Gov. Perry

[LongJim]

We the people?

“The way to have good and safe government, is not to trust it all to one, but to divide it among the many, distributing to every one exactly the functions he is competent to. Let the national government be entrusted with the defense of the nation, and its foreign and federal relations; the State governments with the civil rights, law, police, and administration of what concerns the State generally; the counties with the local concerns of the counties, and each ward direct the interests within itself. It is by dividing and subdividing these republics from the great national one down through all its subordinations, until it ends in the administration of every man’s farm by himself; by placing under every one what his own eye may superintend, that all will be done for the best. What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and concentrating all cares and powers into one body.”--Thomas Jefferson

[LongJim]

Rather than do the hard work on performing this due diligence, the easier and sadly more common thing is to just throw more money at the problem. It's a poor business plan straight out of the gate.

You are exactly right, and mention the best reason for not having federal government as our nanny. Government ruins everything it touches.

[UNT90]

TFLF,

Like it or not, you & your children are citizens of this country. As such you have a stake in her success - success which depends in large part on the education of our children - all our children.

And no, the primary role of government is not just to promote business. The role of government is to promote the present & future well-being of the governed. That well-being includes education, medical care, a healthy environment, and so much more. All of that is expensive but not providing those things costs so much more.

Do you even get how close your views are coming to communism?

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

Government ruins everything it touches.

Hyperbole?

[Censored by Laurie]

Do you even get how close your views are coming to communism?

Once again you're confusing "communism" with "community".

[TheTastyGreek]

Once again you're confusing "communism" with "community".

Dan Harmon may be coming back!

[LongJim]

Hyperbole?

If so, negligible.

[GTWT]

Do you even get how close your views are coming to communism?

Oh my God! You're wrong in so many ways. BUT funny. Thank you, I needed a laugh.

[Quoner]

Dan Harmon may be coming back!

That time working at the executive sweat lodge really helped him get back on his feet quickly.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

As someone that is not married and does not have any children, I always thought my contribution to my community's educating youth (and therefore the success, as a whole, of our country) was through the taxes I pay. What I assume is that educators are properly and responsibly using the taxes I contribute to educate our youth.

If there is a deficiency in educating our youth, I think what tends to be thrown aside is determining what's working and what's not. Rather than do the hard work on performing this due diligence, the easier and sadly more common thing is to just throw more money at the problem. It's a poor business plan straight out of the gate. The US has a high per capita on education spending yet we seem to lag behind other countries that spend less educating their youth.

I'll go ahead and make it clear that I am not saying we need to slash spending on education but I think our government (at all levels -- city, state, and federal) could be better stewards of our children with the funds they are already given. If they prove the can improve what is coming out of our schools then I think we can open a healthy conversation on whether they deserve more money.

Here's a common problem I've seen just in Frisco ISD. We get to the second half of the year and the teachers are all up in yang about supply shortages. This year, it was glue sticks.

Now, last August, every kid had on his school supply list to bring five glue sticks. There are 20 kids in my son's class, that's 100 glue sticks. Just over half way through the year, they are out of glue sticks.

They tell my wife one day after she picks him up. She's incredulous because they started with 100, plus we pay school taxes out the wazoo in Frisco. So, it was her, not me, who said, "Hell, no! Buy your own glue sticks."

My problem is, what in the hell do glue sticks have to do with math, science, and reading? Are you out of glue sticks? Aw. Well, get on to your multiplication tables. You don't have to glue one damn thing memorize multiplication tables.

Get into fractions. Do something to help better my son and his classmates besides all these damn crafts they have them doing all the time.

When I was in elementary school in the 70s, we had one bottle of Elmer's glue, and somehow it lasted all year long. Somehow. And, the somehow was because from as early as I can remember, we were kept busy with worksheets. Worksheets of math. Worksheets of spelling. Worksheets of grammar. Worksheets of science that kids can relate to like weather. Worksheets of simple American history.

Our education system has been hijacked long ago by educators who confuse school with preschool. They are worried about the kids' "feelings" and "self-esteem." And, so they've got all of these stupid activities disguised as lessons that, in our part of Frisco, seem to require lots and lots of glue stick.

Quit your f-ing crafting of every lesson and make the kids use their brains. The whole reason we frequent places like Mardel is for extra work to keep our son and daughter busy. If the Frisco ISD were doing its job, we wouldn't have to have night homeschool.

The thing is, when you become a parent, you have to understand that your local public ISD is full of mush headed teachers. After paying taxes, buying everything on an increasingly long school supply list, and going to teachers meetings with the automation-like educators that inhabit the schools, you just resign yourself to the fact that you yourself have to be the foundation of your children's education.

Your kids' teachers are too busy worrying about unnecessary glue stick supply agendas to teach.

Edited May 29, 2013 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[Censored by Laurie]

Here's a common problem I've seen just in Frisco ISD. We get to the second half of the year and the teachers are all up in yang about supply shortages. This year, it was glue sticks.

Now, last August, every kid had on his school supply list to bring five glue sticks. There are 20 kids in my son's class, that's 100 glue sticks. Just over half way through the year, they are out of glue sticks.

They tell my wife one day after she picks him up. She's incredulous because they started with 100, plus we pay school taxes out the wazoo in Frisco. So, it was her, not me, who said, "Hell, no! Buy your own glue sticks."

My problem is, what in the hell do glue sticks have to do with math, science, and reading? Are you out of glue sticks? Aw. Well, get on to your multiplication tables. You don't have to glue one damn thing memorize multiplication tables.

Get into fractions. Do something to help better my son and his classmates besides all these damn crafts they have them doing all the time.

When I was in elementary school in the 70s, we had one bottle of Elmer's glue, and somehow it lasted all year long. Somehow. And, the somehow was because from as early as I can remember, we were kept busy with worksheets. Worksheets of math. Worksheets of spelling. Worksheets of grammar. Worksheets of science that kids can relate to like weather. Worksheets of simple American history.

Our education system has been hijacked long ago by educators who confuse school with preschool. They are worried about the kids' "feelings" and "self-esteem." And, so they got all of these stupid activities to lessons that, in our part of Frisco, seem to require lots and lots of glue stick.

Quit your f-ing crafting of every lesson and make the kids use their brains. The whole reason we frequent places like Mardel is for extra work to keep our son and daughter busy. If the Frisco ISD were doing its job, we wouldn't have to have night homeschool.

The thing is, when you become a parent, you have to understand that your local public ISD is full of mush headed teachers. After paying taxes, buying everything on an increasingly long school supply list, and going to teachers meetings with the automation-like educators that inhabit the schools, you just resign yourself to the fact that you yourself have to be the foundation of your children's education.

Your kids' teachers are too busy worrying about unnecessary glue stick supply agendas to teach.

Yup...vasectomy at 30 is sounding more and more like the shrewd move. I never want my life to get this boring.

[glick1980]

It's the a utopian world the left lives in. The government is responsible for everything, at yours and my expense.

Rick

The problem with that theory is that it costs much, much more out of my pocketbook and yours when an uneducated person ends up on welfare or when a person that is uninsured has to go to the emergency room and does not pay the bill. All of these things get piggybacked on you and I. I once had a dog with heartworms, it cost me about $2,000 to save his life, but if I had been giving him heartworm preventative it would cost me about $50 a year. This is a good anology for education and helth care in this country, but people do not seem to understand that it costs everyone less when everyone has health insurance and can prevent disease as oppossed to only going to the doctor when something is wrong. It also costs less to provide people with a good education that it does to support them from ages 20-death. One problem with TFLF's view is that how are people who didn't succeed in school suppossed to work with their children on things that they probably do not understand themselves? Where does the cycle stop? These people need access to additional resources or tutors outside of school hours, or something to that effect.

[LongJim]

The problem with that theory is that it costs much, much more out of my pocketbook and yours when an uneducated person ends up on welfare or when a person that is uninsured has to go to the emergency room and does not pay the bill. All of these things get piggybacked on you and I. I once had a dog with heartworms, it cost me about $2,000 to save his life, but if I had been giving him heartworm preventative it would cost me about $50 a year. This is a good anology for education and helth care in this country, but people do not seem to understand that it costs everyone less when everyone has health insurance and can prevent disease as oppossed to only going to the doctor when something is wrong. It also costs less to provide people with a good education that it does to support them from ages 20-death. One problem with TFLF's view is that how are people who didn't succeed in school suppossed to work with their children on things that they probably do not understand themselves? Where does the cycle stop? These people need access to additional resources or tutors outside of school hours, or something to that effect.

This is all well and good, but I'm missing the part where it then becomes the responsibility of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to provide solutions to these issues?

[glick1980]

This is all well and good, but I'm missing the part where it then becomes the responsibility of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to provide solutions to these issues?

You are correct it is not, but if we are going to give out welfare, which I do not agree with, we need to provide a means for people to get off of it, such as being educated and more able to provide for themselves. As long as hospitals accept patients that do not have insurance, and they skip out on the bill, it will increase the cost of care for people with insurance. It is a question of if we would rather spend money on education or welfare, and insurance/preventative care or much more expensive urgent and serious care.

[UNTFan23]

The problem with that theory is that it costs much, much more out of my pocketbook and yours when an uneducated person ends up on welfare or when a person that is uninsured has to go to the emergency room and does not pay the bill. All of these things get piggybacked on you and I. I once had a dog with heartworms, it cost me about $2,000 to save his life, but if I had been giving him heartworm preventative it would cost me about $50 a year. This is a good anology for education and helth care in this country, but people do not seem to understand that it costs everyone less when everyone has health insurance and can prevent disease as oppossed to only going to the doctor when something is wrong. It also costs less to provide people with a good education that it does to support them from ages 20-death. One problem with TFLF's view is that how are people who didn't succeed in school suppossed to work with their children on things that they probably do not understand themselves? Where does the cycle stop? These people need access to additional resources or tutors outside of school hours, or something to that effect.

We already provide educational services but it is up to the individual, at the very least, to complete and earn a high school diploma. After a certain point (16 years old?) the individual can drop out for whatever reason. As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. So, should the government become more totalitarian and force everyone to get that high school diploma in an effort to maybe, hopefully reduce the number of people on welfare?

In regards to healthcare and whether forcing everyone to get health insurance, which by the way is not the same as getting access to healthcare, will actually reduce the cost of healthcare overall. Those individuals that cannot afford health insurance premiums and associated deductibles that you have pay for services like a doctor's visit or some medication may still visit the emergency room except now there is at least someone helping foot a part of the bill (the insurance company).

Again, there really is nothing or no one forcing people to do their annual check-ups to make sure everything is fine (and whether corrective actions need to be taken -- like losing weight), so you will still have people getting hit with huge health bills when they suddenly get very sick and it's more expensive to see a doctor. The idea that everyone having health insurance and therefore will be more healthy in general is a pie-in-the-sky concept and I guess we'll have to wait 20 to 30 years to see if the passage of the law really has a positive impact or not. It could end up despite everyone having insurance the general population is no-more healthy than they were before.

There are stories starting to surface where doctors are ditching insurance and are offering their services with upfront costs. Oddly enough, for some reason the costs are actually less compared to what the cost might be if the insurance company was helping to pay for the service. I'm not sure whether the ACA will allow doctors to continue this practice or not but it is an interesting change in how healthcare is offered and paid for.

Edited May 29, 2013 by UNTFan23

[LongJim]

There are stories starting to surface where doctors are ditching insurance and are offering their services with upfront costs. Oddly enough, for some reason the costs are actually less compared to what the cost might be if the insurance company was helping to pay for the service. I'm not sure whether the ACA will allow doctors to continue this practice or not but it is an interesting change in how healthcare is offered and paid for.

Yeah, that used to be referred to as the "free market". When doctors could simply work with the patient and determine care based on what the patient could afford. But unfortunately, there are those that would shriek about "leaving Granny to die", when nothing could be further from the truth.

My brothers and I were born at Flow Memorial Hospital--a charity hospital--and treated throughout our youth and into adulthood in a doctor's office off Scripture street, during a time when my parents did not have health insurance. My parents were simply asked what they "could afford to pay that day" when they brought us in for checkups or shots, or whatever. As long as my parents showed some sort of responsibility financially--no matter if it was $20 or whatever--we always received treatment.

Amazingly, we survived long enough to become adults.

[FirefightnRick]

You are correct it is not, but if we are going to give out welfare, which I do not agree with, we need to provide a means for people to get off of it, .

Exactly, we need to provide a means for people to get off of it. But that is the exact opposite of what is currently occurring, and it's getting worse. Every where you turn you see people being encouraged to get on welfare, not off of it.

Rick

[UNTexas]

Exactly, we need to provide a means for people to get off of it. But that is the exact opposite of what is currently occurring, and it's getting worse. Every where you turn you see people being encouraged to get on welfare, not off of it.

Rick

The reason advertising to get on welfare is out there is because the party advertising knows how people on welfare will vote.

[CMJ]

Can't wait till the next election cycle!

Edited May 30, 2013 by CMJ

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

The lottery [ Lotto Texas ] .... it goes into the general fund and was never actually "earmarked as additional funds for education"..[ some tried to sell it that way ] All politicians then did was reduce funding from other sources... (especially Perry). ... so.. education did not come out ahead...

Do you really want to live in a poorly educated country?? There are lots of them in the world... pick one.

[UNTFan23]

The lottery [ Lotto Texas ] .... it goes into the general fund and was never actually "earmarked as additional funds for education"..[ some tried to sell it that way ] All politicians then did was reduce funding from other sources... (especially Perry). ... so.. education did not come out ahead...

Do you really want to live in a poorly educated country?? There are lots of them in the world... pick one.

I don't think anyone wants to live in a poorly educated country. At the same time, how can anyone explain why we can spend so much money on education and not have better results when compared to other countries that spend less than the US and rank higher than US students?

[GTWT]

I don't think anyone wants to live in a poorly educated country. At the same time, how can anyone explain why we can spend so much money on education and not have better results when compared to other countries that spend less than the US and rank higher than US students?

Because we spend the money on the wrong things. First & foremost, we need to find a way to attract the best & brightest into the field of education. A few years ago I taught at a small private university where over 50% of our students seeking teaching certification came from the bottom 10% (in terms of HS GPA & ACT) of entering students. Our best students went into business, science, & other majors which led to a career that was more prestigious & which paid better. We have to change that. We have to pay teachers well enough that the career will attract more of our brightest students.

Second, we have to train teachers better. It was a good idea to make prospective teachers major in the area they will teach, then minor in education. That wasn't popular among education professors for obvious reasons.

Third we need to decide what is really important for students to learn & then focus on that. It's inexcusable that a kid can graduate from HS with marginal abilities in reading, writing, & math, and yet has a HS transcript containing fluff (defining fluff will be a land-mine).

Finally, we need to avoid the fads that education is so prone to.

Disclaimer: I am not expert in education & the verbage above reflects my opinion & nothing more.

[CMJ]

My girlfriend has taught both chemistry and algebra (now only chemistry) at the HS level. She could fill books about what is wrong with the education system - trust me I hear about it everyday.

Edited May 30, 2013 by CMJ

[LongJim]

Again, the higher up the government ladder we all go to have things "taken care of", the worse those things work. It's worth noting that the USA did just fine up until 1979 without a DOE. Not sure why it was ever needed, because it's useless and a money-suck. Also, what does it do, such that it needs 5K employees and a budget of over $65 billion per year?

Also, doesn't even the name "Department of Education" give people any sort of shiver down their spine??

Edited May 30, 2013 by LongJim

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

My girlfriend has taught both chemistry and algebra (now only chemistry) at the HS level. She could fill books about what is wrong with the education system - trust me I hear about it everyday.

She is likely right ... I have taught 40 plus years.

People who have never taught usually have no clue... Example, most Politicians. Almost all this state testing hurts not helps. The original TABS test was ok ..lt prevented near illiterates from graduating... the current ones exists so politicians can claim they are doing something.

Both my son who are engineers made more starting than I did after 30 years teaching math.... In today's tech world you don't see as many men in education as you did, especially in math and science. You get what, you pay for.

I teach college math now and the average student just out of HS is not as good as they once were....but the best may be better. Increasing. Grad requirements hurts I think. Upper classes now have people in them that don't belong and it hurts the overall quality of the group.

Flunk people that deserve to fail. It hurts others when the lazy pass.... Next semester they think "why work, I'll pass anyway." Colleges don't.. so the quality gets much better.

Not everyone in HS is or should go to college. Quit teaching everyone as If they were. Offer subjects they need.... But that is more expensive again.

One odd thing to consider... in today's world the smartest women can get all kinds of jobs... 40 years ago most went into education or nursing.... the only jobs available to them then.

Find an answer for trouble-making "students". Problem: you don't want them out on the streets and you don't want them in the typical classrooms. ... I have no answer ... except have classes they have some interest in.

Edited May 31, 2013 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66