Republicans: continued

[L'Emmerdeur]

I suspect your [Cnut's] "atheism" is a sham...

I don't. Despite using a tactical approach to discussion that is similar to online Christian evangelists, I don't see any indication that the fellow from the north is a god-botherer, closeted or otherwise. However, if you have to get in bed with theocrats to own the libs, well, sacrifices must be made.

[rasetsu]

is that from your state-funded media source?

Can you explain to me in what way your question is relevant?

[rasetsu]

I suspect your [Cnut's] "atheism" is a sham...

I don't. Despite using a tactical approach to discussion that is similar to online Christian evangelists, I don't see any indication that the fellow from the north is a god-botherer, closeted or otherwise. However, if you have to get in bed with theocrats to own the libs, well, sacrifices must be made.

[Tero]

Ohio GOP refuses stolen election.
Abortion ballot initiave run by foreigners!
https://www.meidastouch.com/news/ohio-r ... on-results

[L'Emmerdeur]

It's pretty much the Republican party line now. If they don't like the results of an election then ipso facto it was a fraudulent election.

[rasetsu]

[Cunt]

It's pretty much the Republican party line now. If they don't like the results of an election then ipso facto it was a fraudulent election.

You know, if they could only get all the social media giants to censor or suppress that kind of talk, it would surely improve trust in the institutions.

[Sean Hayden]

Republicans complain that since the feds started the department of education, performance has dropped.

More money seems to often equal poorer results. I like the 'school choice' idea, but I don't know why some don't.

In a nutshell: while most people will happily vote to pour money into education, they're reluctant to do the same for communities, especially someone else's. Yet the most important difference between schools that I've observed has been what they have to work with, and that's largely the product of the communities they serve. (This is where arguments about culture gain some traction with me, but I disagree with most conservatives about the causes and remedies for these cultural problems.)

Too many assume everything can be solved at the school. But "school choice" gives away the game here by enforcing admissions criteria, which is a luxury regular public schools can't indulge. The average public school in an inner city has to accept everyone. Worse, they can hardly do anything about students that need help beyond what can reasonably be expected from teachers and admins. They have to serve everyone. That's practically inviting bureaucratic horseshit and grifters ready to sell the next big solution, and not surprisingly both are everywhere you look in the school system (e.g. meaningless paperwork checked and signed by a dozen parties, yet conveying nothing real, and the latest fad in expensive curriculum).

[Cunt]

Yes, 'Inclusion' is a shit show at times. Trouble is, if you let a kid have the best education ever, but didn't let them socialize, there is a very good chance of poor outcomes.

So a balance...somehow.

The school choice thing would give the parents who care the most, the ability to make a bit of extra effort, and get their kids to the school that serves them better.

Plus the less effective schools, for whatever reason, would have greedy competitors trying to win more money, by attracting those kids.

[rasetsu]

I was reading the other day that the inequity between schools in poor districts and rich districts is largely a thing of the past. I only skimmed the article. Probably need more details.

[Cunt]

I was reading the other day that the inequity between schools in poor districts and rich districts is largely a thing of the past. I only skimmed the article. Probably need more details.

If you have kids, I think you should be welcome to research all you want, and pick the school that suits you and your goals the best.

Instead of giving schools a 'captive audience', I mean.

[Sean Hayden]

I was reading the other day that the inequity between schools in poor districts and rich districts is largely a thing of the past. I only skimmed the article. Probably need more details.

I'm not sure, but it does fit with my experience that the differences are largely due to the communities rather than the schools.

[Cunt]

I was reading the other day that the inequity between schools in poor districts and rich districts is largely a thing of the past. I only skimmed the article. Probably need more details.

I'm not sure, but it does fit with my experience that the differences are largely due to the communities rather than the schools.

Doesn't matter which school is better, or why. I would want my kid in the better school.

Individual parents deciding is MUCH more nimble than even the smoothest-run bureaucracy.

[Sean Hayden]

There’s nothing wrong with parents choosing. But it’s important to not sell the idea of parent choice to parents whose kids won’t be admitted into those schools —amazing how many miss that—, especially while taking money from their public schools. That’s getting people to vote against their own interests...

[Cunt]

There’s nothing wrong with parents choosing. But it’s important to not sell the idea of parent choice to parents whose kids won’t be admitted into those schools —amazing how many miss that—, especially while taking money from their public schools. That’s getting people to vote against their own interests...

Sounds wrong, but likely because we have a different understanding of 'school choice'.

The way I see it, the funding is attached to the student, rather than the school (or the tubby bureaucrats administering the schools).

So if the school wants funding, the way to get it is to attract more students. If they suck, their funding declines with their student population.

Competition, which usually works better than gov't run programs.