The AfD appeared in 2013, it's a further right party (not far right, but further to the right than the CDU, the traditional right party). By 2017 they had gained 12.6% of the vote and 90 seats. They took votes and seats from the CDU. That was an instant impact.

In the UK, with FPTP, UKIP, a similar type party formed in the early 1990s, managed to get 12.6% of the vote in 2015. They got one seat. They did change politics, because they forced a Brexit vote, but then they virtually died.

In Germany the people have a much faster way of getting heard and if the politicians don't listen, they lose and lose big time.

In the US there isn't even a chance that third parties like UKIP will get voted for, which means no one listens. Which means the two parties can control their narratives. Which makes for crazy politics and a lack of open debate without being called a "racist" "communist" "fascist" etc etc.

If you are competing with people, and you have one interviewee who has the skills, and another who can read and write and do basic math, which one will get the job? If an employer has to train their employees to do things they should have learned at school, the US will be less efficient and foreign employees will be more sought after.

Yes, parents are the primary teachers of how to become parents. And you get cycles of it failing. Once one parent fails, the whole stack of card fails for generations. And the numbers failing just grow and grow, especially as such people are far more likely to produce more kids.

Well, I'd say that people become more radical when sensible doesn't happen.

If you have a government that is sensible, people will see that sensible doesn't work. When governments are wacky, like in the US, people see the normal system isn't working so they go much further left or right.
We can see this on both sides of the party. The Dems are moving left, the Reps moving right.
Spain is an example of what happens when this is the situation. Civil War in the 1930s, or Weimar Germany, pre-Soviet Russia, many examples.
Either the US introduces a sensible electoral system (proportional representation) or the left and right become more radical and more wacky shit happens.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Josh Shapiro supports overhaul of school funding in PA

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Josh Shapiro has backed a high-profile lawsuit calling for an overhaul of Pennsylvania’s school funding system.

philadelphia.chalkbeat.org

In Pennsylvania, the bulk of public school funding is raised at the local (school district) level through real estate taxes. A small percentage comes from the Feds, and about 35-40% comes from the State.

Perversities abound. When measuring funding on a per-student basis, the big cities with the (statistically) worst academics get the most money, second come the affluent suburbs with high real estate values, and third come rural districts with the highest real estate tax rates, due to low population density. Academically, the big cities do have various forms of "scholar" programs that facilitate SOME urban students getting an education that rivals a good private school, but as the cancer of DEI attacks them, their excellence is in serious danger.

In parallel with funding issues and issues of "equity" is a general movement in Academe to de-emphasize standardized testing, the results of which perennially embarrass both POC communities and public school teachers as a group. So any attempt to measure whether funding initiatives are succeeding in raising up the "worst" districts and schools is hampered by reluctant to quantitatively measure the academic status quo, over time.

So two questions are begged, so to speak. What if funding were "normalized" throughout the State, with every district spending the same amount per pupil (with an adjustment for the lowest population-density districts)? Would the Leftists consider that "fair," and what would that do to/for educational "outcomes"?

[Nothing].

The second question is, if not per-student spending, what other criterion could be used to give every student in the State school system a reasonably equal education - whatever that means?

[I haven't a clue].

One suspects that Leftist politico's would likely just like to throw more and more money to underperforming districts, while ignoring the fact that it doesn't do any good. But that's just my own prejudices coming out.

Here are some numbers:

U.S. Public Education Spending Statistics [2025]: per Pupil + Total

Find out how much the U.S. spends on public education and how the costs break down per student, by state and by level of government.

educationdata.org

So what do you think? What spending principles would result in the "fairest" allocation of funds to the largest number of public school students?

Education is an investment in the future of the country. All kids should get the same level of funding no matter where they live.

Schools with seperate needs should get extra funding.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I know you have heard this before and will dismiss it again. Private schools can pick and choose what students they will accept.

I did not dismiss it. It is a valid point. Public schools used to do the same. If a student came to school to disrupt school instead of learning, they were suspended. If they came back and did the same, they were suspended again. If a student assaulted a student or a teacher, they were expelled, and no one questioned the obvious need for that.

Students with disabilities were educated apart from their non-disabled peers, so they could learn what they could without hindering the education of others. Students who were too lazy to learn would fail, get left behind a grade or two, and realize that they aren't on the graduation track and drop out.

Schools were not twelve year warehousing institutions where at the end, you got a diploma whether you could read it or not.

How about leveling the playing field? Public vouchers but you must accept the public regardless of why they are?

So private schools can be the one-size-fits-all education nightmare that public school are?

How about we give one size voucher to typical students, one to gifted and talented, and a larger ones to students with disabilities or behavior issues that cost public schools more money. Then private schools seeking vouchers would tailor their services to different kinds of kids.

 

[pknopp]

I did not dismiss it. It is a valid point. Public schools used to do the same. If a student came to school to disrupt school instead of learning, they were suspended. If they came back and did the same, they were suspended again. If a student assaulted a student or a teacher, they were expelled, and no one questioned the obvious need for that.

Students with disabilities were educated apart from their non-disabled peers, so they could learn what they could without hindering the education of others. Students who were too lazy to learn would fail, get left behind a grade or two, and realize that they aren't on the graduation track and drop out.

Schools were not twelve year warehousing institutions where at the end, you got a diploma whether you could read it or not.

So private schools can be the one-size-fits-all education nightmare that public school are?

How about we give one size voucher to typical students, one to gifted and talented, and a larger ones to students with disabilities or behavior issues that cost public schools more money. Then private schools seeking vouchers would tailor their services to different kinds of kids.

If you are going to promote a private school being able to pick the best students you can't really give them credit for having better results.

Dismissed.

 

[2aguy]

And yes slavery and segregation were CONSERVATIVE policies. That you come up with "all Democratic policies" shows that you're not really interested in proper debate.

Yes, it's vague because it's a huge subject and I don't claim to have all the answers. It's a discussion for a country to have. The answer of "What should an American adult be like?"

For example - law abiding, having skills to get a job, a good parent, a good spouse.

Then, how do we achieve this?

And again, another jibe. You teach behavior, and yet you come on here and you're full of crap.

I can't be bothered to be honest.

No...they were democrat party policies.....being conservative is a different thing when you are a democrat or a republican. Democrats wanted to preserve slavery. Republicans wanted to preserve the Constitution and the bill of Rights. You doofus.

 

[Seymour Flops]

With all due respect, I don't have the time nor inclination to provide a link to programs that I taught under as a teacher and as a school administrator. The program was ended because it violated the state constitution, not because it sucked, which it did.

Private schools popped up overnight and millions of taxpayer funds were lost when they failed just as fast. These private schools failed because no one they hired was capable of managing their finances.

Ok, what is the name of the program and I will research it myself.

It is plain that you are hiding something about it.

 

[Seymour Flops]

If you are going to promote a private school being able to pick the best students you can't really give them credit for having better results.

Dismissed.

You give up so soon?