Reply With Quote
Texas also has one of the lowest costs of living in the nation. It stands to reason the spending per student will be among the lowest in the nation as well.
Boutons you are a true idiot. This is exactly what wrote about.
Except that Perry put the burden on property owners, the amount the State spends just shrinks. Then he cut the amount property owners can be taxed totally putting schools in a bind. The real problem is the diversion of State money that was supposed to go to education.
What type of pie did you slam into your face?
Texas also has one of the lowest costs of living in the nation. It stands to reason the spending per student will be among the lowest in the nation as well.
TX is about 48th in USA in spending/student. that's not explained totally or significantly by cost of living.
America.
Proving yourself the idiot again, huh?
If you adjust for cost of living Texas is 46th in spending per student. We've been over this, but idk how it has anything to do with this thread.
And teacher pay is lower reducing the costs.
Tell me.
Does paying a teacher more make them better?
Yes...
We've been over this, and time and time again, throwing more money at a problem seldom works.
this. my own university has been raising tuitions out the ass for the past decade and you can walk around campus for 5 minutes and see all the wasteful spending
the problem is that teachers are underpaid, pay peanuts, you get monkeys.
high churn rate, IIRC TX teacher career averages 5 years.
You pay higher, so you also expect more, better education, not only in subjects taught but in pedagogy, etc, etc.
Best book I've ever read. The really frightening part is the rant he goes on in the last chapter about the bourgeoises. The intellectual left hates the small business owner/white collar type middle class and always has since Marx. Evolution of Civilizations is great too; Quigley was a great (and extremely arrogant) writer.
Since I've read that book I've always thought another part of the last chapter was funny. This is Bill Clinton's mentor, and he goes off on how whites are adopting negro behavior, and how detrimental that will end up being. ROFL the media doesn't ever bring that up.
First I've ever heard of it. I should care why?
buzzed in Clinton's ear?
Quigley was one of Clinton's professors at Georgetown. He mentioned him in is inauguration speech.
Supply and demand. In this economy, teachers should be thankful they even have a job.
This.
THIS.
THIS.
Because, when the economy is bad, we can stop educating children.
(rolls eyes)
amazing comedy, our favorite self-ridiculer
public education is not part of the economy, but the VRWC in trying to destroy public education intends to make it part of the for-profit economy.
caveat emptor: for-profit anything delivers the tiest possible product for the highest possible price.
Learning to THINK is one of the greatest gifts anyone can ever receive from anyone else. For many people, the only person who succeeds in giving that gift is a math or science or stat teacher.
The position of some in here that great teachers can be had for a pittance (and feel lucky that they got any job at all) are clear examples of folks who never learned to think critically. Excellent math does not guarantee an ability to think, nor does a lack of math guarantee that one cannot think critically, but well done math education is a HUGE contributor to thinking skills. And we SHOULD be willing, as a society, to pay people who are willing to teach it very high salaries. The fact that we do not is a terrible statement, and certainly no proof of supply and demand economics.
OK...
Just where is all this money suppose to come from?
Barbara Eden?
A money tree?
Should teaches of STEM curriculum be paid more than teachers of non-STEM curriculum?
The problem with education is the bureaucracy and sissy parents. Not money.
You were serious?
wow. I was being facetious.
Borrow it if you have to, raise taxes if you have to, but educate kids.
It is not optional and yields more money than you invest by any measure, dollar for dollar, meaning the less you spend, the smaller your future economy. It is something like eating your seed corn.
More money isn't going to improve poor teachers, and lack of discipline. You have to take all the stupidity out of education from the top down.
Dumbing Down America: The Decline of Education in the US as Seen From Down Under
"[The aim of public education is not] to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. . . . Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim . . . is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States. . . . " - Henry Mencken, The American Mercury, April 1924.
"If the right-wing billionaires and apostles of corporate power have their way, public schools will become 'dead zones of the imagination,' reduced to anti-public spaces that wage an assault on critical thinking, civic literacy and historical memory." - Henry Giroux, 2013.
The United States consistently spends far more money per school age student than any other country in the world, something like $11,800 per child compared with $4,000-$5,000 in comparable countries. Excluding the huge sums spent on the 10 percent of children who go to private schools, the United States spends something like $8,000 of public money per child per year. Yet, in 2012, the United States was 27th on the list of world rankings for school educational achievement, well below Cuba, below even Mexico and Brazil. Social critics regularly blast American public schools as little more than mind-deadening factoriesdesigned to propel working class white students into brain-dead jobs and minority students straight into the arms of the prison-industrial complex. From the other side, public schools are excoriated as retirement parks for lazy unionized teachers to indulge their habit of force-feeding the innocent on Marxist propaganda.
They charge what they like, and what they like is governed not by what they need, or what it costs, or what is good for the students or for the country, but what they think the suckers - er, excuse me - the discerning students, will pay. The problem is, what they will pay is artificially inflated by the ready availability of student loans. For various reasons, over the past 50 years, the United States has developed a system of providing more or less unlimited loans to students on no surety. However, they aren't ordinary loans as they cannot be evaded by any means other than dying in poverty. Ordinary bankruptcy rules do not apply, and family members can be held liable for the debt if the student defaults.
Journalist Matt Taibbi has given a chilling account of how the cost of education has exploded: "Between 1950 and 1970, sending a kid to a public university costed about 4 percent of an American family's annual income. Forty years later, in 2010, it accounted for 11 percent. Moody's released statistics showing tuition and fees rising 300 percent versus the Consumer Price Index between 1990 and 2011." Bloombergsays college tuition and fees have increased 1,120 percent since records began in 1978. As states have cut their education budgets, students have been forced to borrow heavily to make up the shortfall (not that universities did anything aboutcutting their costs, of course). Students now graduate with an average debt of $28,000, but for long courses such as medicine, it is very much more. Two physicians I know in the United States graduated with debts of $250,000 and $400,000 respectively.
Meanwhile, back in Oz, we have a fairly complex system that allows people to borrow from the government to pay their university fees, with interest fixed at the rate of inflation. A degree in applied maths/IT at Queensland University of Technology, which is 15 minutes by ferry from where I live, costs $4,400 a semester, totaling $26,400 for a three-year degree. My son is studying a similar course in Boston at present, for $15,000 a semester, nearly four times as much. Medicine at University of Qld, a well-regarded school, costs $10,000 a year for four years, whereas foreign students pay the actual cost, $54,000 a year. For citizens, the cost of university fees can be borrowed to a maximum of $112,000, which fully covers all degree courses and many post-grad courses as well. It does not have to be paid back until the graduate is earning about $45,000 a year, and then the rate of repayment is not to exceed 4 percent of income in a year. The rate of repayment rises steadily to a maximum of 8 percent on an income of $83,000 a year (there are benefits to paying it off sooner). Interest is fixed at the rate of inflation.
What's the point? The point is that American primary and secondary education costs far more than it should and fails a significant part of the population who are disadvantaged through no fault of their own. It isn't for lack of money: It is lack of political will, the inability of the American electorate to realize that they have to work together to solve a problem that other nations solved a hundred or more years ago. American tertiary education has become a massive falsehood. Students pay for their own education by mortgaging their futures for degrees that, very often, aren't worth half of what they cost. What's the difference between paying for education through taxes and borrowing against your future? It's this: If the US government did its duty and paid for tertiary education through taxes, then it would have an incentive to keep a tight rein on costs. As it is, generations of students are being reamed by private banks that borrow money from the US Treasury at 0.75 percent and lend it to students at 6.4 percent just so their friends in the universities can build bloated bureaucratic empires for their self-aggrandizing staff. Now that must surely be one of the greatest con jobs of all time.
But making a disabled man pay for an education he can no longer use? What's the use of learning to read if you never read ethics?
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/20043-dumbing-down-america-the-decline-of-education-in-the-us-as-seen-from-down-under
In almost every product common to industrial societies, Americans way pay more and receive way less. cable, internet, cellphone, education, and HEALTH CARE, etc
Of course.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions