Brothahorn's Conservative Thread

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

Fuck off. 

[workswithseed 2110]

13 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Fuck off. 

Stop being a titty baby.

[TXSG8R 3362]

41 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I thought of one other viable reason to vote R on national level.

School choice. The Democratic rejection of school choice and charter schools would acutely hurt those kids currently in them, especially kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. 

School choice is the R's trojan horse for school vouchers.  They want to be able to use tax money to pay for religious education.  School choice is logistically a pipe dream and the Rs know it.  They wont give two shits about the kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds struggles with school choice once the only demographic they care about gets to use vouchers to pay for jesus schoolin.  

https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/2403_1745_LP2013-ch08-Transport_Costs_of_School_Choice_0.pdf

Transportation is just one barrier.  This is a good reason why you should have actual educators involved in policy and not rich people that want to spread the word.  

Edited July 10, 2020 by TXSG8R

[Captainant 27682]

3 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

School choice is the R's trojan horse for school vouchers.  They want to be able to use tax money to pay for religious education.  School choice is logistically a pipe dream and the Rs know it.  They wont give two shits about the kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds struggles with school choice once the only demographic they care about gets to use vouchers to pay for jesus schoolin.  

It's the new mechanism for segregating schools while still getting federal funding. It's just religion instead of skin color

Edited July 10, 2020 by Captainant

[naija 2869]

The problem with this thread is that BrothaHorn states that he is going to post Black Conservative (and Libertarian) views and then basically does that entire side a disservice by posting what can only be described as caricatures and Black versions of some of the nutty Trump crowd that invites easy ridicule and a one off dismiss of the idea of a Black Conservative.

Yet, there are examples that don't look, sound or write like they came out of central casting for a Trump 2020 series. Why not post those?

The easiest to digest and that comes to mind is Glenn Loury's show on Bloggingheads.tv. I do not agree with a lot of what is said there, but at least it's a legit attempt at making a counter argument. John McWhorter is also a frequent guest and when the two of them are on, you get to listen to a discussion about viewpoints that are decidedly not Leftist coming from 2 Black men.

if you want the up and coming, then read some of Coleman Hughes' work. Very young, but quite the writer.

You can start with  The Case for Black Optimism and  Black American Culture and The Racial Wealth Gap . Of course, Hughes will tell you he isn't a conservative.

Others abound. Not hard to find. This is a college board. Getting into things that can't just be summarized as tweets should not be difficult.

Edited July 10, 2020 by naija

[wildcat09 29355]

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

It's the new mechanism for segregating schools while still getting federal funding. It's just religion instead of skin color

But it still ends up being skin color too, because they price out minorities. 

[StassneyHorn 6620]

Quickest way to get rid of school vouchers is to let Republicans know that Catholic schools spend entire semesters teaching Social Justice classes.

[Goredho 17412]

This is like a poor man’s Diamond and Silk segment.  Let’s call it Zirconia and Polyester.

[workswithseed 2110]

6 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Quickest way to get rid of school vouchers is to let Republicans know that Catholic schools spend entire semesters teaching Social Justice classes.

What's a Catholic social justice class like?

[StassneyHorn 6620]

Learning the basic tenets of Catholicism. Mostly broad discussions about the Social Contract half the time. Human dignity, sanctity of life close 2nd and 3rd. It’s been 15 years, but it’s the same stuff you hear in a sermon.

Honestly it was a class taught when I was 15-16 that’d better serve to an 18 year old who is going off to college a knowledge for the differences in society. You as a Catholic, cannot say you are prolife while being OK with the death penalty, doing nothing about homelessness, poverty etc.

Edited July 10, 2020 by StassneyHorn

[HenryJames 66134]

Catholic Charities.

[GRHorn 105]

2 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

School choice is the R's trojan horse for school vouchers.  They want to be able to use tax money to pay for religious education.  School choice is logistically a pipe dream and the Rs know it.  They wont give two shits about the kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds struggles with school choice once the only demographic they care about gets to use vouchers to pay for jesus schoolin.  

https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/2403_1745_LP2013-ch08-y  umYu Transport_Costs_of_School_Choice_0.pdf

Transportation is just one barrier.  This is a good reason why you should have actual educators involved in policy and not rich people that want to spread the word.  

 

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

It's the new mechanism for segregating schools while still getting federal funding. It's just religion instead of skin color

These are so many words to justify this simple statement.
 

The Democratic Party aggressively opposes an educational option which improves outcomes in children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. They do so because they currently prioritize teacher’s unions and their money and votes over the education of minority children. 

 

 

[BradInATX 9208]

2 hours ago, Axiom of Choice said:

I don't think this board is very liberal.  I would say on the whole it is moderately liberal on social issues and fiscally somewhere in the middle.  I do think that internet forums in general have become more dogmatic, meaning that they typically develop some implicit consensus on certain topics and they have very little tolerance for deviation on these issues.  This is why the accusation of trolling gets used so much and why there is the label of "unintentional troll" now when troll by definition used to be someone acting intentionally.  But this forum has some good posters and if one feels like spending the effort to have one, then good discussions can still be had.  

I agree with some of what you're saying here. I think the troll label gets thrown around too often, and I do think there is some natural gravity that pulls people into some specific viewpoints. 
 

But "moderately liberal on social issues" - definitely not. This board is extremely socially liberal. Hell, even the Republicans here smoke dope and don't care about gay people getting married. I wouldn't guess there's more than 3 or 4 guys that hold traditional "socially conservative" values, at least not that post here or on the DT. There are some ok boomers on the Football board, but not in the non-sports areas.

The conservatives/Trump voters here are mostly of two camps - the triggered, xenophobic types (Johnny Sack, Onboard) and the affluent guys who vote with their wallet and pretend that their consideration of the issues goes any further than that (I suspect GRHorn, Wulaw Horn, and a few others). There's not a lot of pro-life/anti-drug/anti-gay types here.

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by BradInATX

[workswithseed 2110]

2 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Learning the basic tenets of Catholicism. Mostly broad discussions about the Social Contract half the time. Human dignity, sanctity of life close 2nd and 3rd. It’s been 15 years, but it’s the same stuff you hear in a sermon.

Honestly it was a class taught when I was 15-16 that’d better serve to an 18 year old who is going off to college a knowledge for the differences in society. You as a Catholic, cannot say you are prolife while being OK with the death penalty, doing nothing about homelessness, poverty etc.

That's a much better description than the first thing you wrote. All that makes sense.

[workswithseed 2110]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

I agree with some of what you're saying here. I think the troll label gets thrown around too often, and I do think there is some natural gravity that pulls people into some specific viewpoints. 
 

But "moderately liberal on social issues" - definitely not. Hell, even the Republicans here smoke dope and don't care about gay people getting married. I wouldn't guess there's more than 3 or 4 guys that hold traditional "socially conservative" values, at least not that post here or on the DT. There are some ok boomers on the Football board, but not in the non-sports areas.

The conservatives/Trump voters here are mostly of two camps - the xenophobes (Johnny Sack, Onboard) and the affluent guys who vote with their wallet and pretend that their consideration of the issues goes any further than that (I suspect GRHorn, Wulaw Horn, and a few others). There's not a lot of pro-life/anti-drug/anti-gay types here.

 

I've learned to call myself anti abortion. I can never say I'm mad that Texas killed Brewer and King for thier disgusting act. I only hope that I'm right and that thier eternal damnation is full of pain and torture.

[GRHorn 105]

9 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The parties are not inherently bad.  It’s the people that have hijacked them.  Elect better people in it for the right reasons to represent you and the parties will follow their lead.  It’s more of a bad leadership issue than political party problem.

There’s too many people that have hijacked them. It’s insurmountable at this point in its current state. I’m not sure of the answer. 

[Captainant 27682]

21 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

The Democratic Party aggressively opposes an educational option which improves outcomes in children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

[Citation needed]

[washparkhorn 9939]

12 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I disagree with the first part of this premise. I'd say the viewpoint on this forum is dominated by conservatives. 

Dominated by radical and reactionary moderates, who are conservative by definition, as you identified.

Moderation for the sake of moderation. A thirst for the status quo before populists elected Trump. An unwillingness to proceed with Western Enlightenment ideals and the promise of progress. Passionate about uniformity and conformity. Herd mentality. Closed minded. Kicking the can down the road. 

We blame politicians, but our own tendencies reek of neglect for the common good. We place too much faith in market solutions. 

Perhaps that will change when Texas turns blue. It did in California and Colorado and those States boomed. It's time for Texas to turn its back on the South and join the West - where it belongs. 

Third Way politics is a failure for the American Experiment. 

[washparkhorn 9939]

11 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

The parties are not inherently bad.

I respectfully and strenuously disagree. Much of our checks and balances are designed to throttle the power of partisans. The checks and balances failed - miserably.

[GRHorn 105]

8 hours ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

Which are both a load of horseshit anyways.  You want to reduce the number of abortions?  Sacrificing our democracy and embracing a corrupt President just to try and get Roe overturned won't do that.  It will just mean abortions are done in the shadows and in a less safe circumstances or women will have to expend money to fly to states where abortion is legalized.  If you really want to limit abortions, you should be pro-health care, pro-education, and pro-safety nets for women.  All things the Republican party is vehemently against.  That's what the data shows works.  Not a ban on abortion.  The entire "pro-life" movement is a load of shit meant to manipulate single issue voters to vote Republican even though, by and large, Republican policies are against those voters' best interests.

And as for guns, there isn't some big liberal movement to ban guns.  That's Republican fear mongering. What Democrats generally want to do is keep weapons of war out of the hands of crazy people who will use them against other Americans.  That's a view with which many conservatives actually agree.

So if you're supporting Trump because you're worried about abortion or the Second Amendment, you are doing so because you are an easily manipulated, ignorant fool.   

I’m not worried about abortion as far as judges go. I prefer judges who lean against government intrusion and who have a more textualist interpretation of the law. I’m not an attorney so I’m naturally stepping out of my depth a bit, but I think the law is what it says it is, and if you want it changed then the legislative branch should handle it.  It shouldn’t be judges reading their interpretation into what the law means. Ok non lawyer legal opinion done. 
 

As far as your assurance that the Democratic Party isn’t interested in the second amendment, I would point you to Biden’s denouncement as recently as last year of the Heller decision as well as the general attitude of the cancel culture that is at the heart of the online progressive community. 

[GRHorn 105]

22 minutes ago, Captainant said:

[Citation needed]

I love how you silly twats need citations on everything. Like anything that is against your priors is so inconceivable that you need a fucking bibliography. Here you go, buddy. 
 

https://reason.com/2016/08/22/john-olivers-anti-charter-school-rant-is/

Here’s a link from that column. There’s also a hyperlink in there to a MIT study.

https://educationnext.org/files/ednext20054_52.pdf
 

Or another column. 
 

https://reason.com/2018/08/16/decades-after-brown-v-board-of-education/

Lots of links everywhere. 
 

Repeat after me.
 

The Democratic Party aggressively opposes an educational option which improves outcomes in children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. They do so because they currently prioritize teacher’s unions and their money and votes over the education of minority children. 

[Fondren & Main 6726]

Thanks for making this thread @Brothahorn.  Hopefully this will keep the mentally ill confined to this thread and out of the DT.  
 

[Anastasis 23479]

3 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

School choice is the R's trojan horse for school vouchers.

I think that there are lots of parents right now, across the political spectrum, who would like the option to use vouchers that could be used to fund education options for their children more in line with their personal beliefs regarding how their children should be educated in an environment less beholden to state and federal officials and the funding whip they deploy.

BuT tHeRe iS nO pLacE fOr LibErTariAn iDeaS dUrinG a pAndEmic!  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that there are lots of parents right now, across the political spectrum, who would like the option to use vouchers that could be used to fund education options for their children more in line with their personal beliefs regarding how their children should be educated in an environment less beholden to state and federal officials and the funding whip they deploy.

BuT tHeRe iS nO pLacE fOr LibErTariAn iDeaS dUrinG a pAndEmic!  

Vouchers aren't libertarian. 

[Anastasis 23479]

 

6 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Vouchers aren't libertarian. 

 

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/julyaugust-2019/libertarian-pioneers-school-choice

 

School choice certainly is a pretty common theme. Vouchers are one mechanism for that. And as a parent of three children in public schools, I would certainly like to kick TEA and the feds to the curb right now and have an option for funding an educational environment for my children in line with my values and beliefs, rather than wrongheaded government dictates. And I imagine a lot of people across the political spectrum right now, faced with a similar dilemma, share that perspective. 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Anastasis

[GRHorn 105]

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/julyaugust-2019/libertarian-pioneers-school-choice

 

School choice certainly is a pretty common theme. Vouchers are one mechanism for that. And as a parent of three children in public schools, I would certainly like to kick TEA and the feds to the curb right now and have an option for funding an educational environment for my children in line with my values and beliefs, rather than wrongheaded government dictates. And I imagine a lot of people across the political spectrum right now, faced with a similar dilemma, share that perspective. 

I mean I linked from reason.com

[wildcat09 29355]

How exactly is taxing others to send your kids to a private school libertarian? I’m not saying that makes it bad, just doesn’t strike me as aligned with libertarian principles.

[immortal13 4059]

3 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

School choice is the R's trojan horse for school vouchers.  They want to be able to use tax money to pay for religious education.  School choice is logistically a pipe dream and the Rs know it.  They wont give two shits about the kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds struggles with school choice once the only demographic they care about gets to use vouchers to pay for jesus schoolin.  

https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/2403_1745_LP2013-ch08-Transport_Costs_of_School_Choice_0.pdf

Transportation is just one barrier.  This is a good reason why you should have actual educators involved in policy and not rich people that want to spread the word.  

You just wish your party had this issue in their pocket

[Anastasis 23479]

13 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

How exactly is taxing others to send your kids to a private school libertarian? I’m not saying that makes it bad, just doesn’t strike me as aligned with libertarian principles.

At the moment, I'd be more than happy to be able to direct just a portion of my personal ISD tax obligation to providing an educational environment for my children that does not require them to be subjects in an epidemiological experiment.

 

Shit, atm I'd be ecstatic if TEA and the feds would just stay out of it and allow the local districts to drive the protocols.   

Edited July 10, 2020 by Anastasis

[workswithseed 2110]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

At the moment, I'd be more than happy to be able to direct just a portion of my personal ISD tax obligation to providing an educational environment for my children that does not require them to be subjects in an epidemiological experiment.

 

Shit, atm I'd be ecstatic if TEA and the feds would just stay out of it and allow the local districts to drive the protocols.   

Yeah, I can see why people just do the homeschool deal. Even though most seem to be anti-vaxers. Now that I think about it, they get double fucked since they still have to pay taxes to school and teach their kid/s.

[mchookem 16338]

this thread is either not going the way the OP intended, or it's going exactly the way the OP intended lol

[Anastasis 23479]

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Yeah, I can see why people just do the homeschool deal. Even though most seem to be anti-vaxers.

Uh, everybody was a home schooler spring 2020. 

[workswithseed 2110]

Just now, Anastasis said:

Uh, everybody was a home schooler spring 2020. 

I meant in regular times.

[Huckleberry 33038]

24 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

At the moment, I'd be more than happy to be able to direct just a portion of my personal ISD tax obligation to providing an educational environment for my children that does not require them to be subjects in an epidemiological experiment.

 

Shit, atm I'd be ecstatic if TEA and the feds would just stay out of it and allow the local districts to drive the protocols.   

You didn't address the question.

How is taxing others and using their money to send your child to a specific school in line with libertarian ideals? 

[Anastasis 23479]

10 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You didn't address the question.

How is taxing others and using their money to send your child to a specific school in line with libertarian ideals? 

I am not advocating for taxing anybody else. Personally, I would only like to be able to direct my personal tax "responsibility" to be used for the education of my children in the way I see fit, while I have children in the primary education age range. 

And if that is not tenable, at a minimum, I would like to see the influence of government entities money whipping local ISDs with tax dollars derived from the people residing in those ISDs curtailed.

TEA and the feds are forcing our children into a wrongheaded epidemiological experiment, using the money that they take out of our own pockets as the point of leverage. 

That system fucking sucks. And it shouldn't take libertarian inclinations to recognize that.  

Edited July 10, 2020 by Anastasis

[TexArcher 37989]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

The Democratic Party aggressively opposes an educational option which improves outcomes in children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. They do so because they currently prioritize teacher’s unions and their money and votes over the education of minority children.

Betsy DeVos is the Secretary of Education and you want to fuck with the Democrats on education?

Hell, Republicans have been trying to spin the fact that most highly educated people are not Republicans into a positive, labeling university professors and anyone else with an education as intellectual elitists, for about 40 years.  And you want to fuck with the Democrats on education?

Bold strategy, Cotton.

And now y'all care about minorities, too?  While you're all explicitly or tacitly supporting an outspoken racist who's surrounded himself with white nationalists?

You're full of shit, sir.

Edited July 10, 2020 by TexArcher

[washparkhorn 9939]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

You didn't address the question.

How is taxing others and using their money to send your child to a specific school in line with libertarian ideals? 

The taxing authority already exists - whether or not the taxpayer has children using the School District. A pure libertarian solution  is to stop all taxing authority for public schools. That world does not exist, so incremental libertarians favor school vouchers for the education a family will not be using to spend on alternatives to public school. 

Charter schools are the rage now. Public funding/Private schooling models. Some charters thrive; some do not. 

The education system in this nation is broken. Either reform and rebuild. Or start over. 

I don't see Unions as a big player in the breakdown. If anything they have been too accommodating of poor management. 

[Satchel 6938]

15 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

"Make America Great Again" is entirely about being a victim and a bitch who cries about the past.  It is not a forward thinking slogan. 

Out of the things you posted, there are only a couple of ones actually worth reading.  Leave the dumb memes out like "I keep a gun on me cuz I'm American as fuck", and the crybaby anti-media ones out, and you might get some good discussion.  

23 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

 

 

Du Bois was a Communist. He was not a conservative and would most likely think your views are stupid.

[washparkhorn 9939]

18 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Du Bois was a Communist

I am sure he gave good reasons for it in his application for membeship  - since he was subjecting himself the punishment of the McCarran Act - not our best moment. 

It was a big issue back then. 

https://archive.org/details/Punishment.Park.1971.Peter.Watkins.angeeParaZoowoman.website

 

[Bateshorn 9928]

Vouchers are a way to get the taxpayer to offset the cost of expensive private school tuition for the rich. If there’s an actual faith element, as opposed to “Hightower predatory academy was founded in 1837 to teach Congregational ideals,” then that’s cherries on top for the evangelical community.

Daddy wants a voucher to pay for Chase Worthington IV education. He doesn’t care about browns or blacks going to charter school.  That’s just the bullshit to make it happen.

Ignore the smoke bellowing stage act and pay attention to what the ownership of capital behind the curtain is doing.

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Bateshorn

[TXSG8R 3362]

9 hours ago, GRHorn said:

 

These are so many words to justify this simple statement.
 

The Democratic Party aggressively opposes an educational option which improves outcomes in children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. They do so because they currently prioritize teacher’s unions and their money and votes over the education of minority children. 

 

 

Texas does not have teachers unions.  Nor do other right to work states.  

Teachers are paid almost 20% less than other college educated workers.  

https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2018/09/teachers_wage_penalty.html#:~:text=The wage gap between teachers,according to a new analysis.&text=Compared to other college graduates,than their peers per week.

 

EDIT:  Didnt mean to submit yet.

I guess we see why Rs like to shit on teaching though.

Quote

Teaching is a predominately female profession—about 77 percent of teachers are women, according to the latest federal data. The report authors write that historically, female teachers were a "captive labor pool" with few career options and therefore less leverage to secure higher wages. That historical background is why the pay for teachers has been less than pay in male-dominated professions, Mishel and Allegretto write.

"Those arguing that teachers are overpaid have a hard time explaining how, if this is so, men have not swarmed to teaching," they added.

Did you even open the link I included in my post?  To handle regional school choice, not even individual choice, the transportation costs for a district could quadruple.  Feel free to present some real responses to the issues and not partisan bullshit.  

What do you do when the good school maxes out?  Hire the teachers from the bad schools that are emptying and stick them in portables buildings to teach the same kids?  How do you handle meals at a school thats built for x kids?  Make a third, fourth, fifth lunch period where kids are eating lunch at 9:30 or 2?  

What do you do to bad school that dwindles down to an untenable amount of kids?  Close it and remove that neighborhoods only realistic school choice for children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds that cant afford to drive (time or money) across town on their own dime to get to the good school?  

Saying the words school choice is easy, but it causes as many problems as it will solve.  To say its down to protection of teachers pay or submission to their unions is fucking comical.  

Edited July 10, 2020 by TXSG8R

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Captainant said:

It's the new mechanism for segregating schools while still getting federal funding. It's just in the name of religion instead of skin color

slight correction made to post.

If I am hard core conservative, at least fiscally;  I guess this is one topic where I am steadfastly in the liberal/ left/ insert label  corner.  If you want your kid in something other than public education, you pay the balance. That does not absolve you of the normal tax responsibility we all pay for our public schools.  No exceptions or 'choices' made in the name of religious freedom.  I got a good dose of this when we lived in Louisiana with the private schools basically being a haven from "those black kids."  I fucking hated that environment and it was a huge reason we left.

Edited July 10, 2020 by slorch

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

Texas does not have teachers unions.  Nor do other right to work states.  

Teachers are paid almost 20% less than other college educated workers.  

https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2018/09/teachers_wage_penalty.html#:~:text=The wage gap between teachers,according to a new analysis.&text=Compared to other college graduates,than their peers per week.

They work 20% less too.( I am bigtime pro- teacher, but the elephant in the room is workload)

 

(ducks)

Edited July 10, 2020 by slorch

[Goredho 17412]

What’s a family going to do with a $10,000 check from the government?

Conservatives families with a $200,000+ yearly income:  We will use it to offset some of the cost of sending our kids to that $20,000 a year elite private academy!

Families living on less than $50,000 a year: Survive.

Conservative families with a $200,000+ yearly income:  DISGUSTING FREELOADERS!!!

[StassneyHorn 6620]

9 hours ago, workswithseed said:

That's a much better description than the first thing you wrote. All that makes sense.

Yea I was buzzin and didn’t want to think about specifics, glad I did though. Went to Catholic school for 13 years and I expect others to know these things, instead of realizing I had a much different experience than most in that regard.

[TXSG8R 3362]

3 minutes ago, slorch said:

They work 20% less too.( I am bigtime pro- teacher, but the elephant in the room is workload)

 

(ducks)

If you've spent any time around a teacher, you know their holidays are easily offset by the amount of work that occurs after the bell during the school year.  All those papers have to get graded, lesson plans made, materials created, etc.  That time off is captive btw, teachers are forced to take vacations during peak travel season so they get to spend the max on travel, hotels, etc.  Teachers cant take 2 weeks in the middle of the year like other professions.  

I also haven't met a teacher yet that doesn't spend a portion of their generous salary on school materials for kids, because their parents cant/wont get them the necessary materials.  School districts are too busy counting all that extra money they have that they couldn't be bothered to help I guess.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

 

The education system  parenting in this nation is broken. Either reform and rebuild. Or start over. 

 

FIFY.

[Guest]

Just now, TXSG8R said:

If you've spent any time around a teacher, you know their holidays are easily offset by the amount of work that occurs after the bell during the school year.  All those papers have to get graded, lesson plans made, materials created, etc.  That time off is captive btw, teachers are forced to take vacations during peak travel season so they get to spend the max on travel, hotels, etc.  Teachers cant take 2 weeks in the middle of the year like other professions.  

I also haven't met a teacher yet that doesn't spend a portion of their generous salary on school materials for kids, because their parents cant/wont get them the necessary materials.  School districts are too busy counting all that extra money they have that they couldn't be bothered to help I guess.

LOLz.  Again, I'm not slamming teachers.  A good portion of my wife's family works as educators/ administrators.  You can go through my posting history if you're really bored, and you will see a very, very supportive stance towards teachers.

Bottom line, their work schedule ain't shit compared to many other professional  folks.

[BradInATX 9208]

What’s a family going to do with a $10,000 check from the government?

Two chicks at once, man

 

[Nivek 16946]

I think that there are lots of parents right now, across the political spectrum, who would like the option to use vouchers that could be used to fund education options for their children more in line with their personal beliefs regarding how their children should be educated in an environment less beholden to state and federal officials and the funding whip they deploy.
BuT tHeRe iS nO pLacE fOr LibErTariAn iDeaS dUrinG a pAndEmic!  

Much like the USPS, Republicans created the problems and then cried about them.

Same as it ever was.