Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawker)   Romney on the Wisconsin recall: "This means we can cut back on government by getting rid of teachers, police and firemen." No, seriously, he really did say that   (gawker.com) divider line 70
    More: Scary, Wisconsin, teachers  
•       •       •

6722 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jun 2012 at 12:09 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-06-11 12:18:23 AM  
6 votes:

gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Home schooling. Right to bear arms. Get yourself a bucket and fill it up with water.

The rich people want to keep more of their money. They don't want to pay taxes any more. This means that we all have to be a lot more bootstrappy.

You folks keep voting these assholes into office. Get used to it.
2012-06-11 12:27:52 AM  
5 votes:
We can't cut the budget too fast. Things will go badly so we should only bust the unions like good GOPers.

Mitt Romney: if you take a trillion dollars, for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink GDP over 5%. That is by definition throwing us into recession or depression.  So I'm not going to do that, of course.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/romneys-big-fat-wet-kiss-to-keyn e sian-economics.html

/1924: Stalin bans all free trade unions and outlaws strikes.
1929: Mussolini guts trade unions and puts them under corporate and government control.
1933: Hitler abolishes collective bargaining, trade unions and arrests their leaders.
2012-06-10 07:37:27 PM  
5 votes:

Lorelle: GAT_00: I think Romney should make a national policy address talking about why we need to fire police and firefighters, since those groups tend to vote Republican.

He probably thinks that everyone will be better off if we go back to relying on private contractors for security (e.g., Pinkertons), and have only all-volunteer fire departments.


THIS.
That's exactly what the plan is. Private schools, private cops. Can't afford to have the private fire company put out your fire? Your own damn fault you weren't born rich.
2012-06-11 08:07:23 AM  
4 votes:

wildcardjack: hubiestubert: wildcardjack: To break it down another way...

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x487]

Which costs us more?

You are MISSING THE POINT!

There's at least $100k per year EVAPORATING per classroom. Where the hell is all that money going? Yes, some of that money could be going to after school type programs, but my numbers (from a 2009 Census Bureau report) are for Elementary through HS. Your numbers are including post-secondary education.

Too many administrators and too much pointless teacher retraining. It's inefficient. You have just made an argument in favor of throwing money at a system that's full of black holes.


You do realize that teaching isn't a one for one service, right? You aren't just paying for the teacher to be in front of the class. There's also insurance. There are books and supplies--often many of which, especially at the elementary school level that are supplied out of pocket by the teacher. There are also administrative costs. There is all that testing that we have now--yes, Virginia, all of those standardized tests do cost the districts something. So does keeping track of all of those students. Insuring those students while they are under your roof. Transportation to and from. Cost of the school lunch program. Cost of a breakfast program. Sports program--yup, the equipment costs something to maintain. Any activities programs add onto a school budget as well.

Do you think it's pointless for doctors to maintain their professional development? What about attorneys? What you call "pointless" retraining is keeping current as a professional. As a chef, I have to maintain certain accreditation. Laws do change, after all, and while much of the core of Serv Safe standards are similar, they do vary a bit from state to state. Teachers, likewise continue to develop professionally--teachers aren't just babysitters with degrees, there is actual work in there. Oddly enough, since teachers are subject to the whims of districts, and often mismatched Federal, state, and local goals, they face a morass of standards that are criss-crossed, but expected to ford anyway. That includes evaluation, that means tracking of students across grade levels, that means a LOT of IEPs for special education. There is an enormous amount of paperwork that is associated with teaching today--beyond the grading of the teachers' own testing of the students, planning of lessons, and in professional discussions across multiple teams of teachers consulting with one another, and likewise keeping the State involved.

There IS waste in the system. You only have to look at the Phoenix system as a for instance. Every group of sub-divisions has their own school--each of those schools services a fairly small community, but all of them lean on State and Federal funding sources so that we can help maintain them. Every one of those schools has their own administrative staff, their own bussing, their own custodial staff, their own afterschool programs, their own testing--again, those cost school districts money--and on top of all that, every school has slightly different standards depending on who is running that particular school board. Slightly different standards in administration, those pesky forms, their own filing of records, and more. In order to maintain these schools, separately, every community dips into limited State and Federal wells, along with a diminishing tax base for their own communities.

One way we can weed out some of the grosser inefficiencies to the system is a bit more standardization. Not of the teaching material, but simply at the Administrative level. Likewise, consolidating districts that are just for vanity's sake to keep the "wrong crowd" out of parents' hair wouldn't be bad either. Money, pooled between communities would go further. A LOT of money is pissed away at the Administrative level. Not just in salaries, but in the record keeping itself, the maintenance and upkeep of often aging schools in their infrastructure. In the constant barrage of services that parents demand, but seem a bit reticent to pay for. Let's not forget transportation--that does cost money. The buildings cost money to maintain. Lunchrooms cost money to maintain, to stock, to staff. Libraries cost money to maintain and stock. All the competing sports programs cost money to maintain. Computers cost money. Maintaining that equipment costs money. Licensing software costs money. Networks cost money. Internal security costs money. There is more to education than just paying a teacher. Behind every teacher there are office staff, up the ladder from there. Those all add onto the cost.

What you call "evaporating" is maintaining all the other services that schools are in for. And while we do need to look for efficiency, a lot of that "extra" as you call it, goes fairly high administrative costs, and oddly enough, those superintendents and principles, likewise have to maintain their professional standards too. It goes into the standardized testing, it goes into insurance, it goes into a lot more than just chalk and mimeograph ink.

Teachers are professionals. Even an Elementary Ed degree is a Bachelors of Science, with a fair amount of paperwork to keep track of all those students--yes, that means testing procedures--which oddly enough, change fairly often. In order just to keep up with the shifting vagaries of school districts, there are State and Federal standards that shift fair often. Just to keep up there, means constant training and retraining.

You want to eliminate waste in our schools, then we need to eliminate the mismatch of goals and administrative standards. End the local control of schools and districts would go a long way to edging out the "excess" that you speak of. Every school district generates tons of paperwork and standards that likewise are written and records of kept. Centralize and end the administrative redundancy in maintaining different standards across the board. Testing is necessary, but right now, we are basing funding on standardized tests that are often more about rote memorization than skills based testing. The former is easier to evaluate, but reflects the goals that districts put on teachers to perform according to flawed models. It also doesn't reflect the various learning styles of all students, but forces students to be evaluated on only a tiny portion of the skills that are actually necessary to prepare them for the real world.

Testing is a big part of those costs. Every one of those tests costs the districts money. Money to give the tests, money to keep the records, money that goes into evaluating the data gathered from those tests, and then funding efforts. Then there is grant writing--another fair heavy cost to time and money for teachers--which eats up into time that could be spent teaching. The sheer volume of paperwork associated eats into budgets as well.

It isn't a simple one to one ratio when you speak of the cost of education. There is a vast array of support staff behind every teacher, beyond just a janitor, a school nurse, a lunch staff, bus drivers, and a principal and office staff. Administrative costs are eating up budgets as well, along with that professional development that you seem to take exception to.

Do you like a doctor to keep current in their field? Nurses? Attorneys? That cost is heaped into the service costs in those fields. Teaching shifts standards around just as fast, and teachers need to be kept current on the laws and standards that shift around them, along with the patchwork quilt of goals set by each district. Local school boards add onto the cost as well, and add onto the material and standards that teacher are required to be kept current on. We can eliminate a lot of the "waste" as you call it, by eliminating local control of schools, and centralized administration alone. It would also mean teachers would need less retraining just to keep up with the patchwork quilt of standards, and more time actually teaching, than planning and maintaining a LOT of paperwork to go to the local, State, and Federal levels.
2012-06-11 01:06:06 AM  
4 votes:

serial_crusher: "not hiring more of" == "getting rid of"?


"cut back on" == "getting rid of"

"He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It's time for us to cut back on government and help the American people." ~ MC Mittens R-money
2012-06-11 02:25:11 AM  
3 votes:
wildcardjack: To break it down another way...

lh6.googleusercontent.com

Which costs us more?
2012-06-11 01:36:04 AM  
3 votes:

serial_crusher: "not hiring more of" == "getting rid of"?


I know you're just trolling but I'll bite.

"We have 145,000 more government workers under this president. Let's send them home and put you back to work." -Mitt Romney

"(Obama) says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It's time for us to cut back on government and help the American people." -Mitt Romney

What do you think he's advocating here? Paid vacation? The man is quite literally saying that he wants to create jobs by firing over a hundred thousand public workers.

It's almost mind boggling. Firing tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of workers will certainly perk the economy right up! The beatings will continue until morale improves!
2012-06-11 12:22:56 AM  
3 votes:

teto85: kmmontandon: gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Billionaires.

Our Galtian overlords are masters of all trades, and totally have our best interests in mind.

Corporations. Because "corporations are people, my friend."



And they'll only put out fires, stop criminals, and teach children, for those who can pay. The idea of public good and compassion for ones neighbors will be burnt out of society in order to obtain maximum profitability and production at the lowest possible cost to the owners by systematically turning people into a helpless and unquestioning workforce.
2012-06-10 10:11:46 PM  
3 votes:
He just gets off on people losing their jobs. That's all he does.
2012-06-10 09:48:05 PM  
3 votes:
um...didn't we give a lot of cops a bunch of milspec weapons and gear for free? you might want to get all those guns back before you fire all the cops and tell 'em to go pound sand.
2012-06-10 08:20:53 PM  
3 votes:

Vodka Zombie: Fark Romney. He's an idiot. Sometimes, Republicans, money takes a back seat to a person's intellect, and, let's face it! You're trying to elect America's first retarded president.


Ahem.

i1214.photobucket.com
2012-06-10 06:24:06 PM  
3 votes:
There is an excessive amount of police officers in the US. The number of sworn peace officers has more than tripled in the past twenty years to over 1.2 million while the population has only grown by about 24%. Police are needed but with the hiring binge the number of people that are officers that have no business carrying a gun and badge has exploded. I do not think that was what Romney was getting at but it should be explored.
2012-06-10 06:11:15 PM  
3 votes:
Strange considering that Walker didn't target police and firefighters. I think Romney should make a national policy address talking about why we need to fire police and firefighters, since those groups tend to vote Republican.
2012-06-11 03:18:22 PM  
2 votes:

HAMMERTOE: Generation_D: Why do people all hate union workers, seriously? I have some theories, but wouldn't mind hearing the Fark Independents tell their side.

In their day, unions were totally awesome. They utilized the power of unity to force legislative changes that will be felt forever. Things like minimum wages, the 40-hour work week, OSHA regulations- we owe Unions for these, plain and simple. A legacy historic in its proportions.

On the other hand, all of these achievements are decades old. Once Unions achieved these basic minimums, they had to keep providing "advancements" to justify the continued payment of Union Dues, to continue their political power, as well as the luxurious salaries of the Officers. The problem: once you reach a tipping point, then all the "advancements" you achieve are at the cost of the sustainability of the very company you are relying on for your continued employment. When these costs become large enough, it's only a matter of time before the company goes under. When the "company" is a government, either local or regional, the Union effectively has their hands in the pockets of an agency that, by its very definition, has its hands in the pockets of every taxpayer. Not acceptable, at least to me.


Yea, unions are bad now, because workers have it great. That's why our wages haven't been going up and all the growth in the country goes towards management: because unions representing the worker are just too darn powerful and overreaching.
2012-06-11 01:25:20 AM  
2 votes:
I have a better idea: close all overseas military bases, half of the US bases, and cut military spending by 75%.
2012-06-11 12:59:51 AM  
2 votes:
Is there anyone in here who thinks that we should be firing teachers and lower the quality/availability of our education system?

Is there anyone in here who thinks that a generation of Americans with less knowledge and education than the previous is a good idea?

If so... how would that be a good thing? In what way does it make us a better country?
2012-06-11 12:30:46 AM  
2 votes:

kmmontandon: gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Billionaires.

Our Galtian overlords are masters of all trades, and totally have our best interests in mind.


Atlas Shrugged, part 2

angryflower.com
2012-06-10 11:21:38 PM  
2 votes:
Why do people all hate union workers, seriously? I have some theories, but wouldnt mind hearing the Fark Independents tell their side.
2012-06-10 11:10:34 PM  
2 votes:

Lorelle: He probably thinks that everyone will be better off if we go back to relying on private contractors for security (e.g., Pinkertons), and have only all-volunteer fire departments.


I'm sure that Blackwater Xe Academi is looking for a way to get back on the government teat...

Who do you think Erik Prince is donating to this election cycle?
2012-06-10 09:27:18 PM  
2 votes:
Privatize the police and fire departments

/that worked so well in the 19th century
//and fits right in with the GOP "Forward, into the past" agenda
2012-06-10 06:32:14 PM  
2 votes:

Lorelle: GAT_00: I think Romney should make a national policy address talking about why we need to fire police and firefighters, since those groups tend to vote Republican.

He probably thinks that everyone will be better off if we go back to relying on private contractors for security (e.g., Pinkertons), and have only all-volunteer fire departments.


He probably owns a couple of private security groups.
2012-06-10 06:09:00 PM  
2 votes:
So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?
2012-06-11 05:33:50 PM  
1 votes:
Hey, my town got rid of its one man police department... cost us 100k to pay off his pension plan.

Seriously, our cop wrote maybe a handful of tickets every year and basically only went to the schools for the drug awareness programs.

It was funny at the boro council meeting when someone asked why we had a cop when the state police barracks are 4 miles from town.. and pretty much every 911 call was handled by them...

We have a lot of people working jobs that do not go toward the end goal of protecting us or educating our kids.. its time to re-access things because obviously the status qua isn't working.
2012-06-11 02:47:31 PM  
1 votes:

FrailChild: It's because retarded scare tactics like this have been used far too long to justify the explosion of big government. Don't want to support some ill-conceived public project? You must want houses to burn down & crime in the streets & no more teachers!

I am also sick of unions threatening to not do their job over some petty demand. Even worse so when they are already well paid, tenured, getting every weekend and holiday off...

The message for unions is do your damn job and be competitive or you might just have to find a job in the real world some day if the taxpayers need to get out of debt.


You're right. I never seen a cop, firefighter, teacher, carpenter or plumber do a lick of work except Monday through Friday, 9-5. You never see a cop out on a Saturday night working. Firefighters just let houses burn to the ground on holidays. Teachers never grade papers or attend seminars unless it's on that taxpayer's dime. If your pipes burst on a weekend, good luck getting any plumber to come and do an emergency repair.

Yup. They're all the same, every last one of them.
2012-06-11 02:43:34 PM  
1 votes:

Generation_D: Why do people all hate union workers, seriously? I have some theories, but wouldn't mind hearing the Fark Independents tell their side.


In their day, unions were totally awesome. They utilized the power of unity to force legislative changes that will be felt forever. Things like minimum wages, the 40-hour work week, OSHA regulations- we owe Unions for these, plain and simple. A legacy historic in its proportions.

On the other hand, all of these achievements are decades old. Once Unions achieved these basic minimums, they had to keep providing "advancements" to justify the continued payment of Union Dues, to continue their political power, as well as the luxurious salaries of the Officers. The problem: once you reach a tipping point, then all the "advancements" you achieve are at the cost of the sustainability of the very company you are relying on for your continued employment. When these costs become large enough, it's only a matter of time before the company goes under. When the "company" is a government, either local or regional, the Union effectively has their hands in the pockets of an agency that, by its very definition, has its hands in the pockets of every taxpayer. Not acceptable, at least to me.
2012-06-11 02:00:31 PM  
1 votes:
It's because retarded scare tactics like this have been used far too long to justify the explosion of big government. Don't want to support some ill-conceived public project? You must want houses to burn down & crime in the streets & no more teachers!

I am also sick of unions threatening to not do their job over some petty demand. Even worse so when they are already well paid, tenured, getting every weekend and holiday off...

The message for unions is do your damn job and be competitive or you might just have to find a job in the real world some day if the taxpayers need to get out of debt.
2012-06-11 01:16:52 PM  
1 votes:

Generation_D: Why do people all hate union workers, seriously? I have some theories, but wouldnt mind hearing the Fark Independents tell their side.


Practical experience. My small business ran an exhibition in downtown Philly. Everything I brought in was on casters, yet they charged $5K to move it from the loading dock to a spot on the convention floor not more than 200 feet away. I watched 3 grown men huddle around a crate that could be rolled by a 100 pound woman. They had to make 3 whole trips to get everything. This kind of crap is par for the course at these events. These are jobs that high schoolers could do for $10 an hour. I understand that there are for more skilled laborers out there but this sort of thing is obscene.

Unions also disgust me because they want to retain people based upon seniority and not merit.
2012-06-11 11:59:57 AM  
1 votes:

r1chard3: gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?

Back to the good ole days when the fire company would show up at your burning house and leap into action.

Negotiating the fee.

Or even better. Two rival companies would show up and get into a brawl over whose turf your building was in while it burns to the ground.


OR - make a contract with property flippers and insurance companies so that when your property burns down they can move in and buy it can give the fire company their "cut". Even better if you replace "when" with "WHEN" and deal in the arsonists...
2012-06-11 09:49:08 AM  
1 votes:

MyRandomName: eurotrader: There is an excessive amount of police officers in the US. The number of sworn peace officers has more than tripled in the past twenty years to over 1.2 million while the population has only grown by about 24%. Police are needed but with the hiring binge the number of people that are officers that have no business carrying a gun and badge has exploded. I do not think that was what Romney was getting at but it should be explored.

But correlation equals causation! The decrease in violent crimes is due to the tripling of officers! And if crime rates increase again we need more officers! Either way we need moar officers!

True story. My city currently has enough school space and teachers for 13000 more kids than currently enrolled. The city council solution, all democrats, was to build new super schools for even more classroom space. No layoffs are coming. Liberals never have a reason to actuality reduce, even in this blatant example. It's a never ending quest of growth.


Sounds weirdly like GOP States building excess Prison space, only schools aren't exactly like prisons last time I checked.

So in conclusion: Liberals =Teachers and Schools and an Educated Populus. GOP=more Prisons with empty cells demanding to be filled with Incarcerated Citizens so the Free Market can work as it should.

Got it!
2012-06-11 09:27:24 AM  
1 votes:
The mental gymnastics needed to embrace a Don't Tread On Me sign while simultaneously bowing down to corporate power is a f*cking mental disorder. The same way we look back at burning witches with amazement, hundreds of years from now whatever society is around will look back at us and wonder how propaganda controlled humanity.
2.bp.blogspot.com
2012-06-11 09:03:39 AM  
1 votes:
Back to the topic:

One of the first problems with the Liberal=Fascists models, that is popular thanks to Jonah Goldberg and others, is that Fascists were very much down on organization of the workers. The confluence of government and business that is the model of the Fascist state is an elimination of any sort of power sharing between the state, business and workers. It is a strict top down model that says whatever the State says is good, is. If the State demands more work, for less pay, then there cannot be any form of dissension from that.

Unions look out for the interests of the workers, and to balance the power that management puts onto their wages and work, and yes, that drains profits. Because everything drains profits. Marketing drains profits. Packaging drains profits. Development drains profits. Workman's compensation drains profits. Maintenance of production facilities drains profits. Paying executives drains profits. Public relations drains profits. Simple entropy associated to any facility drains profits. Buying materials drains profits. At least if you look at cash flow in alone. In that ideal world, businesses should only strive to reduce their costs by eliminating workers, eliminating maintenance, eliminating delivery of goods, eliminating materials. Which, oddly enough, is impossible, unless your business is simply marketing ideas, and even then there are costs associated. The closest we have of that pure model, and even that has costs which run into the millions of dollars in litigation, is with the RIAA suing the bejeebus out of folks over intellectual property infringement--oddly enough, which is based on a model that is supposed to be protecting the rights of the intellectual property holders, but tends to favor the folks who produced the work at a physical level, and less about the IP originator.

Elimination of unions is about limiting the rights of workers, to protest, to hold their own labor to be of value. It diminishes costs for the business, and is supposed to make things more efficient. In a way, it does, but you have to ask yourself for whose benefit? It isn't the loosey-goosey Left that is looking to take a hard right turn and eliminate workers rights to association and the right to the courts to redress wrongs, or enter into contracts freely. That is very much the issue. So long as management maintains the right to associate, and to organize their industries, then workers likewise have a right to look out for their own interests.

There are good unions. There are bad unions. You have to look at the situation, and you have to look at the discussions on a case for case basis. There is room for accommodation, which is why there is collective bargaining. It allows workers to pool their resources to send their own representatives into the court room and to negotiate on their behalf, you know, while they are busy actually working.

Now then, if you want to eliminate unions, you have to likewise eliminate any sort of trade associations in industry as well. No more industry conferences. No more lobbying by industry reps. Folks are hoping to eliminate one foot on a three legged stool, and hoping that the world will work out, so that the balance can remain on the other two legs indefinitely. It is a sort of impressive goal, but none too practical.

Workers are actually on the floor. They know better than anyone the actual condition of the facilities. They are at the heart of any organization or business. They are not just producing, they are likewise eyes to the ground at the most basic level. Good management realizes this, and prizes that, but when you introduce other factors into the mix, like shareholder interests, which pull management from just the production and facilities, there are often conflicting goals.

In this same way, teachers, cops, firemen, and other government worker based unions, are on the ground, and are uniquely qualified to comment on what is actually needed, as opposed to what someone who is removed from the ground maintains is important. Much like a solider who realizes that the gun that he was issued, and apparently tested, tends to jam, or that lo, the intelligence gathered that said there were no snipers in region, he's still getting shot at.

Simply being up the chain and removed from the situation on the ground doesn't mean that folks understand the real conditions, and the real challenges. In an ideal world, those folks up the chain listen to the local management on what conditions are like, and move to respond appropriately. The world isn't ideal, so it's up to the folks on the ground to push back and demand better, because they're the ones who have to deal with the ground conditions. Being up the ladder often means being removed from those conditions, and all the foresight in the world, and lofty vantage looking out to the future of the company or over all strategy isn't going to stop a production line from grinding to a halt because maintenance was ignored, and a problem that was seen by the folks on said production line and reported as being necessary to fix was shuffled off as being too unimportant or just grousing.

Management and labor don't have to conflict, but they tend to because their goals are slightly different, and their perspective is slightly different. In the end, you have to have balance between the two, and the third leg of the stool, in government, to regulate safety and production standards for the public as well as for the folks who run the company, and those who produce the goods. Upsetting that balance is only a short term solution, and it then throws things wildly out of skew later, as new issues arise.
2012-06-11 07:12:09 AM  
1 votes:

bugontherug: kmmontandon: gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Billionaires.

Our Galtian overlords are masters of all trades, and totally have our best interests in mind.

It is true that our Galtian overlords are ubermensch, each singularly capable of achieving any endeavor from sabotaging global industry, to developing the finest metal in world history, to dowsing infernos at steel plants. But they do these things not because they have our best interests in mind. They do these things because they have their own best interests in mind. So long as we're obedient serfs, we're allowed to enjoy the cascade of benefits which flow from their heroic efforts.

Get it straight, bro.


Too bad there are so many parts of the world willing to provide cheaper serfs than the USA, or else there might be more cascade-basking going on.
2012-06-11 03:56:58 AM  
1 votes:

wildcardjack: hubiestubert: wildcardjack: To break it down another way...

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x487]

Which costs us more?

You are MISSING THE POINT!

There's at least $100k per year EVAPORATING per classroom. Where the hell is all that money going? Yes, some of that money could be going to after school type programs, but my numbers (from a 2009 Census Bureau report) are for Elementary through HS. Your numbers are including post-secondary education.

Too many administrators and too much pointless teacher retraining. It's inefficient. You have just made an argument in favor of throwing money at a system that's full of black holes.


You seem to be operating on the assumption that all money budgeted for education is spent within classrooms, apparently believing that those classrooms themselves are free, and maintained for free, and heated and cooled for free, and cleaned for free. Oh and school lunches, free. Buses, free (gasoline for buses, free too). Oh, and all the people who aren't directly teaching students, the people who keep the system running, administrators, secretaries, lunch ladies, bus drivers, they all work for free too.

This isn't to say there isn't waste ( I don't think kindergarteners need iPads, for example) but the obvious disingenuity with which you are approaching the topic is precluding, rather than encouraging, any honest discussion on the topic, because when people have to waste time debunking bullshiat, they are less able to have meaningful conversation.

Unless that's what you're going for, in which case, well done!
2012-06-11 03:44:50 AM  
1 votes:
I think it's safe to say that a Mitt presidency will be nothing more than a "Loot & Scoot" for him and his connections. The man obviously had no problem destroying companies for profit, why not go for whole sectors of the US economy. The Supreme court is already up the conservatives butt, and congress will no doubt be split for awhile. He'll have no fear of impeachment, nor of imprisonment. Half his money is already in the Caymans. It will be pigs at the trough, the state of the country be damned.
2012-06-11 02:52:49 AM  
1 votes:
He made the mistake of actually being honest about what the Republican vision of "small government" actually means -- cuts in services vital to median and lower income Americans. What he's supposed to do is make vague references to trimming supposed fat from government, without getting specific enough for people to realize "Hey wait, that's not a $300 hammer -- that's a service I actually rely on."
2012-06-11 02:12:30 AM  
1 votes:

wildcardjack: Okay, we're spending an average of $11k per year per student.

Teachers make what, about $40k per year? Maybe $60k when you throw in benefits and pensions.

Where the hell is all that money going? Class size is around 20, so an average of $200k per class room.

Just sayin'.

Oh, and maybe we need to actually run the numbers on all of the past "educating educators" programs and figure out what worked best. Then farkING STICK WITH ONE TEACHING STYLE FOR A FEW YEARS. I've been hearing complaints that elementary teachers have been getting $10k courses on the latest teaching methods for reading and math every two years or so. Stop trying to fix what you can't tell if it's broken because you keep fixing it.


Actually, teachers learn various methods because not everyone has the same learning style.

This is one of the things they teach in those high falutin' teaching schools. Along with various methods to evaluate students, how to maintain discipline, the actual subject matter, professional standards, a bit of developmental psychology, and somewhere in all that mess, there is actually a fair amount of science and math involved.

And then there's professional development. Education is about bettering yourself and your understanding. Oddly enough, thanks to NCLB, teachers have to prove their qualifications a bit more. Sort of like taking that CPR course, and getting recertified. Oddly enough, CPR training has changed a bit over the years as folks have collated data. For instance, breaths are not as emphasized as earlier courses. Why? Because new data came in.

It's almost as if Education was considered a science...
2012-06-11 02:02:22 AM  
1 votes:

Corvus: Places where I work, if someone is about to get fired because he does a shiat job and then doesn't get fired people don't cheer him like a hero and pretend he "Won" and pretend he does better than everyone else just because he didn't get fired.


So much THIS. That's what I've been saying for over a year. The only reason this whole situation is even occurring is because the guy is a completely unreasonable jackass. I mean, he put the Nat'l Guard on alert before he "dropped the bomb" because he believed there was a good chance there would be "substantial civil and labor unrest." If he didn't realize he was doing something unreasonable than he would have never seen the backlash coming, but he did see it coming.
2012-06-11 01:42:03 AM  
1 votes:

downpaymentblues: Sabyen91: Dude, don't defend Freakonomics. It isn't defensible.

Sigh. I wasn't defending it. I was just giving him/her an explanation for the 70's to 90's logic it tried to use.

Seriously: You people need to take some deep breaths.

In through the nose.... out through the mouth...
In through the nose.... out through the mouth...

Better?


Whew, feeling better. Yeah, I don't think you are the type to be a dick. I apologize.
2012-06-11 01:34:46 AM  
1 votes:

intelligent comment below: downpaymentblues: sprgrss: Abortion was legalized in the 1960s. How in the world would something from nearly 30 years prior have that drastic of an impact on the crime rates of the 90s. If you credited for a drop in crime in the 80s, you might have a point, but not for the 90s.

Abortion rates didn't become prevalent until the 70's. Those non-existent kids would be crime committing adults in the 90's.


Uh huh. And the lowering of crime rates in the 90s had nothing to do with more economic gains for lower classes and more job opportunities? Not to mention the record number of criminals locked in jail for even minor offenses. Abortion has nothing to do with lowering crime rates.


I'm just explaining the Freakanomics hypothesis. You asked about how something from the 70's affected the 90's.

I give up. You politics tab people are just WAITING to jump down someone's throat.
2012-06-11 01:17:56 AM  
1 votes:

sprgrss: Abortion was legalized in the 1960s. How in the world would something from nearly 30 years prior have that drastic of an impact on the crime rates of the 90s. If you credited for a drop in crime in the 80s, you might have a point, but not for the 90s.


Roe v Wade decision was 1973.
2012-06-11 01:17:38 AM  
1 votes:

sprgrss: Abortion was legalized in the 1960s. How in the world would something from nearly 30 years prior have that drastic of an impact on the crime rates of the 90s. If you credited for a drop in crime in the 80s, you might have a point, but not for the 90s.


Abortion rates didn't become prevalent until the 70's. Those non-existent kids would be crime committing adults in the 90's.
2012-06-11 01:12:18 AM  
1 votes:

farkin_Gary: JohnnyC: Is there anyone in here who thinks that we should be firing teachers and lower the quality/availability of our education system?

Is there anyone in here who thinks that a generation of Americans with less knowledge and education than the previous is a good idea?

If so... how would that be a good thing? In what way does it make us a better country?

Benjamin Franklin's formal schooling ended at the age of ten. What's your problem, sparky?


www.mememaker.net
2012-06-11 01:11:15 AM  
1 votes:
If we cut back on policemen, there will be more 2nd hand police uniforms for Romney to wear.
2012-06-11 01:09:17 AM  
1 votes:

skepticultist: eurotrader: There is an excessive amount of police officers in the US. The number of sworn peace officers has more than tripled in the past twenty years to over 1.2 million while the population has only grown by about 24%. Police are needed but with the hiring binge the number of people that are officers that have no business carrying a gun and badge has exploded. I do not think that was what Romney was getting at but it should be explored.

::looks at crime rates from twenty years ago::

::looks at crime rates now::

::eyes eurotader suspiciously::

Watchootalkinbout Willis?


The crime rate decline of the 90's could just as easily be explained by the legalization of abortion. That is if you believe the theories espoused in Freakonomics. He actually covers most of the prevailing theories, and the increase in number of police officers is far from the most compelling reason.
2012-06-11 01:08:30 AM  
1 votes:
What kind of a country would we be without police, firefighters, or teachers?

A: AFGHANISTAN!

cache2.allpostersimages.com
2012-06-11 12:54:11 AM  
1 votes:
The free market will decide which fires get put out, and which aggravated domestic batteries get stopped, and _____, and _____, and _____, etc.

What a wonderful society we're working towards.
2012-06-11 12:49:53 AM  
1 votes:

cmb53208: Sabyen91: Ken VeryBigLiar: Mildly ironic given at least two cities in Waukesha County are debating getting rid of parts if not all of their police forces. Then they find out that the Sheriff's Dept. takes an extra three minutes on average in response time and all of sudden they're back in their good graces.

Oh please, oh please, oh please.

I think one Waukesha County community (City of Pewaukee) got rid of their police force because they broke the Golden Rule of Waukesha Policing; that is they pulled over and hassled the white people as well as the black folks from Milwaukee


I hope they all do it. They deserve all the bad things that would happen to them.
2012-06-11 12:49:43 AM  
1 votes:

Sabyen91:

How farking stupid are they? Oh, never mind. The suburbs don't believe in government. I expect schadenfreud.


Pretty stupid actually, and I think deep down they do believe in government, they just don't want to pay for it: those schools, libraries, parks, and police departments (that they depend on to keep the ni-BOOOONGS out) I guess they want to come from pixie dust. Not to mention all the highway improvements so they don't get stuck in traffic living 30 miles away from work
2012-06-11 12:45:53 AM  
1 votes:

eurotrader: There is an excessive amount of police officers in the US. The number of sworn peace officers has more than tripled in the past twenty years to over 1.2 million while the population has only grown by about 24%. Police are needed but with the hiring binge the number of people that are officers that have no business carrying a gun and badge has exploded. I do not think that was what Romney was getting at but it should be explored.


::looks at crime rates from twenty years ago::

::looks at crime rates now::

::eyes eurotader suspiciously::

Watchootalkinbout Willis?
2012-06-11 12:42:51 AM  
1 votes:

The Name: Well, I think we can safely say that Romney just won Wisconsin.


You might want to check the exit polls again.
2012-06-11 12:40:42 AM  
1 votes:

verbaltoxin: No jokes yet about the police and fire departments being bought, loaded heavy with debt, broken up and sold for profit?


It's no joke. That's Mitt's actual plan.
2012-06-11 12:38:28 AM  
1 votes:

Weaver95: um...didn't we give a lot of cops a bunch of milspec weapons and gear for free? you might want to get all those guns back before you fire all the cops and tell 'em to go pound sand.


Don't worry, I'm sure Mittens wants to lower their unemployment benefits so they can't afford the ammo.
2012-06-11 12:36:03 AM  
1 votes:
No jokes yet about the police and fire departments being bought, loaded heavy with debt, broken up and sold for profit?
2012-06-11 12:29:26 AM  
1 votes:

Ken VeryBigLiar: Sabyen91: Ken VeryBigLiar: Mildly ironic given at least two cities in Waukesha County are debating getting rid of parts if not all of their police forces. Then they find out that the Sheriff's Dept. takes an extra three minutes on average in response time and all of sudden they're back in their good graces.

Oh please, oh please, oh please.

New Berlin already did the study on canning all the clerks and dispatchers- $9MM in savings...over 10 years. The chief was all gung-ho to throw them under the bus (many of them applied for jobs in surrounding cities) but now people find out the County is slower and that the officers might be next? Not so much.

If most of the cities and towns in Waukesha County weren't so spread out it might work but in the current places the County handles the heavy lifting (like Oconomowoc and other parts in the west) it's been said the difference is appreciable.


How farking stupid are they? Oh, never mind. The suburbs don't believe in government. I expect schadenfreud.
2012-06-11 12:27:39 AM  
1 votes:

Sabyen91: Ken VeryBigLiar: Mildly ironic given at least two cities in Waukesha County are debating getting rid of parts if not all of their police forces. Then they find out that the Sheriff's Dept. takes an extra three minutes on average in response time and all of sudden they're back in their good graces.

Oh please, oh please, oh please.


New Berlin already did the study on canning all the clerks and dispatchers- $9MM in savings...over 10 years. The chief was all gung-ho to throw them under the bus (many of them applied for jobs in surrounding cities) but now people find out the County is slower and that the officers might be next? Not so much.

If most of the cities and towns in Waukesha County weren't so spread out it might work but in the current places the County handles the heavy lifting (like Oconomowoc and other parts in the west) it's been said the difference is appreciable.
2012-06-11 12:14:19 AM  
1 votes:

namatad: GAT_00: Strange considering that Walker didn't target police and firefighters. I think Romney should make a national policy address talking about why we need to fire police and firefighters, since those groups tend to vote Republican.

Funnier that Walker claims that he protected teachers, along with the cops and fire.
LOL


The motherfarker claimed that class sized went down and loss of teachers went down. If people can just lie on their ads how do we have any recourse? Is this how Democracy dies?
2012-06-11 12:12:15 AM  
1 votes:

Sensei Can You See: eurotrader: There is an excessive amount of police officers in the US.

No, no, no -- can't you see that Romney actually wants to fire every single police officer, firefighter and teacher in the country? That's the only possible meaning.


farking shill. You bought his bullshiat that there are too many cops without question.
2012-06-10 11:34:05 PM  
1 votes:

ksdanj: I'm sure that Blackwater Xe Academi is looking for a way to get back on the government teat...

Who do you think Erik Prince is donating to this election cycle?


What do you mean "back on"? They're one of the government's three largest contractors.
2012-06-10 11:29:56 PM  
1 votes:

Generation_D: Why do people all hate union workers, seriously? I have some theories, but wouldnt mind hearing the Fark Independents tell their side.


Because socialisms.
2012-06-10 09:48:21 PM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: Strange considering that Walker didn't target police and firefighters. I think Romney should make a national policy address talking about why we need to fire police and firefighters, since those groups tend to vote Republican.


Funnier that Walker claims that he protected teachers, along with the cops and fire.
LOL
2012-06-10 09:35:39 PM  
1 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Privatize the police and fire departments

/that worked so well in the 19th century
//and fits right in with the GOP "Forward, into the past" agenda


Good thing Pinkerton is still around. I was appalled the first time I saw a security seal with their name.
2012-06-10 09:31:22 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: "not hiring more of" == "getting rid of"?


If there's increased demand but not increased hiring, or lack of funding for current levels (as is the case), than yes, not hiring more = getting rid of.
2012-06-10 07:54:39 PM  
1 votes:
Fark Romney. He's an idiot. Sometimes, Republicans, money takes a back seat to a person's intellect, and, let's face it! You're trying to elect America's first retarded president.
2012-06-10 07:50:19 PM  
1 votes:

dorko16: propasaurus: THIS.
That's exactly what the plan is. Private schools, private cops. Can't afford to have the private fire company put out your fire? Your own damn fault you weren't born rich.

It seems we really are headed down the path of being modern serfs.


That's what capitalism is unless you moderate it with what are usually called socialist tendencies and safeguards. Just neo-Feudalism.

I'm tempted to repost whole a section from Blue Mars that says this a lot better than I can.
2012-06-10 07:41:49 PM  
1 votes:

propasaurus: THIS.
That's exactly what the plan is. Private schools, private cops. Can't afford to have the private fire company put out your fire? Your own damn fault you weren't born rich.


It seems we really are headed down the path of being modern serfs.
2012-06-10 06:56:38 PM  
1 votes:

gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Teaching is the family and churches responsiblity, Law enforcement private security and of coures Danites. Putting out fires well as long as you go to church and pray enough there will be no fires.
2012-06-10 06:52:03 PM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: Lorelle: GAT_00: I think Romney should make a national policy address talking about why we need to fire police and firefighters, since those groups tend to vote Republican.

He probably thinks that everyone will be better off if we go back to relying on private contractors for security (e.g., Pinkertons), and have only all-volunteer fire departments.

He probably owns a couple of private security groups.


No no, he knows people who own private security groups.
2012-06-10 06:49:52 PM  
1 votes:
It also occurs to me that Walker and Romney both taking credit for "The Message of Wisconsin" and its actual content, could turn into the most entertaining biatch-fight of the season.
2012-06-10 06:23:24 PM  
1 votes:

kmmontandon: gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Billionaires.

Our Galtian overlords are masters of all trades, and totally have our best interests in mind.


Corporations. Because "corporations are people, my friend."
2012-06-10 06:10:23 PM  
1 votes:

gaslight: So....who will be doing the teaching, who will be doing the law enforcement and who will be putting out the fires?


Not Romney, I'm pretty sure.
 
Displayed 70 of 70 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report