Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-23-2022, 07:47 AM   #541
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
As soon as you subsidize my ability to join a private country club instead of the local town owned course I might change my mind.
really?
scottw is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 07:57 AM   #542
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
As soon as you subsidize my ability to join a private country club instead of the local town owned course I might change my mind.
"What is irrefutable is that you want me to help subsidize your kids going to private school."

ONE HUNDRED percent false. That is literally 100% demonstrable bullsh*t. In my case, I'd like to direct some of MY TAX DOLLARS, to the school of my choice. How is that asking you to subsidize me by even one cent?

In the case of poor people stuck in the cities, now the truth comes out, you accidentally said the quiet part out loud. You claim all day long you want to help these people, and they are begging for more school choice, which you'd deny them, because YOU don't like the idea of any of your money going to a private school. You're OK with your tax dollars subsidizing their crappy (and more expensive)public schools. But you're not OK with your tax dollars subsidizing them to attend quality private schools (often cheaper) that actually work. Please, please tell us how that's helping poor people?

Paul, you'd rather subsidize them to attend lousy schools in Hartford which costs $20k per year per kid, than send them to my kids' tiny Catholic school which has less than 10 kids per class, and costs $5500 per kid for middle school grades? That';s just chock full of common sense.

That's liberalism, boy! "I demand to spend $20k per year of public money on a terrible school, rather than $5500 per year on a terrific school!!"

It's stupid, and it does nothing to help poor people. But more money goes to the unions, which means more money goes to helping democrats win elections. And THAT'S what matters.

You want to fix public schools? Offer school choice. Tell public schools that they now have competition. Do that, and those public schools would make some meaningful improvements in the next 5 seconds (they can't fix the effect of broken families, but they can fix some things, like get rid of lousy teachers). There's zero incentive to do a good job, when you have a perfect monopoly.

You say to poor people "keep voting democrat, and hopefully one day before your kids graduate (or drop out), those schools will improve".

You're telling poor people to suck it up. I'd offer them a huge improvement. Yet you're on the side of the angels. Sure Paul, whatever you say. Nothing but hollow, empty, virtue-signaling rhetoric.

Your country club example is way off, because catholic schools are usually cheaper than the public schools in the cities.

So would you turn down the chance to play at a private country club which had a better course and lower greens fees than your public golf course? Because that's what you're advocating for here. You're advocating to spend a fortune more money, for a vastly inferior product. That just makes all kinds of sense.

Last edited by Jim in CT; 08-23-2022 at 08:16 AM..
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:01 AM   #543
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
he compared an underprivileged kid in a failing school getting the opportunity to get a good education that might lift them out of poverty,,,, to him getting a free membership at a private golf course....

good grief....
scottw is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:10 AM   #544
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
he compared an underprivileged kid in a failing school getting the opportunity to get a good education that might lift them out of poverty,,,, to him getting a free membership at a private golf course....

good grief....
Yup. But he's the virtuous one. You cannot make that up.

Every once in awhile Scott, they say the quiet part out loud. They want huge numbers of poor people to stay exactly where they are, because the more of them that are in the cities and addicted to welfare, the larger their reliable voting block is.

Choice a - spend $20k per year per student in Hartford public schools, which are failing sh*tholes.

Choice b - spend less than $6k per year to send them to a catholic K-8 school with less than 10 kids per class, and where kids on average perform a full grade level higher than where they are, on standardized tests.

Why is this a difficult choice? Politics. That's it. If you were at all motivated by an actual urge to help these people, that's a ridiculously easy decision.

But unfortunately for those poor people, while school choice will help lift those kids out of poverty, it doesn't help democrats win elections.

The poor people need to form a union. Then the democrats will actually act on their behalf.
The other benefit to this school choice...let's say you pull 10 kids out of Hartford (where you'd spend $20k per kid), and out them in my kids school, which costs $5500 per kid...the public school in Hartford (1) now has fewer kids, thus smaller class sizes, which everyone knows helps kids. And (2) they also have more money, because Hartford schools can keep the $14,500 they were going to spend anyway on each kid who left for private school. If it's 10 kids who leave, thats $145k that Hartford can spend on the remaining kids.

In other words, after those kids leave, the public school can now spend even more money per kid, on the kids who choose to remain there.

Win-win.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:22 AM   #545
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
he compared an underprivileged kid in a failing school getting the opportunity to get a good education that might lift them out of poverty,,,, to him getting a free membership at a private golf course....

good grief....
subsidized snarky one, not free
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:26 AM   #546
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Yup. But he's the virtuous one. You cannot make that up.

Every once in awhile Scott, they say the quiet part out loud. They want huge numbers of poor people to stay exactly where they are, because the more of them that are in the cities and addicted to welfare, the larger their reliable voting block is.

Choice a - spend $20k per year per student in Hartford public schools, which are failing sh*tholes.

Choice b - spend less than $6k per year to send them to a catholic K-8 school with less than 10 kids per class, and where kids on average perform a full grade level higher than where they are, on standardized tests.

Why is this a difficult choice? Politics. That's it. If you were at all motivated by an actual urge to help these people, that's a ridiculously easy decision.

But unfortunately for those poor people, while school choice will help lift those kids out of poverty, it doesn't help democrats win elections.

The poor people need to form a union. Then the democrats will actually act on their behalf.
Indiana's school voucher program started in 2011

The data doesn’t match you fantasy Jim school choice is a red herring being presented as a benefit for inner city blacks . But is aimed a sending white kids to religious schools and having the government pay most of the bill ..
But keep saying it’s about poor people



Whites increased from 40 to 60% and blacks declined 24 to 12%.





For a full voucher, worth 90 percent of what a state would spend in a public school, a family of four can earn no more than $45,000 annually, but students whose parents earn up to $67,000 can still qualify for a half-voucher. And for children already in the program, their family income can rise to nearly $90,000 annually.

Yep helping those who need it most




“If the idea behind a voucher program is we’re going to have the money follow the student, if the student didn’t start in a public school, the money isn’t following them from a public school, it’s just appearing from another budget,” Stewart said. “And we’re not exactly sure where that’s coming from.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
wdmso is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:36 AM   #547
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Indiana's school voucher program started in 2011

The data doesn’t match you fantasy Jim school choice is a red herring being presented as a benefit for inner city blacks . But is aimed a sending white kids to religious schools and having the government pay most of the bill ..
But keep saying it’s about poor people



Whites increased from 40 to 60% and blacks declined 24 to 12%.





For a full voucher, worth 90 percent of what a state would spend in a public school, a family of four can earn no more than $45,000 annually, but students whose parents earn up to $67,000 can still qualify for a half-voucher. And for children already in the program, their family income can rise to nearly $90,000 annually.

Yep helping those who need it most




“If the idea behind a voucher program is we’re going to have the money follow the student, if the student didn’t start in a public school, the money isn’t following them from a public school, it’s just appearing from another budget,” Stewart said. “And we’re not exactly sure where that’s coming from.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
inner city parents desperately want it. so i guess you’re saying (1) that you know better then they do, what’s best for their kids, and that (2) you aren’t really pro choice.

If you had shown the ability to EVER not tow the union line, you’d have some credibility here. If the unions told you to lay an egg, you’d squat and ask what color.

Oh you don’t like tax breaks for families making as much as $90k?

How about the $7500 tax credit for buying new electric cars? How many poor people are buying new electric cars?

as always, it’s ok when liberals do anything, such as giving. big tax credits to the rich.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:39 AM   #548
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
subsidized snarky one, not free
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
he compared an underprivileged kid in a failing school getting the opportunity to get a good education that might lift them out of poverty,,,, to him getting a subsidized membership at a private golf course....

good grief....



OK...that makes you sound a whole lot better
scottw is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:52 AM   #549
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
The data doesn’t match you fantasy Jim school choice is a red herring being presented as a benefit for inner city blacks . But is aimed a sending white kids to religious schools and having the government pay most of the bill ..
But keep saying it’s about poor people

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
correct. that is exactly what it is.

Future "segregation academies"
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 08:55 AM   #550
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
he compared an underprivileged kid in a failing school getting the opportunity to get a good education that might lift them out of poverty,,,, to him getting a subsidized membership at a private golf course....

good grief....



OK...that makes you sound a whole lot better
I'm not thrilled with my town's snow removal. Maybe I can get a subsidy to hire a private contractor to make extra passes on my street when it snows.
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:01 AM   #551
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post

Every once in awhile Scott, they say the quiet part out loud.

.
you didn't even have to put words in their mouth like they frequently do with you...

we've learned that he doesn't believe other people are nearly as charitable as they claim and that he believes he is even more charitable than he claims....

and...

that some children should not benefit from a better education opportunity unless he get's his private country club membership subsidized....

fabulous....

and Wayne is saving the planet with an electric toaster....


can't make this stuff up....
scottw is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:16 AM   #552
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Yes, let's make the schools better by taking away funding and the most engaged parents by subsidizing private schools. Makes sense.
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:18 AM   #553
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Yup. But he's the virtuous one. You cannot make that up.
See you cannot help yourself. No wonder you are an angry person with no friends on this site.
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:31 AM   #554
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
correct. that is exactly what it is.

Future "segregation academies"
I support school choice with strict income caps. Especially in inner cities where schools are the worst. So please explain how that's aimed at sending white kids to better schools. I'm all ears.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:31 AM   #555
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post

you are an angry person with no friends on this site.
when all else fails
scottw is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:33 AM   #556
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
See you cannot help yourself. No wonder you are an angry person with no friends on this site.
You are incredible Paul. It was you, not me, who said you like your side because you think they have superior views on helping the poor, and that republicans don't like poor people or something. But when I remind you what you said, I'm angry. Make sense.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:35 AM   #557
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
when all else fails
Paul: My side has better views on helping the poor and Republicans don't care about poor people.

Jim: you claim your side is the virtuous side

Paul: You're angry and scummy.

And try to control your snarkiness Scott, liberals really don't like it when their logic is exposed to the light of day.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 09:39 AM   #558
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Yes, let's make the schools better by taking away funding and the most engaged parents by subsidizing private schools. Makes sense.
Nope. Follow the math, or have a middle schooler explain the math to you. My idea of school choice leaves public schools with more money to spend per kid. "More money per kid", is the exact opposite of what you claim would happen.

So it's better to punish the "most engaged parents" by leaving them in failing sh*thole schools that you'd never, EVER send your kids to?

How does that help those most engaged parents, Paul? Please explain how denying school choice helps those parents? The ones who happen to be poor, but are doing everything the right way? How does denying them school choice help them?

The only ones hurt by school choice are the teachers left behind in the urban schools (as some of the most teachable students would leave) and the union, and therefore democrats who get $$ from the union. That's it.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 10:33 AM   #559
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
I support school choice with strict income caps. Especially in inner cities where schools are the worst. So please explain how that's aimed at sending white kids to better schools. I'm all ears.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Yes, let's make the schools better by taking away funding and the most engaged parents by subsidizing private schools. Makes sense.
told you right there.
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 10:35 AM   #560
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Paul: My side has better views on helping the poor and Republicans don't care about poor people.

Jim: you claim your side is the virtuous side

Paul: You're angry and scummy.

And try to control your snarkiness Scott, liberals really don't like it when their logic is exposed to the light of day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Yup. But he's the virtuous one. You cannot make that up.
You don't even recognize when you insult people any more
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 10:39 AM   #561
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Yup. But he's the virtuous one. You cannot make that up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
You don't even recognize when you insult people any more

that's an insult?
scottw is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 11:12 AM   #562
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Files copied from voting systems were shared with Trump supporters, election deniers

A Georgia computer forensics firm, hired by the attorneys, placed the files on a server, where company records show they were downloaded dozens of times. Among the downloaders were accounts associated with a Texas meteorologist who has appeared on Sean Hannity’s radio show; a podcaster who suggested political enemies should be executed; a former pro surfer who pushed disproven theories that the 2020 election was manipulated; and a self-described former “seduction and pickup coach” who claims to also have been a hacker.

So let me guess . They are Trumps lawyers but Trump shoulders no responsibility for their actions?

It’s that how it works ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
wdmso is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 11:18 AM   #563
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
You don’t find failing public schools and charter schools in wealthy neighborhoods, do you?

Why would that be?

Because wealthy locales add more burden on to their local taxpayers, who are willing to pay and insist on quality education.
Now Jim and other school choice disciples have no desire to increase funding, instead they want to spread it thinner using vouchers to replace public education funding.
The magical privatization theory, good for schools, prisons, roads, rail, etc.
Wonder why we keep losing ground in the world?
Public schools would have less money to work with because what they used to receive is now a voucher that is handed out.
The only families left behind are those who cannot make up the difference of the voucher (thus, lower-income families) and those with disabled children. Because private schools do not have to take disabled children.

Unfortunately those left behind are the most expensive and it would only get worse.

Now some think that teachers need to just do more for less, because they should feel privileged to be responsible for the education of our greatest asset.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 11:39 AM   #564
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Public schools would have less money to work with because what they used to receive is now a voucher that is handed out.
The only families left behind are those who cannot make up the difference of the voucher (thus, lower-income families) and those with disabled children. Because private schools do not have to take disabled children.

Unfortunately those left behind are the most expensive and it would only get worse.

Now some think that teachers need to just do more for less, because they should feel privileged to be responsible for the education of our greatest asset.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
And don't forget the issue of fixed/variable cost. If there are fewer students you still need to spend the same for services such as heating the building, provide the same security/guards, etc. You still need to run the same buses, etc. End result is lower $ to provide services while subsidizing students to go to private school. As I said the most engage parents would take their children out while the students w/o engaged parents with the most needs would be left further behind. I guess they would need to lift themselves up by the bootstraps.

Last edited by PaulS; 08-23-2022 at 11:45 AM..
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 11:44 AM   #565
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
As I said the most engage parents would take their children out while the students w/o engaged parents with the most needs would be left further behind. I guess they would need to lift themselves up by the bootstraps.
yes, as you said, you advocate for punishing the few engaged parents, because you believe it’s their job to leave their kids in crappy schools for the benefit of others, rather than let them
flourish in good schools

yet you claim you care more about those parents than i do.

Keep bleating the narrative paul.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 11:52 AM   #566
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
yes, as you said, you advocate for punishing the few engaged parents, because you believe it’s their job to leave their kids in crappy schools for the benefit of others, rather than let them
flourish in good schools

yet you claim you care more about those parents than i do.

Keep bleating the narrative paul.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
The few would leave and benefit while the majority would be still be in the public schools with fewer resources.

It is all about what is best for Jim - screw the less fortunate. Typical Conservate mantra.
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 12:05 PM   #567
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
The few would leave and benefit while the majority would be still be in the public schools with fewer resources.

It is all about what is best for Jim - screw the less fortunate. Typical Conservate mantra.
"the majority would be still be in the public schools with fewer resources. "

(1) the majority are there anyway. Better to force them all to stay? Or better to help those who want the help?

(2) Fewer overall dollars, but more dollars per student.

(3) competition would incentivize the public school to improve.

"It is all about what is best for Jim"

How does this help me, exactly? I'm not poor in an urban area. I'm already sending my kids to private school. You're saying I'm selfish, because I want to help those engaged parents?

You keep saying you don't want to subsidize private schools, but you're OK with subsidizing public schools, whish are worse and way more expensive?

Finally, it's what they want Paul. I say let them choose what's best for their kids. You'd deny them that choice, yet you claim you're more on their side than I am.

And teh fact that dumping massive amounts of money into lousy urban schools helps democrats win elections, that has nothing to do with the liberal stance on the issue, that's just a happy coincidence for the left.

But you're going to make the urban schools stronger by continuing to throw good money after bad.

Beyond stupid. And likely racist. Keep those darkies where they belong, don't let them into the suburbs. It's better for them, actually, to stay in downtown Hartford. Keep telling yourself that, Einstein.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 12:29 PM   #568
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post

Beyond stupid. And likely racist. Keep those darkies where they belong, don't let them into the suburbs. It's better for them, actually, to stay in downtown Hartford. Keep telling yourself that, Einstein.
Again, this is why I think you are a classless, friendless person.
PaulS is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 12:35 PM   #569
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Again, this is why I think you are a classless, friendless person.
a whole lot easier for you to insult me, than to make me wrong.

You said it’s selfish that i support school choice for poor people
in urban areas. I asked how that’s selfish, you ignored that obviously and insulted me.

You’re opposed to helping the few engaged parents in that situation who are doing the right thing and desperately want a better future for their kids. you compared educating poor children, to something as extravagant as a country club membership. but i’m the flawed one

Tell me more, please. I’d like to sign up for your low-IQ newsletter.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-23-2022, 07:44 PM   #570
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Some people are proof that Trump merely acted as the latest conduit for America’s deep natural reserves of #^&#^&#^&#^&tiness.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com