Random Politics & Religion #20

There's no doubt many reasons why a child's education fails. However the unions and the administrators existence currently as a method to make whatever value there is in the system per dollar spent LESS valuable.

Clearly you need money to teach kids anything, but one cannot argue that money is the only key to successful teaching. The only argument here is how do we get more value per dollar spent?

The first thing is to get rid of all the dead weight in the system and there's a ton of it in the unions and the administration.

All countries have regional governments, the difference is the composition and framework. Each State in the USA is like an individual country then a region. Inside each State are various counties / parish's that have their own local governments and rules that are governed by the States Constitution. Yeah the US has a single Constitution that establish's the nation, but each State also has it's own Constitution that establish's how that State is governed and under which conditions it was admitted into the Union. The best analogy is the EU and it's member states, in fact the EU was established as a form of government similar to the USA though not as strong. Because of how each US State has sovereignty over it's own laws, many international agreements need to be done on a State by State basis. Take something like a drivers license, there is no "US Drivers License", it's done by State and each State would need a reciprocal agreement with each and every country in the world in order for drivers license's to be valid. States like California actually have these agreements / miniature-treaties with countries like Korean and Japan allowing drivers licenses to be recognized by each. Similar situation happens with things like Licenses to practice Medicine and Law, they are done at a State level.

The Tenth Amendment states in plain language the relationship between States and Federal Government.


Now the Constitution also grants the US Government some central powers which are pretty important in this context.


Our courts have struck down federal laws for violating those limitations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez

This deals with a law passed by Congress regulating firearms in Public Schools. It was found unconstitutional because the Federal government doesn't have that power and couldn't how how it would effect interstate commerce.


They also laid down some general guidelines for determining if the commerce clause applied.


This is why so much of our federal regulations center around federal tax money and not directives to the States. It would be unconstitutional for the Federal government to declare it illegal for States to not teach common core, yet it's entirely constitutional for the Federal government to attach tax monies to participation in a Federal education program or as part of adherence to Federal education guidelines.

And like that I brought it back to the topic of education.

Self reliance and responsibility is anathema to the Progressive ideology. Individuality doesn't matter, only the will and direction of the collective. Of course the collective is being run by these divine benevolent gods who don't ever run the system for their own benefit.

People need help, but the government should only help those who help themselves. Those who seek aid and not depend on it or demand it should receive it. And even then, only as a temporary measure to help them out of whatever situation they need the aid for.

As for feeding children, why aren't the parents doing that? Why are you demanding that the government and schools feed them? Why is it a bigger priority for those parents to buy ***they don't absolutely need (like TVs, cell phones, internet, etc.) than it is to make sure their children are fed?

And don't give me that *** that's usually the response to the above.

Couple that to the "victim" mentality peddled by the left. When you convince someone they are a victim, you automatically set them up for and build in their own failure. Victims and failures can never be self reliant, they must always rely on progressivism to bail them out.

As parent who falls in the socio-economic spectrum of upper middle/lower upper class; it's interesting reading the opinions pertaining to the perceived decisions of parents far less well off than myself by posters who don't have children.

Intresting but clear read, thanks!

sarcasm tags because some posters here lack the ability to detect it.

I have kids. And while they won't grow up in an upper lower class household like I did, they will be taught the same lessons. You are not entitled to success. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions. If you don't want to spend your life worrying about money then get used to the idea of hard work when you're young, because it only gets harder from there.

I'm talking about knowing what the cost of raising a child as someone who has a child and money; in relation to people who don't have children, having negative opinions about the decisions of those parents who don't have money make.

Especially, in regards to what services they are reliant on to compensate their lack of income in order to provide adequately for their children. Not all parents who are financially poor, make selfish and self centered decisions and do need help.

It's easy to point out extremes and bundle everyone else up in attempts to marginalize. However, that line of thinking and generalizing does everyone a disservice.

Cause as a parent I'm sure you are well aware diapers, bottles, formula, cribs, bassinets, playpens, day care all add up. That's just year one. Like health care and funeral services it is one hell of a racket.

OCD Edit for clarity:

I'm talking about knowing what the cost of raising a child is. As someone who has a child and money; in relation to people who don't have children, having negative opinions about the decisions of parents, who don't have money, make.

Well, it's hard to not have negative opinions when you spend several years in bad neighborhoods and the parents have enough money to chain smoke and drink beer but not enough money to ensure that their kids have basic necessities. This is not the case for all parents obviously, but it's so insanely common that there's no point in downplaying it.

I wonder...what's the monthly child support for a first child in the States? (I think the word is Child Support, I dont mean alimony, I mean the monthly money you get from the state. Or is this also dependant on which state you live in?

In the U.S., you get a tax credit on your annual tax return. The government does not give you monthly "child support".

So? They aren't the one's seeking it as lifetime benefits.

Those that seek it and see it as being weak, that gives the more incentive to get off of it. Those are the very people we need to help.

And, by stopping lifetime recipients, or those who constantly game the system quite often, will those children not be taught how to game the system.

Cause, you know, it wouldn't work.

So, we should reward people for making bad choices?

I thought the whole point of the welfare system is to bring people out of poverty. You can't do that if you encourage people to stay in poverty....

It also depends on the state.

But you generally do not get money for having children. It's a right, not a privilege.

Ic, I get a monthly amount of money for my kids, I get 320€ish a month I think for my son and daughter till they're 18. That money is meant to provide in the children's basic needs (people do take advantage of the system though and the money isnt always used for what its meant for), most cities even give a bonus per child (think where I live its €1k, thats to boy beds, diapers, bottles, etcetc)

Actually its not per month, its as long they go to school. Think mom got child support for my brother till he was 30.

Over here you get 120 dollars a month for the first child but we also have "flerbarnstillägg" where you get some extra money the more kids you have

You get the same for studying past 16 as well, they just call it studiebidrag instead of barnbidrag

This problem of people not decently feeding or taking care of their children isnt a problem of the lower income scale only though. It also happens in the better income classes, some people just arent fit to be parents and cant or refuse to see their priorities.

That is true, but as you can see Shiroi is arguing against, that narrow sightedness that was brought up by others, that the poor should make better decisions.

Between the lines it's akin to saying poor children should be penalized by the poor decisions of their parents.

File that under : #Things people don't realize they're saying.

Some well to do kids don't get home cooked meals due to busy parents, and parents who can't cook and rely on prepackaged meals.

For many kids the hot breakfast/lunch provided by their schools under the free and reduced cost programs is the closest thing they get to a home cooked meal.

One thing you're forgetting is that it's about their constituents benefitting from the aid... once you give them something and then try to take it away from them it doesn't always go so well... look at social security... who's willing to take that hit? For all that some politicians talk about cutting back on the welfare state very few if any actually want to give up funding for any of their programs once they have it... it's not just about this oh you're a hate monster if you try to take anything away or cut back like you may like to believe...

We agree on some of this... there are many things that contribute to the education system failing the youth of America... it's not something that you can sit there and generally blame on one or two things.... it's not just as easy as saying get rid of the dead weight either... it's about changing the whole environment... even if you can get rid of the "dead weight" what's to say more of the same wouldn't just come in?

I also think that unions aren't really in the business of helping much these days... but let's face all unions are out for their membership only and nothing else... they're not there for the kids... it's like a lot of groups in the US that protect the terrible in their group to maintain the protections they desire or that some just don't want to rock the boat or fear retribution for speaking up... the converse though, disbanding unions completely, is a scary thought for many and personally I think a balance can be struck...

Money plays a bigger role than you may like to think... funding for better teachers, supplies and for programs is a big deal and you can see the effects between schools that have all of that and those that can barely afford to make copies of the tests they're handing out... this all usually gets concentrated into certain neighborhoods due to the way we fund schooling and restricts access based on that too...

While some of it is on the individual, the desire to learn and your own home environment it's also on us to show people that there is something better at the end of the road... you should look at some of the programs they've been running where they substitute kids in and out of different schools and see the difference it makes and how the students themselves view the situation...

Some of you can blame the parents or the teachers or the unions or whatever but it's not the kids fault that they ended up where they were... there are a great many elements to it and regardless it's in our own best interest to improve the situation...

I wonder if you ever get tired of hearing yourself speak generalized nonsense like this all the time...

How exactly do you know what these parents are buying? You seem to make assumptions here that people are buying nonessential items before feeding their kids... how exactly do you know this or are these just more assumptions that fit your viewpoint so you just say them out loud?

Regardless of whether you have kids or not we all have a vested interest in the success of educational programs... we all pay in via taxes and we all can benefit or suffer a detriment from the results... your kid isn't even in the system yet anyways as he's, if I recall correctly, less than a year old. Maybe I'm wrong on that though... I know we have had discussions about your wife being a teacher and I think that's more where your point of view comes from.... its. In all our best interest to take more time and put more into this though some of us should really take more time to educate ourselves better on the topic first...

Also, *shock* a liberal with a job?!? You've lied to me all this time sav....

Holy Flavin posts, Batman.