------------------
Smithers, do you realize if I had died, there would be no one to carry on my legacy. Due to my hectic schedule and lethargic sperm, I never fathered an heir. Now I have no one to leave my enormous fortune to. No one.
~C. Montgomery Burns

For fuck sakes...

------------------
"I've never seen anything this beautiful in the entire galaxy. Alright, give me the bomb" -Ultra Magnus, Fight or Flee

------------------
"Sorry Wendy, I jsu can't trust something that bleeds for five days and doesn't die."

Honestly, nearly all of what Jay and DT accused me of advocating and believing is lies! How can you possibly construe the statement that more money is not the answer for our public education system, as they already have far more money than they need, as evidenced by catholic schools, to mean that we should kill spending altogether? I never stated anything of the kind! I said that more money is not the answer, and very rarely is. Hard work is the answer, as it is with all worthwile things in life! Each city INDIVIDUALLY should go through its system, and eliminate teachers and principals that aren't doing their jobs!

And you guys have yet to answer my question: Why would giving more money to a system that spends $9000 per student per year be a better solution than implementing a school system that already exists which works better, has a far higher percentage of graduates, its graduates typically having a better education, and costs far less? I'm not seeing a downside, here.

------------------
"Sorry Wendy, I jsu can't trust something that bleeds for five days and doesn't die."

I don't think that was me. And if they were free, why would they draw ANY particular class?

"the schools select who they want"

I'd guess that that would be because there is limited space, which would not be a problem in a city-wide system. Ziyal, care to confirm or deny?

"So, what do you propose we do with the toublemakers? Ignore them? Sweep them under the carpet?"

We do ignore them. That's the problem. I suggest that we do everything we can to teach them to love learning, and to work hard. But if after all that, they still choose not to learn, then tell them that they are not welcome on school premisis until their attitude has changed. Maybe their parents would do something about it in that case, like they're supposed to. If someone chooses not to learn, there's nothing you can do to force them, and if they're being disruptive in the process, then their presence does them no good and is detremental to others. Thus, if all attempts to convince them to change their behavior have failed, ejection is the logical solution.

"I don't want to start a fight, Omega, but it doesn't appear to many of us that your beliefs are being misconstrued all that much. If you percieve that they are, perhaps you need to reexamine them and how you present them."

Really? You're serious? I don't get this. I say that more money is not the answer, and people construe that to mean that I think funding should be killed altogether? If that's the case, then I'm not the one who thinks that there are only two choices at all times.

As to your earlier comment about "facts creeping into my rhetoric", I hope that was a joke, 'cause otherwise, I'm going to have to ask for an explination.

For you to say "We keep pouring more and more money into education, and it has done no good whatsoever.... 'And now, for something completely different.'" Well, what does that mean? Other than you think that we should spend less money on the system? Heck, you said in another thread that the government spending money on education was "unconstitutional" so where does that leave us? Spend less means spend some. Spend none means spend none. You can't present an argument and when someone responds accuse them of saying you lied.

So, since this is your idea (and you seem to have so few of your very own since much of what you do is stand on the side and snipe at other people), what is your idea for something different? It certainly can't be something as vague and non-specific as saying "spend less money." Scrap the public system and institute a wholly private system of education? Puhleeese. If you wonder why the public shcools suffer from problems enumerated below, rest assured that one of two things will happen in a privatized system you advocate.

1) Students will be excluded. Due to learning problems, monetary problems, or any other number of criteria that they could think up to keep the undesirables out. Thereby eliminatine one of the beauties of our system is the diversity it offers because everyone gets a chance to partake.

2) Or private schools will loose the right to have a choice about the makeup of the student body. As such they will suffer the same problems faced by the current system.You will have the same overcrowding, students that learn at different levels, students who don't care...ect. In other words, they can no longer be elitist and that hurts the bottom line of higher graduation rates ect you cite before as perks of a private system.

As to your accusation that the we spend $9000 a year on students...well I think that number is fascinating. Ther are districts in south central LA and some Orange county districts, just to be local, that have FAR less than that to spend per student. The inner cities are having a very tough time as that most of the money gets funneled to the more affluent areas (regardless of what final number you think we spend per student).

I wonder then, in this era of flush times, why there are schools in the San Fernando Valley that are composed of wholly of tempory trailers and not buildings. Perhaps they like trailers. You certainly make it sound like the in public school system there are computers at every desk, bees making sweet honey out in the playgrounds being tended by keepers, and plush carpet in all the rooms. Maybe I've lied by concluding that, but that is what you seem to say.

Moreover, I don't think that one can use the money that a private Catholic school has to indite to public school system. There are very different sets of problems for each of them. As Liam points out, private schools pick and choose there student body. The student body of the public school is the community that lives around it. This includes students with disabilities, all sorts of learning problems, and the student who is not motivated at all to attend school. And yet the public system is required to offer all of them a space in class. Furthermore, the majority of private schools also have smaller class sizes than do public schools. It's part of how they sell themselves. Anyone in education knows that smaller class sizes means more teacher or fewer students...the public system does not have the option for the latter.

Finally, I don't accuse you of believing in lies. I think that your view of the world, which you put in your status line as 'Archconservative,' is simplistic and just often wrong. However, I think you believe whatever it is you think you believe. But I don't think you've read enough or had enough real world experience to keep saying what you say. And when you say things that are wrong, I for one am going to speak up.

------------------
Smithers, do you realize if I had died, there would be no one to carry on my legacy. Due to my hectic schedule and lethargic sperm, I never fathered an heir. Now I have no one to leave my enormous fortune to. No one.
~C. Montgomery Burns

Sounds like we've got a duel brewing. Say sardonic barbs at 10 paces. My money is on Sol.

------------------
--Then, said Cranly, do you not intend to become a protestant?
--I said that I had lost the faith, Stephen answered, but not that I had lost self-respect. What kind of liberation would that be to forsake an absurdity which is logical and coherent and to embrace one which is illogical and incoherent?

James Joyce, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.

And now, some figures, if you can dig it. This all goes for my home state, Washington. From the office of the State Superintendent, for the 98-99 school year. Totally.

999,616 swinging cats enrolled.

4.4 billion dollars spent annually.

"Now hang on, Mixmaster S!" I hear you saying. "4.4 megabucks? That be serious cash, yo." Yo. However, it works out to only $4,401.69 per student. About half the figure Omega be quotin'.

Now here's where we gots to make ourselves a distinction between gross dollars spent and the ultimate destination of those funds. G. For instance, how much of that money ever gets anywhere near students? Good question, and one that most educated school debate type things center around. But if we just want to go with the flat "9,000 is good enough for students", we don't need to cut back spending, but double it. Which would involve, here in Washington, spending 92.4 percent of the state budget on education, but I digress.

Now, here be some mo' facts.

55,611.75 teachers. Yo, I don't know WHAT is up with the one teacher who is only three-fourths of a person, but da facts are da facts, yeah?

That breaks down into about 18 students per teacher. Which is a rather enviable class size, homie. But wait! Not all of those 55,611.75 are actual, in the class, teachers. Also, here in da Evergreen State, there are rather larger differences between east and west, with west being far richer and hence having far more teachers per class, even with more students.

"So S-Man," you be saying, "what's the dilly, yo?" Heck if I know. Just some numbers to chew on. Word.

Now who only sees two alternatives? I don't suggest we cut spending IMMEDIATELY. I suggest we fix the system first in the manner I perscribed, THEN, when they're down to using half their budget, cut spending by about a third. They'd have more than enough money to do whatever they want (as they already do), and the competence and power to use it.

"a privatized system you advocate."

Oh, so HERE's the problem. You just didn't get it. Sorry about accusing you about lying about my beliefs in this instance. I was mistaken. I've been on defensive ever since DT accused me of being racist, over and over and over and... Again, my sincere apologies. (Everyone please take note: this is the first time I have ever admitted I was wrong in my life! ) I never said anything about a privatized system. I fact, I said "if they were free, why would they draw ANY particular class?" I simply suggest that public school systems model themselves after the catholic school system, since it works so well. It would still be public, though.

As for students being excluded, the fact that it's public would negate monitary problems. And students with learning disabilities sufficient enough to prevent them from learning much in a normal school environment should go to schools specially equipped to teach them, for their own good, AND so as not to hold everyone else in the class back. Such publicly-funded schools DO exist, if I'm not mistaken.

"I wonder then, in this era of flush times, why there are schools in the San Fernando Valley that are composed of wholly of tempory trailers and not buildings."

As there are here in Nashville. One's about six blocks from my house. Of course, they're building to replace the "portables", as they're called. So where does all the money collected for education in these areas go, anyway? And how much per student IS spent, if you can find out? I do agree that, in some areas, more money is needed, but it isn't the end-all solution you seem to think it is. How do you suggest we fix things where they ARE spending $9000 per kid?

"furthermore, the majority of private schools also have smaller class sizes than do public schools."

I believe that Ziyal will confirm that the typical catholic school has thirty to fourty children per classroom.

"I think that your view of the world... is simplistic and just often wrong."

Funny, that's the same thing I think about you...

Ziyal:

"Well, my school.. accepts students based on grades"

Any idea why they have to limit who gets in? Just curious.

Sol:

"To quote a certain giant anthropomorphic rooster, that was a joke, son."

That's what I thought. I just couldn't tell without a . Sorry.

"However, it works out to only $4,401.69 per student."

Is that just state funding, or does it include city xor county?

I've never been in one with more than 30.

"Any idea why they have to limit who gets in? Just curious."

Why does Harvard limit who gets in? My school gets people from all over Los Angeles, not just from within the city. When too many want to get into the same school (my school is one of the better Catholic schools around), the school gets to pick and choose. We DO have a wide range of student performances though. There is a grade limit, but the limit is not unreasonably high (from what I've seen of some people around here...). Oh, and let me throw in something else here. Catholic school teachers get paid less than public ones, so you'd KNOW our long-standing teachers are rather dedicated at their job.

------------------
--Then, said Cranly, do you not intend to become a protestant?
--I said that I had lost the faith, Stephen answered, but not that I had lost self-respect. What kind of liberation would that be to forsake an absurdity which is logical and coherent and to embrace one which is illogical and incoherent?

James Joyce, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.

Anyway...

Omega, you are! And now that I know you're from Nashville, I'm even more sure. There is a reason the South votes almost entirely Republican. It ain't cause of their feelings on funding NASA either. You sit there spouting your love for Reagan. Well, I hate to tell ya this dude, but the Prez you have wet dreams about was a racist. Did you ever look at his record? Hell, he support the HUAAC (which I'm sure you do) so I wouldn't expect him to be progressive minded. This idiot went on a speaking campaign against Brown v Board of Education, railing against the evils of Mongrelization. And before I leave the racist thread, did you actually read what you wrote in the post about blacks speeding and not writing? Thank god most niggers kill themselves, right? They're so violent, it's just survival of the fittest. (dear eddie, no wonder I hate the Republican party) If I have to hear another "I don't look at race" defence from a conservative... generally, it's racists who say that. I've yet to find someone who said that who isn't.
Don't worry Omega, there's hope for you. You're not set in your ways yet. I suggest you begin reading about REAL American heroes. Huey P. Newton and Fred Hampton being the first two to come off my tongue. It'll give you another viewpoint, because you've obviously been exposed (mainly) to only one. Become familiar with the Black Panthers, learn about why America is REALLY a great country (not the shit they taught you in school) and once you can explain Nat Turner and John Africa to me, you'll be secure enough in your own place in society to realize that yes, race does matter. I'll try and send you some links on these guys soon.

Anyway, lets get back to ripping Reagan. The following is from the NY Times, I think 14/11/1965.

"Reagan is opposed to the Social Security Act as originally formulated, the progressive income tax, Medicare, antipoverty programs, farm subsides, TVA, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, public housing, Federal Aid to education, and using Veterans Administration hospitals for other than service related disability"

Sounds like a real genius, eh?

But keep in mind Omega, I don't personally dislike you. I just think your political and social and economic beliefs are beyond crap. You'll soon learn, don't worry.

BTW, on the matter of schools, in my neighbouring county, where I go to college, they are building a prison near where the school is. If you're wondering, they're spending more money on the prison than on a community college. That's fucked up. And you can quote me on that :-)

And all the stuff you said about funding education (in the bit about cutting by 1/3) is more apt for the military.

Finally, on the age issue, I must second that in the teen years, they do matter. Now, I wasn't picking on your age (I call almost everyone lad or dude or man or bloke or, well, whatever the hell I Feel like at the moment) but I could if I wanted. Crap, a girl two years younger than you a guy two years older than me could not legally bang (nor could I). Think about it while you listen to Rage Against the Machine, or Public Enemy, or NWA.

------------------
"Here is another word that rhymes with shame" - Kurt Cobain
Blew, Nirvana