We can't cut education

[Persia]

President Obama cast his education program in economic terms today, saying better schools mean more jobs ...

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/03/obama-education-is-the-best-jobs-program/1

Obama asks Congress to revamp education law by new school year in Sept., but obstacles remain

http://www.washingtonpost.com/obama-asks-congress-to-revamp-education-law-by-new-school-year-in-sept-but-obstacles-remain/2011/03/14/ABUTfMV_story.html

[danielost]

ok then cut old and handicapped peoples money.

[ohio traveler]

Seems like the more we spend, the dumber our kids are.

[danielost]

Seems like the more we spend, the dumber our kids are.

i have said this before. we are not teaching anymore, we are teaching to pass a test.

[questionmark]

Seems like the more we spend, the dumber our kids are.

Kids are seldom more educated than the dedication of the parents to education.

[supervike]

Just like if your personal budget was in turmoil, I think it's only wise to look at ALL expenditures very closely.

Then you'd weigh the importance and need of every expenditure.

I'm sure we can find places to cut every single program, or at least do them more efficiently.

Defense, education, roads, etc etc. Anything and everything should at least be looked at.

[danielost]

Just like if your personal budget was in turmoil, I think it's only wise to look at ALL expenditures very closely.

Then you'd weigh the importance and need of every expenditure.

I'm sure we can find places to cut every single program, or at least do them more efficiently.

Defense, education, roads, etc etc. Anything and everything should at least be looked at.

i agree and we need to stop giving them more money than they ask for to start with. as the gop did in 09

[Wookietim]

Just like if your personal budget was in turmoil, I think it's only wise to look at ALL expenditures very closely.

Then you'd weigh the importance and need of every expenditure.

I'm sure we can find places to cut every single program, or at least do them more efficiently.

Defense, education, roads, etc etc. Anything and everything should at least be looked at.

You know, it's quite obvious that this countries educational system is not really working at peak efficiency. And that it's getting worse.

But the thing is, one doesn't decide to cut funding for something like this and expect it to get better. That logic doesn't work. Education is absolutely the one, basic, completely essential bit of spending we have if we want to remain competitive in the future as a country. We can't walk away from it and think that will help future generations in any possible way.

[supervike]

You know, it's quite obvious that this countries educational system is not really working at peak efficiency. And that it's getting worse.

But the thing is, one doesn't decide to cut funding for something like this and expect it to get better. That logic doesn't work. Education is absolutely the one, basic, completely essential bit of spending we have if we want to remain competitive in the future as a country. We can't walk away from it and think that will help future generations in any possible way.

Now, I happen to agree...but we also don't want to just sign a blank check and say 'whatever you need'.

For instance, they've raised a tax here in my area that is called a Local Option Tax. So every dollar spent in my county, a penny goes to the school district. I don't have an issue with that at all.

But, so far what they have done is build huge shiny new schools with all the latest gadgets. Again, we need schools and education is important, but we, as a country are in a huge economic downturn. Couldn't that money have been better utilized updating existing schools? (I can think of 3 school buildings that they've just abandoned, and they are less that 30 years old). Granted, eventually we'd need new schools, but not when money is hard to come by. They've taken the approach that if you have the money, you'd better spend it all before it goes away. It's just not wise financially to do it that way.

So, the only difference to the school kids is simply they go to a fancier building. The cirriculum is the same. Hopefully, just having a better building makes learning more conducive, I sure hope so. If it does, and the grades and results rise for these kids, then I suppose it is money well spent.

[Wookietim]

Now, I happen to agree...but we also don't want to just sign a blank check and say 'whatever you need'.

For instance, they've raised a tax here in my area that is called a Local Option Tax. So every dollar spent in my county, a penny goes to the school district. I don't have an issue with that at all.

But, so far what they have done is build huge shiny new schools with all the latest gadgets. Again, we need schools and education is important, but we, as a country are in a huge economic downturn. Couldn't that money have been better utilized updating existing schools? (I can think of 3 school buildings that they've just abandoned, and they are less that 30 years old). Granted, eventually we'd need new schools, but not when money is hard to come by. They've taken the approach that if you have the money, you'd better spend it all before it goes away. It's just not wise financially to do it that way.

So, the only difference to the school kids is simply they go to a fancier building. The cirriculum is the same. Hopefully, just having a better building makes learning more conducive, I sure hope so. If it does, and the grades and results rise for these kids, then I suppose it is money well spent.

1. Suggesting that we take the idea of budget CUTS to schools off the table is not the same as giving education a "Blank check".

2. Let's see... New schools cut down on class sizes, allow the hiring of more teachers (With the resulting decrease in unemployment) and also decrease unemployment during the construction.

[danielost]

You know, it's quite obvious that this countries educational system is not really working at peak efficiency. And that it's getting worse.

But the thing is, one doesn't decide to cut funding for something like this and expect it to get better. That logic doesn't work. Education is absolutely the one, basic, completely essential bit of spending we have if we want to remain competitive in the future as a country. We can't walk away from it and think that will help future generations in any possible way.

you do know that the more we spend on education, the less return we are getting and the less competitive in the world.

[Wookietim]

you do know that the more we spend on education, the less return we are getting and the less competitive in the world.

Perhaps because we are not spending it correctly. But you can't help educate kids by removing the resources to provide that education. After all, kids aren't going to learn to read better if we decrease the number of books they have... Why should reducing spending on other educational resource somehow magically help them learn better?

[zooage]

There are ways to cut education that won't effect the students. How about starting with combining school districts at the administration level? By cutting a third of the districts out and combining them, we would save millions in pay, benefits, pensions, etc.

We could do away with the school breakfast funding. Why are we feeding them breakfast anyway? Most of those that get breakfast at school already get government assistance anyway. Why aren't they feeding their children? That shouldn't be a schools problem.

However, we should start by cutting every other program our government funds first. Corporate Welfare? Farm Subsidies for ConAg and Monsanto? Tax breaks for Big Oil? Why have we not cut all or these programs completely out of the budget? America spends $1.13 Billion a day on interest on the national debt acquired since 1980. Our pay checks haven't been worth less since the Depression. That is the main issue we face. We are being bled dry by the huge debt our elected officials have told us for years would never effect our economy! We were lied to again.

[danielost]

Perhaps because we are not spending it correctly. But you can't help educate kids by removing the resources to provide that education. After all, kids aren't going to learn to read better if we decrease the number of books they have... Why should reducing spending on other educational resource somehow magically help them learn better?

i dont know.

i do know that a couple of years ago, new jersey was spending the least amount on education and was getting the best results.

but what we need to do is go back to educating kids and stop showing them how to pass a test.

[preacherman76]

Federal government has no constitutional authority to have anything to do with education. And we were #1 in the world, before the fed got involved.

[Wookietim]

There are ways to cut education that won't effect the students. How about starting with combining school districts at the administration level? By cutting a third of the districts out and combining them, we would save millions in pay, benefits, pensions, etc.

We could do away with the school breakfast funding. Why are we feeding them breakfast anyway? Most of those that get breakfast at school already get government assistance anyway. Why aren't they feeding their children? That shouldn't be a schools problem.

However, we should start by cutting every other program our government funds first. Corporate Welfare? Farm Subsidies for ConAg and Monsanto? Tax breaks for Big Oil? Why have we not cut all or these programs completely out of the budget? America spends $1.13 Billion a day on interest on the national debt acquired since 1980. Our pay checks haven't been worth less since the Depression. That is the main issue we face. We are being bled dry by the huge debt our elected officials have told us for years would never effect our economy! We were lied to again.

Why not make those changes but not cut funding? How does spending less on education magically translate into better educated students? Could you explain that?

It seems many people's attitude is "If we spend less we will get more"... Tell me - how many times have you experienced that equation working in your own life?

Federal government has no constitutional authority to have anything to do with education. And we were #1 in the world, before the fed got involved.

Tell me something : What country is #1 right now? And then answer a followup : Does that country have a federal govt spending money on education?

[Bendy Demon]

I've said it bere and I will say it again..what we need to do is eliminate sports, gym and most of the arts from the education budget.

Now..before anyone goes all nuclear on me allow me to explain. Sports equipment, for example, is very expensive and many schools make passing gym class a requirement for graduating or even going to the next grade. We have kids who can dribble a ball but can't spell their own names.

Art is nice and I won't deny its usefulness but at the same time we need the kids to be able to read a book and actually think. Wailing on a guitar or pounding a drum may be nice but if the kid cannot figure out how to do some simple book keeping or devise their own system or even figure out how not to get swindled by credit card companies than all the acrylic paints in the world won't do them a lick of good.

Some people have whined claiming that "poor" kids wouldn't otherwise have a chance to do their "art". I don't mean to sound harsh but why should that be my problem? Why must I pay tax money so some child can paint while other disadvantaged kids are not getting school materials or not getting the help they need so they can read at an age appropriate level.

The school I graduated from placed a huge emphasis on their stupid sports programs, put lots of money into having a rock concert twice in the year yet at the same time when I was taking a history class.. we had one set of books which we had to hand in at the end of class and then go check out the book from the library at the end of the day..we were not allowed to do it any other time. Lots of kids, including myself at the time, often did not do the work because the library was so backed up and I had no other way to get home other than the bus so I had to forgo the homework and as k the kid I sat next to the next day to quickly lend me his book so I could scan the reading material.

I agree that we are not teaching the kids to actually think or even develop their own interests..we teach them to memorize key words only so they can pass a test. We do not teach them to think outside of what they are told by the media..we teach them to "obey" and never ask, question or even stand up for themselves.

We don't teach them to seek knowledge on their own but only to memorize what the corporations dictate as relevant. But that is just it too..we do not teach them how what they are learning relates to the real world...we do not teach anything that is relevant beyond what the workplace wants.

We do not teach kids to seek knowledge for their own development...

[danielost]

Why not make those changes but not cut funding? How does spending less on education magically translate into better educated students? Could you explain that?

It seems many people's attitude is "If we spend less we will get more"... Tell me - how many times have you experienced that equation working in your own life?

Tell me something : What country is #1 right now? And then answer a followup : Does that country have a federal govt spending money on education?

what does that have to do with what he said.

[preacherman76]

Tell me something : What country is #1 right now? And then answer a followup : Does that country have a federal govt spending money on education?

First tell me something, why have we been in free fall since the federal government got involved in education? How on Earth, being the youngest nation of the times, could we have climbed to the top of that hill??? One word, freedom. Over taxation represents slavery.

Edited March 14, 2011 by preacherman76

[Wookietim]

what does that have to do with what he said.

Well, let's see : He suggests making cuts based on savings in other areas. So the first sentence "Why not make those changes but not cut funding?" definitely applies.

The second sentence furthers that concept : "How does spending less on education magically translate into better educated students? Could you explain that?" - my point is that we shouldn't reduce funding even if we can move funding we currently spend to other areas of it.

My third sentence : "It seems many people's attitude is "If we spend less we will get more"... Tell me - how many times have you experienced that equation working in your own life?" applies to the overall concept of the thread.

To be honest, so far in every post where you have talked to me you have been a poster child for good reasons NOT to cut funding to education. After all, if the educational system produces you, then we really need to pour more money into it.

[Wookietim]

First tell me something, why have we been in free fall since the federal government got involved in education? How on Earth, being the youngest nation of the times, could we have climbed to the top of that hill??? One word, freedom. Over taxation represents slavery.

Answer my question and perhaps you will answer your own question. If you think that the presence of federal funding somehow automatically diminishes the quality of education, and if the #1 country does federally fund it's education then your assumption is incorrect.

[zooage]

you do know that the more we spend on education, the less return we are getting and the less competitive in the world.

That's been a talking point of the right for years, though they offer no evidence of it. we are getting less return because our schools are being forced to teach foreigners that can't or won't learn English because America no longer makes their parents know English to become a citizen. We are forced to teach EVERY child, even if they are far beyond teaching because of the gang mentality, or because they either know everything, or they think the world owes them everything because of events that occurred 150 years ago. Chances are most them will never be a productive member of society anyway. Why waste time and money on them now? We have pandered to groups that could care less about education for too long. Cut their families welfare if they don't pass with a "C" average. No sports at all with out the same. Simple things that would make a big difference in the overall picture. We were taken out in the hall with a big paddle when I was in school. One never dare talk to a teacher like they do now.

[preacherman76]

Well, let's see : He suggests making cuts based on savings in other areas. So the first sentence "Why not make those changes but not cut funding?" definitely applies.

The second sentence furthers that concept : "How does spending less on education magically translate into better educated students? Could you explain that?" - my point is that we shouldn't reduce funding even if we can move funding we currently spend to other areas of it.

My third sentence : "It seems many people's attitude is "If we spend less we will get more"... Tell me - how many times have you experienced that equation working in your own life?" applies to the overall concept of the thread.

To be honest, so far in every post where you have talked to me you have been a poster child for good reasons NOT to cut funding to education. After all, if the educational system produces you, then we really need to pour more money into it.

Oh but governments were spending money on education before we werent, and we still topped them. Nothing breeds intelligence like freedom. Problem we we became complacent, and let these scum decide new definnitions of freedom. Hence the free fall. Bigger government is NEVER the answer.

[Wookietim]

Oh but governments were spending money on education before we werent, and we still topped them. Nothing breeds intelligence like freedom. Problem we we became complacent, and let these scum decide new definnitions of freedom. Hence the free fall. Bigger government is NEVER the answer.

Again - is the #1 country in education NOT spending money at the federal level on it? Because if it is, then your argument falls apart.

[preacherman76]

Answer my question and perhaps you will answer your own question. If you think that the presence of federal funding somehow automatically diminishes the quality of education, and if the #1 country does federally fund it's education then your assumption is incorrect.

I know for a fact it does. The numbers dont lie. Why are the other countries in the top 5? Cause they remove the children who are not successful, and work to the bone the children who are. Which obviously produces results. However I for one would rather go back to what made us even better then them, through freedom.

Edited March 14, 2011 by preacherman76