THE HYPOCRISY OF THE LEFT PART 6

[tellitlikeitis]

live from the wall st journal report:

from WSJ editorial board member Jason Riley ( a black man by the way )

" the washington dc public school system spends 13,000 dollars per year per student "

" the washington dc public school system has an almost not believable 12 % literacy rate among it's 11th graders "

" the washington dc public school system is the lowest rated school system in the nation "

" i don't blame Barak Obama one bit for not sending his children to the DC public schools, but the ultimate hypocrisy here is that while Mr obama will tell you that he is going to fix the public schools, his attitude is that while they are being fixed, his children will go to private schools...How does Obama plan to " fix " the public schools in DC ?.. by throwing more money at them...More than 13 thousand dollars per student per year? Obama's hypocrisy on this is just stunning "
Obama's people will say the issue on this is security....that is a smokescreen that is an embarassment....if somehow the issue of security could magically be a nonissue, does any serious thinker out there actually think the Obama's would send their children to the worst rated school system in the country " ? The security issue provides nothing more than political cover for an issue that , one would think, would be a priority for a minority president where the minority community is the main victim in this issue...At what point does a reasonable person say that this system is broken, is not going to work and needs to be completely dismantled...5% literacy... 2% .. when no one can read and write...my god, is that what it is going to take? "


the big H rolls on

[Bubba]

Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?

[Dr. NO]

The president has no part of the DC spending plan, but doesn't the Congress hold the DC purse strings? If so, then they are the ones that failed in oversight of the city and the failure of the system. Kind of like FreddieMac and Fannie Mae don't ya think?

[shortski]

President doesn't have any direct control but can exert some control by suggesting to the Dem controlled legislator, legislation that dangles the carrot (Federal Dollars) in the face of the local pols and teachers union, that require they do what he wants or no cigar. Like the no child left behind, that seems to have worked well.

Standard response throw more money at it, most of which end up in the pockets of the administrators and the teachers union.

Means test teachers, that would be a good start to improving education.

[BigKahuna13]

President doesn't have any direct control but can exert some control by suggesting to the Dem controlled legislator, legislation that dangles the carrot (Federal Dollars) in the face of the local pols and teachers union, that require they do what he wants or no cigar. Like the no child left behind, that seems to have worked well.

Standard response throw more money at it, most of which end up in the pockets of the administrators and the teachers union.

Means test teachers, that would be a good start to improving education.

No child left behind was a huge power grab by the federal government. the feds have no business in the education business.

[Dr. NO]

President doesn't have any direct control but can exert some control by suggesting to the Dem controlled legislator, legislation that dangles the carrot (Federal Dollars) in the face of the local pols and teachers union, that require they do what he wants or no cigar. Like the no child left behind, that seems to have worked well.

Standard response throw more money at it, most of which end up in the pockets of the administrators and the teachers union.

Means test teachers, that would be a good start to improving education.

No child left behind was a huge power grab by the federal government. the feds have no business in the education business.

Oh YEAH! What does the Fed know about what is going on in your town? Let the education department set minimum standards, provide money to teach then get the hell out of the way.

[tellitlikeitis]

[quote="Bubba"]Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?[/quote]


uhh, you seem to be totally missing this here by asking that


he could propose, as the bush administration has tried to propose, a federal tax CREDIT, for those who choose to not indulge themselves and their children in the public school system scam and instead send their kids to real institutes of learning...

catholic schools educate kids at half the cost, yet provide at least twice the education


" oh god no we can't do that,,,, that will take too much money away from the public schools and cause them to , uh, uh , uh, not be able to offer a quality education......????? " baaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh..... ... 13k and dead last ...are you kidding me

[Bubba]

Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?

uhh, you seem to be totally missing this here by asking that


he could propose, as the bush administration has tried to propose, a federal tax CREDIT, for those who choose to not indulge themselves and their children in the public school system scam and instead send their kids to real institutes of learning...

catholic schools educate kids at half the cost, yet provide at least twice the education


" oh god no we can't do that,,,, that will take too much money away from the public schools and cause them to , uh, uh , uh, not be able to offer a quality education......????? " baaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh..... ... 13k and dead last ...are you kidding me

How does Obama plan to " fix " the public schools in DC ?.. by throwing more money at them...More than 13 thousand dollars per student per year? Obama's hypocrisy on this is just stunning "

Really now....I thought this was the point - that Obama's solution would be to throw more money at it when, in fact, the President has no control over DC spending on the schools.

Now, could there be another solution? Sure, but that's not the point of the article.

[BigKahuna13]

Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?

catholic schools educate kids at half the cost, yet provide at least twice the education

do they now? you have any kids in catholic school? the tuition for my daughter's catholic h.s. is more than twice the school portion of my property taxes. ($8,500 as opposed to $3,500). I don't doubt that the private school provides a better education but it is not cheaper.

The real solution is not tax credits or vouchers or anything else. The real solution is to do what a city in Ca did (I think it was San Francisco). Let parents pick the public school their kids attend and move the funding with the kids - effectively introducing competition between public schools. Schools that don't perform lose money and go out of business.

[tellitlikeitis]

[quote="BigKahuna13"][quote="tellitlikeitis"][quote="Bubba"]Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?[/quote]



catholic schools educate kids at half the cost, yet provide at least twice the education
[/quote]

do they now? you have any kids in catholic school? the tuition for my daughter's catholic h.s. is more than twice the school portion of my property taxes. ($8,500 as opposed to $3,500). I don't doubt that the private school provides a better education but it is not cheaper.

The real solution is not tax credits or vouchers or anything else. The real solution is to do what a city in Ca did (I think it was San Francisco). Let parents pick the public school their kids attend and move the funding with the kids - effectively introducing competition between public schools. Schools that don't perform lose money and go out of business.[/quote]


1)just for the record , i have three in catholic schools... all grammar... grammar is less than high in terms of expenditure.... the dc quote of 13k is the average for grammar and high....so it would be safe to assume just the high is even more than 13k... which is even more ridiculous... for you to say that catholic schools, in general, do not provide an education at a cheaper cost is just ridiculous....if you are going to use an elite catholic school , which there are some in my area, as a base example that is one thing...and there is nothing wrong with you choosing to send her there, don't get me wrong....but don't skewer the numbers....where i am, my three in grammar cost me just under 11k per year for all three, slight discounts for multiple children included in that....the average grammar school expenditure in the city i am in for the public schools is, PER PUPIL, $8700... the high school is 11,700....for around 9k, where i am, i can send them to not the top catholic high school, but probably the 3rd best and there are at least 5 others that would come in at around 7500 that would provide a superior education to the junk they would get at any of the public schools....exactly 50% less?...no , but still a lot less and getting a lot more...
what a phony argument saying that " your portion " of the property tax bill " and so on....how can actually think one would believe that the public school system spends 3500 per student in that district....

2) you expect me to believe that whatever public school district you live in spends on $3500 on each kid....unless i'm reading you wrong , that seems to be what you are saying...i'm sorry, i just dont believe that

[BigKahuna13]

Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?

catholic schools educate kids at half the cost, yet provide at least twice the education

do they now? you have any kids in catholic school? the tuition for my daughter's catholic h.s. is more than twice the school portion of my property taxes. ($8,500 as opposed to $3,500). I don't doubt that the private school provides a better education but it is not cheaper.

The real solution is not tax credits or vouchers or anything else. The real solution is to do what a city in Ca did (I think it was San Francisco). Let parents pick the public school their kids attend and move the funding with the kids - effectively introducing competition between public schools. Schools that don't perform lose money and go out of business.

1)just for the record , i have three in catholic schools... all grammar... grammar is less than high in terms of expenditure.... the dc quote of 13k is the average for grammar and high....so it would be safe to assume just the high is even more than 13k... which is even more ridiculous... for you to say that catholic schools, in general, do not provide an education at a cheaper cost is just ridiculous....if you are going to use an elite catholic school , which there are some in my area, as a base example that is one thing...and there is nothing wrong with you choosing to send her there, don't get me wrong....but don't skewer the numbers....where i am, my three in grammar cost me just under 11k per year for all three, slight discounts for multiple children included in that....the average grammar school expenditure in the city i am in for the public schools is, PER PUPIL, $8700... the high school is 11,700....for around 9k, where i am, i can send them to not the top catholic high school, but probably the 3rd best and there are at least 5 others that would come in at around 7500 that would provide a superior education to the junk they would get at any of the public schools....exactly 50% less?...no , but still a lot less and getting a lot more...
what a phony argument saying that " your portion " of the property tax bill " and so on....how can actually think one would believe that the public school system spends 3500 per student in that district....

2) you expect me to believe that whatever public school district you live in spends on $3500 on each kid....unless i'm reading you wrong , that seems to be what you are saying...i'm sorry, i just dont believe that

Yes $3,500 is approximately the portion of my tax bill that goes to the school district. That's not what gets spent per pupil because
obviously the schools get money from other sources but so does the catholic school. Diocese generally subsidize schools to an extent.
My daughter's tuition is not out of the ordinary for private high schools. Several people I know pay similar amounts.

Also consider that public schools typically have to offer more services that private schools. Private schools don't have to take on ESL students or students with emotional / psychological problems. Public schools do. Those programs cost money. Also consider that
many private schools have an "unfair" advantage in that nuns - the majority of teachers at my daughter's school - do not draw a salary.

We probably can't compare the two precisely in terms of expenditures and I'll grant that private schools generally - GENERALLY - give better educations than public schools. But twice the education for half the price? Four times the value? I seriously doubt it.

[thorski]

Do they still teach creationism in catholic schools or is it intelligent design now?

[tellitlikeitis]

[quote="BigKahuna13"][quote="tellitlikeitis"][quote="BigKahuna13"][quote="tellitlikeitis"][quote="Bubba"]Umm...what control does the President of the United States have over spending on DC schools and how will Obama increase spending there per pupil?[/quote]



catholic schools educate kids at half the cost, yet provide at least twice the education
[/quote]

do they now? you have any kids in catholic school? the tuition for my daughter's catholic h.s. is more than twice the school portion of my property taxes. ($8,500 as opposed to $3,500). I don't doubt that the private school provides a better education but it is not cheaper.

The real solution is not tax credits or vouchers or anything else. The real solution is to do what a city in Ca did (I think it was San Francisco). Let parents pick the public school their kids attend and move the funding with the kids - effectively introducing competition between public schools. Schools that don't perform lose money and go out of business.[/quote]


1)just for the record , i have three in catholic schools... all grammar... grammar is less than high in terms of expenditure.... the dc quote of 13k is the average for grammar and high....so it would be safe to assume just the high is even more than 13k... which is even more ridiculous... for you to say that catholic schools, in general, do not provide an education at a cheaper cost is just ridiculous....if you are going to use an elite catholic school , which there are some in my area, as a base example that is one thing...and there is nothing wrong with you choosing to send her there, don't get me wrong....but don't skewer the numbers....where i am, my three in grammar cost me just under 11k per year for all three, slight discounts for multiple children included in that....the average grammar school expenditure in the city i am in for the public schools is, PER PUPIL, $8700... the high school is 11,700....for around 9k, where i am, i can send them to not the top catholic high school, but probably the 3rd best and there are at least 5 others that would come in at around 7500 that would provide a superior education to the junk they would get at any of the public schools....exactly 50% less?...no , but still a lot less and getting a lot more...
what a phony argument saying that " your portion " of the property tax bill " and so on....how can actually think one would believe that the public school system spends 3500 per student in that district....

2) you expect me to believe that whatever public school district you live in spends on $3500 on each kid....unless i'm reading you wrong , that seems to be what you are saying...i'm sorry, i just dont believe that[/quote]

Yes $3,500 is approximately the portion of my tax bill that goes to the school district. That's not what gets spent per pupil because
obviously the schools get money from other sources but so does the catholic school. Diocese generally subsidize schools to an extent.
My daughter's tuition is not out of the ordinary for private high schools. Several people I know pay similar amounts.

Also consider that public schools typically have to offer more services that private schools. Private schools don't have to take on ESL students or students with emotional / psychological problems. Public schools do. Those programs cost money. Also consider that
many private schools have an "unfair" advantage in that nuns - the majority of teachers at my daughter's school - do not draw a salary.

We probably can't compare the two precisely in terms of expenditures and I'll grant that private schools generally - GENERALLY - give better educations than public schools. But twice the education for half the price? Four times the value? I seriously doubt it.[/quote]



1) we are probably not as far apart on this as it first seemed although we probably do disagree on some things

2) you are right, some dioceses offer some subsidized monies, but i don't think all and i don't think it is , when all factored in, even close to the total expenditures that the gov't spends on public schools

3) you are correct that there has to be an answer to the issue of the " troubled " student... but now we are getting into a can of worms that could get out of control....i would propose that a fairly significant amount of the " trouble " cases are the result of bad parents who are pushing their kids off onto the state, but im not going to get into that....autism, special needs, agreed , 100% , that would need to be addressed.... but i think it could be addressed in the private sector with a gov't subsidy

4) your daughter is lucky and you are lucky....there are not many catholic schools left that are staffed primarily by religious orders

5) the extremes of the issue are what they are... the super poor without a pot to piss in ( often by thier own choices , but not always ) and the wealthy who really dont have to give a second thought to dropping 10 to 15 k a year to educated the children....the middle class are the ones who are increasingly feeling the vice around the neck....i don't know what the hell i am going to do in 5 years and am looking at 30 to 40 K for high school outlays....i live in a city, a major urban city in which whites comprise about 10% of the public school population....there is an average of 5 guns seized a month in this system.. there is an average of 10 stabbings be year....teachers are assaulted at the rate of 4 a month....it is not an option....and there are increasing numbers of people in my situation and there is going to reach a tipping point where something has to give...

6) major metro public schools and suburban public schools , i think, are not the same.... but , and again, this is the point of the original post, if liberals who claim to be for the poorest and most vulverable , really were, they would readily be able to admit the current system, at least when examined in a major metro city, is a failure and is failing the very people whom they claim to want to help....suburban do gooder liberals who don't have to be exposed to the reality of this in so much as it affects them and their children are the hypocrites i refer to .....i know many of them as friends of my wife....they are so easy to spot....oh my god, no we must support the public funding of education through public schools ... yeah that's great when little muffy and biff are going to suburban high that is nice and 99% white....they have not answer, none , none at all , for the real issue of inner city middle class and they would not be caught dead even driving by some the nut houses that fashion themselves as schools , never mind be caught sending little muffy and biff there...

7) i don't want the gov't to pay for my kid's education in whole...just let me keep my money that goes to partially funding ( like your 3500 or so that is directly going to the pool, ) the broken system and i'll come up with the rest... and then the govt can then either run their own schools for the " troubled " or legit special needs kids with the other source money that you refer to OR, they could just outsource it althogether and subsidize it ....BUT THAT WOULD BE THE END OF THE N.E.A and the teachers unions

[icedtea]

[BadDog]

I've never heard of Catholic schools teaching "creationism" over "evolution" -- that seems to be the province of the more wing-nut Middle America private schools.

However, there is no way that they provide twice the education -- I'd be happy to match SAT scores and selective college acceptances of the graduates of my very-much lower middle class public high school with those of any religous public school in the area. (Informal comparisons when we graduated showed that the public school kicked butt with much higher SAT scores and many more slective college acceptances.)