You're viewing a single thread.
Your dude wants to literally abolish the Department of Education, and your contribution is calling us fat.
Say one thing about the right, they sure know their electorate.
You gonna keep posting this without understanding what it says, huh?
The department of education is mostly just a pass through agency. Standards are set by the states. It doesn't take 4000 employees to divy up funding.
Or have the department of education set nationwide standards like most countries do.
Drive up the intellectual quality of the citizens and watch the country prosper.
Bush 43 tried having nantional standards and instituted profiency tests with no child left behind. Due to there being consequences for poorly performing schools and teachers, Obama capitulated to the teachers union and switched to letting the states determine tests and standards. Public school teachers may want what's best for students but the teachers union does not.
And now we have the insane voucher scheme that will further erode the average educational standards across the country.
If a public school performs poorly they get more money, if a voucher school performs poorly they get closed. In my area voucher schools perform better than public schools and cost half as much.
Affluent white area by any chance?
And those religious "schools" that don't have to confirm to standards. Sure they are churning out real productive, fully functioning adults.
Affluent white area by any chance?
That's the one area where public schools outperform private in my area. The less wealthy the neighborhood the more likely private schools do better.
And those religious “schools” that don’t have to confirm to standards. Sure they are churning out real productive, fully functioning adults.
A requirement for accepting state money is standards have to be met. Private highschool graduates have higher ACT scores, higher acceptence rates into college, higher college graduation rates.
The less wealthy the neighborhood the more likely private schools do better.
That's because private schools act as a filter for the families that can afford them. Kids from poorer families are more likely to have an unstable home life, insufficient access to meals outside of school lunches, and other things which are the biggest factors in educational success. The voucher system takes funding from the public schools used by the poorest kids and gives it to the private schools used by families that could already afford to go elsewhere.
Private schools can also arbitrarily accept/reject students which gives them an advantage in outcome metrics.
The vouchers in my area pay for all tutition for private school for low and middle income families. There is no tutition cost for families. It lets low income families escape failing schools.
Default respond to any cost saving by the left is "nooooo". This makes them highly irresponsible. Glad they are not in charge anymore in the US.
Now change the EU. We're still f#cked.
The budget Deficit has increased under Republicans and decreased under Democrats consistently for decades.
How you can still think Republicans save you money is beyond insane. No child left behind really did a number on the populace.
The budget Deficit has increased under Republicans and decreased under Democrats consistently for decades.
Trump R -$6.612 trillion
Obama D -$6.781 trillion
Bush R -$3.293 trillion
Clinton D +$63 billion
Bush R -$1.036 trillion
Reagan R -$1.412 trillion
Carter D -$253 billion
Ford R -$181 billion
Nixon R -$70 billion
Johnson D -$36 billion
Kennedy D -$18 billion
Eisenhower R -$15 billion
Truman D -$5 billion
Roosevelt D -$194 billion
Hoover R -$5 billion
Is like to point out that most of Obama's increase in budget was pushed through under Bush (because budgets are passed the prior year). And he brought it down from that starting point over his two terms. Trump immediately jacked it back up from what he inherited, and Biden decreased it again.
You can make excuses for every president it's always the guy before them, but the numbers don't show a decline in deficit for Democrat presidents.
Oh yeah, the party of fiscal responsibility who is now trying to pass a progressive 4,5 billions tax cut for the wealthiest part of society. Who knows when these missing funds for the government will show up in its administrative books???
You must be so wise in the way of the finances, please (not) teach us master
You should probably go back and check your facts. I don't see anything about a proposed 4.5 billion progressive tax cut.
Sorry, you're right, it was a 4,5 trillions cut.
Fiscal responsibility!!
Try Looking at an actual graph that does more than an entire term distilled into one number... Some of those don't even look accurate. You might learn something
The numbers must be wrong since they go against your preconceived notions.
There's those reading comprehension skills again.
You claimed the numbers I provided don't look accurate and more granular numbers will prove your point but don't provide any. Seems like you're saying the numbers must be wrong but can't provide any data to back that claim. That almost sounds like you have no data and are going off your preconceived notions.
On both side they've failed horribly. I am not a republican, not even American. The main thing I like about DT's presidency is DOGE. That is a huge game changer. Love everything about it. 👍
First time in years that I think common sense is coming back in the world. 🤷♂️
Not a single iota of common sense exists in this administration. They're all crooks and conmen. It's astonishing a noncitizen has fallen for such an obvious grift while not being the target of their propoganda. That takes an extra special kind of gullible
"the left" has no default response to any costs saving.
"Noooooooo" as a reply comes only when a destruction of the modern state is acted masking it as "cost saving".
It's like a doctor prescribing suicide to solve a patient illness. It works, the illness is gone, but the patient is not feeling well afterwards.
But this is too much of a complex reasoning for a libertarian to understand, I get that. Oh well, back to you play-doh eating contest you go
Sorry, I didn't realize that funding musicals in Ireland was core to the functioning of the American government. My bad!
/s in case you couldn't tell.
It's called soft power. Basically an investment in presenting the best part of your culture to others hoping that it will attract people to your ideals and idea of society to ease collaboration with other peoples.
But you do understand the reasoning behind such an investment with your superior intellect, I'm sure.
And I'm also sure that you do understand that where an investment is missing others will provide that investment. Promoting their culture in lieu of others.
I'm putting /s explicitly because I'm not sure you'd get my sarcasm, I don't think you could understand these subtle reasonings
And how, pray tell, does funding a Musical in Ireland accomplish that?
Developing relationships through common cultural references. You can mainly use culture as a media to expand your influence in places where you already have a hold of the situation... In other places where you still have have to build your influence, and maybe an infrastructure, you invest in building roads and airports. Which is what China is doing with the "Road and Belt initiative" in many developing nations. If you think freezing foreign aid programs will help America sustain its image around the world you don't understand how foreign policy works. Exactly like Donald Trump and his cronies.
Amazing how you can't have a thought deeper than the shallowest of puddles, have you ever thought about being observed by medical professionals?