The Trump Presidency

[thethe]

"this was your choice of a question. there goes that relationship"

it speaks to high level of disgust of people having some people question you

even if he was joking here

we know the truth from Bannons comments to the leaks of how upset he gets over anything

And you thought that loaded question which was asked really fit that forum? And of course it was a joke to lighten the mood after it was asked. He even answered it adequately.

[Hawk]

Theresa May is such a turd.

[Hawk]

What rules would you advocate for numbers, enrollment, etc.? Here's why vouchers won't work. It isn't that they're necessarily a bad idea, but little Johnny's mom and dad are busy and they don't have time or patience or willingness to put up with their little angel getting punished for trying to burn down the gymnasium or for getting an F in Math because he was texting in class (or sleeping) instead of paying attention so they "school shop" in the same way that Michael Jackson doctor shopped. They keep moving their little angel around from school to school, always blaming those at the last school for his failures instead of blaming him and let's face it school administrators have to plan how many students they're going to have, how many teachers they're going to need and if students are bouncing around like ping pong balls in a lottery barrel thingy how can they know what to expect? Oh and did I mention that most of the superintendents I've known over the years weren't all that bright to begin with? Sure there are exceptions but that mandatory lobotomy they have to get so that they believe every BS story parents hit them with so that they overrule any real punishment little Johnny ever actually gets causes them to not be very good at math anymore.

I'm not prepared to provide numbers, but what I would advocate for is a very systemic enterprise with some federal guidelines supplemented by standards enacted at a local level. As for the 'school shopper' example you provided, it seems like this could be mitigated with relative ease (granted, in this hypothetical) with a "term" agreement and/or placing transfer applications (except in the obvious case of relocation) not directly in the hands of the schools themselves but with some sort of independent arbitration body.

[Hawk]

I didn't say that vouchers, on their own, constituted "'decimation' of publicly-funded education"; and I actually think, moreover, that vouchers—"provided", as you suggest, that "the government responsibility which is removed in the public to private transfer is then correspondingly re-appropriated to a oversight of the for-profit enterprises"—are not a horrible idea. They wouldn't be the first improvement I'd suggest, but I actually think vouchers that allow parents to send their children to existing private schools, with some sort of organ of oversight like you suggest, make a hell-of-a-lot more sense than the sort of direct pubic-subsidy apparatus that constitutes charter schools (all the rage amongst establishment liberals like Cory Booker, all-too-often partial to total disasters).

Ah, I see, and I agree, although my guess is that you'd see a great deal of angst arise from this particular proposition (in some parts, it would be probably [sadly] be just as controversial as integration). A compromise might be allowing only means-tested vouchers at said private schools, perhaps with a stricter geographical delineator attached.

What are your qualms with charter schools?

[sturg33]

Here's a hypothetical one: Single-payer health-care would make society accountable for the health of all of its citizens, even the most economically marginalized and monetarily-blocked from access. Here's a historical one, from the most recent half-century: the VRA made the voting-apparatus more accountable to those citizens who, if not de jure, were de facto denied franchise, simply on the basis of color or creed. Or one more, still in operation: regulatory bodies like the FDA hold companies accountable to the health and safety of the consumer, as opposed to simply their bottom-lines and shareholders. How modern are we talking? The WPA made the federal government accountable to the joblessness and destitution of its constituents.

But you think of accountability as solely a virtue participated in and expressed by the individual, just as I see personal liberty without economic safety to be a special kind of savagery. That's why and where we differ ideologically. But I don't accuse you of advocating savagery, even if I think that's the windfall of your preference for a certain species of liberty; I likewise think it's disingenuous to propose that the left's goal is less individual accountability, even if you think that's a repercussion of greater societal accountability.

Yeah - you basically said what I was thinking. Leftist policy advocates for accountability for other people. This is doomed to fail as it creates individual dependency and complacency.

The only thing we can control for ourselves is our own decisions... and thus, we should promote individual accountability for our own decisions.

Perhaps "winning" wasn't the right term for the leftist policies that are advancing. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and suggest it's an unattended consequence of their policy... Well meaning policies always seem to have those that outweigh the benefits.

[Oklahomahawk]

I'm not prepared to provide numbers, but what I would advocate for is a very systemic enterprise with some federal guidelines supplemented by standards enacted at a local level. As for the 'school shopper' example you provided, it seems like this could be mitigated with relative ease (granted, in this hypothetical) with a "term" agreement and/or placing transfer applications (except in the obvious case of relocation) not directly in the hands of the schools themselves but with some sort of independent arbitration body.

Your response doesn't sound terrible. Without specifics I couldn't get too deeply into "speaking to it" but a working together with some federal rules and guidelines, especially where it has to do with standards and funding would be two really good areas to start. Isn't the #1 problem (as far as fixing the education system) the fact that they won't work together except as (metaphorical) gun point? The way transfers typically work around here are most schools will approve transfers as long as there aren't too many especially when the transferring student is "somebody they don't mind losing" I"m in favor of local control for a lot of things and I certainly don't mind some local control of schools as far as curriculum. I had a friend explain the common core stuff to me not long ago and it sounds like it was founded on a good idea, but the finished product seems about as dumb and unworkable as a system can be. I still don't consider myself an expert on it, but after I found out the parts I found out, I really didn't want to learn anymore about a system that assumes all children can learn the same exact material the same exact way using the same exact method. Anybody who has taught anything knows that isn't the case. Oh and then there's Texas who "reworked" their history texts a few years back. Remember those? No partisan politics in the textbooks they decided to go with, huh?

And why are the textbooks and overall curriculum so important (besides the obvious reasons). Does anyone remember the parts of the Austrian ultimatum sent to Serbia after they sent the assassins who killed Franz Ferdinand? Austria sent a list of stuff, Serbia agreed to most of them, but what was in the ones they wouldn't accept?

[50PoundHead]

First off, the federal government can say anything they want about vouchers but it wouldn't mean a whole lot. There is no clause in the US Constitution relating to education and the federal government only pays about 10% of aggregate education costs and that is largely for special education, Title I money for poor children, and a bit for career and technical education. That would make only a small amount of money that could conceivably follow a student under a voucher plan. The rest of the education revenue is comprised of state aid and property taxes and the ratio of those varies from state-to-state.

We have a lot of school choice here in Minnesota. Open enrollment in the public system (districts can only refuse transferring students due to space constraints), expanded open enrollment between Minneapolis/St. Paul and the suburbs under an integration/achievement plan, charter schools, area learning centers, alternative schools within school districts, tax deduction for private school tuition, college-in-the-schools, and post-secondary enrollment options where high school students can take courses at a college are all part of that system. We rank near the top of comparative rankings on achievement among the states, but our achievement gap between white and minority students is the worst in the country. I don't think the crux of the minority achievement issue would likely be addressed by more school choice. To me, it's more a function of the growing disparity in wealth and economic opportunity that exist between the rising wealth of the suburbs and the growing desolation of the inner cities. In Minnesota, revenue per pupil doesn't matter either. Minneapolis and St. Paul get considerably more revenue than the average school district, but when residents of the district speak over 100 different languages, there simply isn't enough money to get everything done. Language barriers and student mobility make it extremely difficult in those districts.

Standardized testing is a largely a joke after elementary school. We force all 11th graders in Minnesota to take a math test that is probably applicable to the futures of less than 10% of the students taking it. I scored in the high 90%'s on both the ACT and GRE and when looking at the test questions, I wondered if I could have passed it in high school. I remember being at a site visit in her State Senate district years ago with the illustrious then-State Senator Michelle Bachmann and she when the testing question was being discussed, she turned to me and said (and I paraphrase) "The only assessment that matters is the one parents and their children have about the quality of education they are receiving." I believe there is something to that, but at the same time I think there has to be some rough set of measures by which schools can be graded. I am not an educator, but as someone who has been involved in the financial side of education funding for the past 30 years I've learned enough to form many wrong opinions, but I think critics of public education spend too much time on the depth of knowledge issues and not breadth of knowledge issues. The curriculum has been greatly narrowed in most school districts throughout the country. Part of that is due to the overweening dedication to standardized testing and the other part is about money. Career and technical programs are more expensive to operate and with the stress placed on getting kids into four-year colleges whether it's appropriate or not has mothballed a lot of those programs. And, as I've stressed in numerous posts over the years, everyone here needs to read Bill Bishop's The Big Sort. It doesn't talk about education directly, but it really hits at the heart of the fraying of common vision in the United States due to the geographic re-sorting of the population and I believe that has had an effect on education.

Hawk, charters are fine, but the Minnesota experience is illustrative of some of the problems that crop up when inexperienced people (some with good intentions and some with bad intentions) are given license to start a school. Minnesota had the first charter school law in the country. There was a cap on the number until the late-90s when a ton were established. Again, some were started by well-intentioned people and some were started by straight-out con artists. Running a school is a complicated business and you simply can't get rid of all the procedures that govern the expenditure of public money when sending money to charter schools. I was on legislative staff when the idea of charters were first being kicked around and was in a meeting with my boss (chair of the Education Funding subcommittee) and a proponents of charters. My boss asked the proponent "What about liability insurance?" The proponent was absolutely dumbfounded. His response was "Why would we need liability insurance? We are educating kids." My boss told him, something to the effect, "Well, good luck when the kid falls off the poorly-maintained jungle gym." I honestly think the growth of charters, at least in the urban areas, spring from the frustration that the minority population has when facing a largely white bureaucracy. Now that bureaucracy is simply following a lot of orders from federal and state officials, but in a lot of these big operations, it is hard for frustrated people to get a straight answer. They would rather go to a charter school where achievement levels are the same (or often worse) but they feel invested in the education of their kids. We also had a charter school closed down that was on the verge of being a madrassa. Charters have also led to greater self-segregation (and I can understand that).

My two-and-a-half cents.

[cajunrevenge]

Well Trump just fulfilled his promise of a 5 year lobbying ban. Love him or hate him he is getting **** done at an unprecedented pace. Wheres Obama at to explain why he cant do **** about legalization. If Trump was for legalization it would be in stores by the end of his first 100 days. This is why I wanted a non politician to be President. Feels like he has done more in his first week than Obama did in 8 years.

[thethe]

Well Trump just fulfilled his promise of a 5 year lobbying ban. Love him or hate him he is getting **** done at an unprecedented pace. Wheres Obama at to explain why he cant do **** about legalization. If Trump was for legalization it would be in stores by the end of his first 100 days. This is why I wanted a non politician to be President. Feels like he has done more in his first week than Obama did in 8 years.

It certainly feels like Trump is getting tangable things accomplished. There was always a large percentage of people whow were not going to like it but to the Victor go the spoils. If the left wants to do something about it they need to mobilize for 2018 and not act like children crying about trump doing the things he promised during his campaign which won hI'm the election.

[cajunrevenge]

Trump just signed a new executive order mandating the cutting of 2 regulations for every new one added. Now if he can do that for spending too I might even consider voting for him next time around.

[sturg33]

Trump just signed a new executive order mandating the cutting of 2 regulations for every new one added. Now if he can do that for spending too I might even consider voting for him next time around.

Yeah I like this one... even if it is arbitrary. Our regulations have gotten out of control

[cajunrevenge]

I dont know about arbitrary, I think he campaigned on cutting 90% of regulations.

[Oklahomahawk]

I realize there were/are stupid regulations, ones that don't do anything but make a mockery of the whole concept of regulations, but when ahole companies are dumping poisons into the ground water and air and people start getting sick and dying (because there's no EPA or anyone else to stand up to them) and there isn't a damn thing that can be done to them I hope everyone who's creaming themselves at the thought of no regulations remembers this. I guess anyone who's had cancer simply isn't able to look at the whole concept of getting rid of all regulations in the same way as someone who hasn't.

Also, didn't the banking meltdown of 2007 until well today happen because the regulations that were meant to stop that crap from happening had been removed or ignored??

[57Brave]

Holocaust Denier

??

[cajunrevenge]

[Oklahomahawk]

I like Ron Paul, I think sturg will vouch for me on this one, but I think he's more than a little naive on this one. If someone gets cancer from poisons getting dumped into their environment how does the homeowner go about proving where that poison came from? Big corporations with big lawyers would eat them alive, especially in the area of air related pollution. All you have to do to see that the EPA does some good work is to look at the condition of the Hudson River in the early 1970s and then look at it today. Would I want to drink from the Hudson today, hell no, but it's not even the same animal as it was before some regulatory restrictions were put in place. What's he always saying, "in a perfect world". Well this one ain't perfect. Is the EPA and/or government pretty inept, corrupt, incompetent a lot of the time? Yes! Is this still better than having nobody between us and the stuff that WILL be pumped into our environment, yes, definitely. What we need IMO is an EPA that has a few things they're looking for (poisons, etc.) and the authority to go wherever they need to look and look there and if they find evidence something is done about it, right away. Record the whole process so there's no question of mistakes or fraudulent intent on the part of the EPA.

As for the housing bubble, again these banks were using public money at times, purposely engaging and selling loans they KNEW were bad (some of them anyway). this is a criminal act and we've reduced it to just some bad decisions.

[goldfly]

i think i hate him more and more cause he's such a pussy that wants everyone to like him

[57Brave]

olivia wilde ‏@oliviawilde 15m15 minutes ago

olivia wilde Retweeted Donald J. Trump

Our vetting process was already extremely strict & extensive, averaging 18 months per refugee, most of whom were children. You are pathetic.

[57Brave]

"The President went out of his way to recognize the Holocaust" - actual WH press secretary Sean Spicer quote today.

[goldfly]

you know it might have been very helpful to have had some ambassadors around the globe (instead of firing them all in the first minute without replacing them) to help citizens, green card holders etc that got ****ed over hard in foreign lands by this reckless executive action


but it seems President Bannon did it all on purpose