Have you heard this clip from Obama?

[Zelda]

There is also a significant difference between taxing goods and services and subsidizing particular industries.

 

A tax is paid to the government by an individual or business. A subsidy is paid by the government to an individual or business. It is a redistribution of wealth, like tax credits and welfare.

 

Of course, the money for goverment subsidies comes from taxes.

 

I think that's slicing the bologna pretty thin. This kind of parsing of words is exactly why people are so suspicious of Obama's tax plan.

[teamturner]

Yes, we already have redistribution of wealth. But how far does it have to go??? And who decides how much someone "needs"??? That's the scary thing to me. I feel like we struggle financially but I'm sure there are those that would consider us wealthy. It just depends on what your standard is and whose standard are we going to be using? Look at the poor in the world and then look at the poor in America. There's a big difference. I just don't like to use the word fair because we cannot aim for fair. Yes, I agree that we should help those that need it. But I think the kind of help we offer to many are not the kind of help that gives them a leg up. Instead it creates a nanny state and we become a society that "expects" the government to take care of us. Again, I'm all for helping the poor and honestly I think the government should quit wasting money and learn to budget like the rest of us instead of increasing taxes. Since the Bush tax cuts, the government took in MORE in taxes rather than less. (someone posted a really great article on this last week) The problem is the government just keeps spending and it needs to stop.

 

And as for freedom, people in America should have the freedom to make as much income as they want. If there's going to be some sort of ceiling as to when you give up even more of your hard earned money then one could say that is not "fair". The child tax credit is returning ones earned money back to them. It wasn't the government's money in the first place and they've had the benefit of using it and earning interest on it. And I have 4 dc and I can tell you that whatever money we get back each year in tax returns gets put back into the market and helps pay peoples salaries. In other words, we spend it! :D

Edited October 27, 2008 by Michelle in TX
mispelled quit!

[Jean too]

I believe it is a transcript of the part on the you tube. I was not aware of the longer version. I can not find a transcript for the longer interview.

[Jugglin'5]

It all just makes me so very sad. Maybe I'm too tired to get angry right now, I don't know. But, as has been oft said, "those who do not learn from history are bound to repeat it."

 

-- most people under 30 may know what the "term" communism is, but they do not know what it is, or would mean for this country. Much of that has been left out of history books.

 

-- Intelligence can be a double edged sword... anyone remember the Carter years fondly? Carter was exceptionally smart (graduated in the top 10 of his USNA class), but that is what tended to make him indecisive with foreign policy. And his (along with the Democratic Congress) economic policies at that time were in many ways disastrous.

 

Bush, and the Republicans are not without a multitude of their own sins. The Republicans were given ample opportunities to push for significant reforms, but many in leadership became intoxicated with their new found "power" -- and instead of bringing reform, continued down the same corrupted path as those who led before.

 

I have never been as disturbed as I am today, as I look toward the next 2-4 years. While I know some who say, God will protect us (or my family), I'm reminded of a passage in the Bible which says, "rain falls on the just and unjust alike." The converse is also true... when famine and disease hit the country, the entire nation is affected. I just cannot shake this feeling that, if the policies and beliefs I'm beginning to hear so much about these last couple of weeks are put into place, many, many people are going to be hurt than anyone ever anticipated. And, it will be much more difficult to undo.

 

:iagree:

I am not afraid of my eternal future, but the near future frightens me, regardless of who is elected. I am hoping we are not passing a point of no return. Great nations have always gone through a rise and fall cycle, but I was hoping America would stay in its republic, rather than empire, phase a bit longer. I am one of those few conservatives who was against torture, The Patriot Act, etc. Guess whose hands all that stuff is going to be in now, guys? Then there is the looming specter of the return of the Fairness Doctrine - if that is re-instituted, guess who gets to interpret fairness? "Conservatives" are going to be hoisted on their own petards.:glare:

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

The child tax credit is returning ones earned money back to them. It wasn't the government's money in the first place and they've had the benefit of using it and earning interest on it. And I have 4 dc and I can tell you that whatever money we get back each year in tax returns gets put back into the market and helps pay peoples salaries. In other words, we spend it! :D

 

But what about childless folks? They earned money the hard way, too. Was their money the government's and not *my* money? Would they not put it to just as good a use? Wouldn't they also spend it? Or wouldn't they be as likely to do so as I would?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I believe it is a transcript of the part on the you tube. I was not aware of the longer version. I can not find a transcript for the longer interview.

 

It's ok, Jean. I just needed the whole thing to hear or see context, and momto7 posted the link for the whole audio version.

[lynn]

Well yeah, the credit is limited by income that's true. Though seriously I think most people making "$100,000 a year in many (but not) areas of the country, can afford the basis for their children if they live wisely. It's not just for the poor. I don't know that I think it's fair to give a credit without a determination of need.

 

But the deduction is for everyone, is it not? Or pretty much everyone? Honestly, DH and I don't need it. We don't. We didn't have children whom we could not afford to feed and educate. But we get it anyway. Yipee. Wealth redistributed to us:)

 

 

I agree with you and this is probably so off topic but I had to say it. I see many people of those who do "need" it waste it. My sister is one of them it's a free for all for 3 months, she gets her $3000 from the g'ment and last year the stimulus check, then it's gone until next April. When they did the stimulus package there were $400 water slides in yards of people you could tell were in "need". I know we can not tell people how to spend or save but geesh. . "Spreading the wealth" is an awful concept and besides isn't there a welfare system to help those in"need"

[teamturner]

But what about childless folks? They earned money the hard way, too. Was their money the government's and not *my* money? Would they not put it to just as good a use? Wouldn't they also spend it? Or wouldn't they be as likely to do so as I would?

 

Yet another good example of why we need tax reform. I've not studied all the various ideas but we all pay taxes for which we don't get the benefit. I'm paying taxes for the public schools, for example, and homeschooling. There's also the marriage tax benefit isn't there? Not helpful for the non-marrieds. We could make a list. But to say it's not right to return one's own money back to them, that seems odd to me. Now see I favor reducing everyones taxes, especially those on corporations. But I'm a trickle down economics kind of gal!

 

:leaving:

[Spy Car]

Yes, we already have redistribution of wealth. But how far does it have to go???

 

How about, far enough to make sure school children in the inner-city are able to attend schools where their educational opportunities at least slightly approximate the opportunities found in leafy suburbs?

 

That's what the "redistribution" discussion was about, and it is a worthy topic of conversation in my mind.

 

I think the kind of help we offer to many are not the kind of help that gives them a leg up. Instead it creates a nanny state and we become a society that "expects" the government to take care of us.

 

How is wanting to improve "poor or minority schools" anything more than meeting the minimum needs of our citizens? This isn't a "leg-up", it's just a basic duty of our government, and one that has not been fulfilled.

 

Again, I'm all for helping the poor....

 

If you are going to help the poor, you need to ensure they get a chance to have a descent education. This is what Barack Obama was talking about.

 

Bill

[Jugglin'5]

But what about childless folks? They earned money the hard way, too. Was their money the government's and not *my* money? Would they not put it to just as good a use? Wouldn't they also spend it? Or wouldn't they be as likely to do so as I would?

 

I agree with you here, Pam. I hate any kind of engineering or subsidizing this, that, or the other.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

We currently live (and have for a long time) under a graduated tax system. This means, very simply, that our government takes less money (percentage wise) from those who make less money and more money from those who make more. Some people who don't pay taxes at all, receive benefits under this system. I do not have a problem with that, I think it is government's obligation to help the poor, and the money has to come from somewhere.

I don't understand all the "fear" about "scary" plans to turn us into a "socialist nation." I don't see any difference in what is being proposed tax-wise by Obama than what we already have in place, just a little tweaking of the numbers.

If you really want to understand our tax system to strengthen your argument (or disprove mine), visit http://www.house.gov/jct/x-32-08.pdf Here's a sample, I've highlighted some in red to better emphasize my point:

"In order to determine taxable income, an individual reduces AGI by any personal

exemption deductions and either the applicable standard deduction or his or her itemized

deductions. ..... The deduction for personal exemptions is reduced or eliminated for taxpayers with incomes over certain thresholds, which are indexed annually for inflation.

 

 

 

Regular tax liability

 

 

 

To determine regular tax liability, a taxpayer generally must apply the tax rate schedules

(or the tax tables) to his or her regular taxable income. The rate schedules are broken into

several ranges of income, known as income brackets, and the marginal tax rate increases as a taxpayer's income increases. Separate rate schedules apply based on an individual's filing status. For 2008, the regular individual income tax rate schedules are as follows:

 

 

 

Table 1.–Federal Individual Income Tax Rates for 2008

 

 

 

If taxable income is: Then income tax equals:

 

 

Single Individuals

 

 

Not over $8,025................................................ 10% of the taxable income

Over $8,025 but not over $32,550...................$802.50 plus 15% of the excess over $8,025

Over $32,550 but not over $78,850................ $4,481.25 plus 25% of the excess over $32,550

Over $78,850 but not over $164,550.............. $16,056.25 plus 28% of the excess over $78,850

Over $164,550 but not over $357,700 ........... $40,052.25 plus 33% of the excess over $164,550

Over $357,700 ...................................................$103,791.75 plus 35% of the excess over $357,700

 

 

[Spy Car]

I agree with you here' date=' Pam. I hate any kind of engineering or subsidizing this, that, or the other.[/quote']

 

 

But do you claim exemptions for the 5 kids?

[Jugglin'5]

But do you claim exemptions for the 5 kids?

 

You betcha...it is still my money, because I do pay a significant amount of taxes, I am just sorry that other people can't get more of their money back...

 

ETA: I don't see the point in letting the govt. have any more of my money than is legally required, because they'll just send it to people not to grow stuff, or another state's pet project...

Edited October 27, 2008 by Jugglin'5
added...

[Melissa in FL]

 

 

My problem with the child tax credit (and honestly, I don't have that much of a problem with it - I'm surprised to find myself posting about it since I've not really given it much thought) is that everyone gets that credit even if they are wealthy and don't actually need it. If we only gave that credit to people who actually need the money to provide basic needs for their children, then everyone would have lower taxes (theoretically, with all things being equal) and that seems more "fair" to me then giving the credits to everyone regardless of need.

 

This isn't true. The Child Tax Credit begins to fade out at a certain level. This was the first year we were unable to take the whole tax credit based on our income. We still qualified for a portion, but not the whole thing. At a certain tax level you are unable to take any of it.

Melissa

[Elaine]

OK. I tried to watch the video, but John Stossel is so politically biased, I had to turn it off. When will news programs return to reporting news, not opinion? OK. Rant over.

 

 

Yes, when will they??

 

 

Now you see what we conservatives see. That's how I feel everytime I am forced to hear CNN or MSNBC or, the absolute worst, Katie Couric! Bias, bias, bias!

[Jugglin'5]

Yes, when will they??

 

 

Now you see what we conservatives see. That's how I feel everytime I am forced to hear CNN or MSNBC or, the absolute worst, Katie Couric! Bias, bias, bias!

 

 

:lol::lol::lol: So true. I find Stossel to be a breath of fresh air.

[asta]

How about, far enough to make sure school children in the inner-city are able to attend schools where their educational opportunities at least slightly approximate the opportunities found in leafy suburbs?

 

That's what the "redistribution" discussion was about, and it is a worthy topic of conversation in my mind.

 

"Atlanta's public schools are located in Dekalb and Fulton Counties, Georgia. Those districts spend $5,769 per pupil at public schools. Thirty-three independent primary schools in Atlanta charge less than that amount, and 17 of those charge less than $3,000. The median tuition is $3,312 (Table 9, p. 18).

 

Fifteen of Atlanta's 29 independent high schools charge less than the government schools' costs, and six charge less than $3,000. Median tuition is $5,600 (Table 10, p. 19)." Source

 

-- Atlanta's public schools are failing. FAILING. Apparently it has nothing whatsoever to do with funding, as those two counties encompass both inner city and what would be referred to by critics as "nice" areas.

 

How is wanting to improve "poor or minority schools" anything more than meeting the minimum needs of our citizens? This isn't a "leg-up", it's just a basic duty of our government, and one that has not been fulfilled.

 

Actually, public education is a function of local governments, not a national one.

 

If you are going to help the poor, you need to ensure they get a chance to have a descent education. This is what Barack Obama was talking about.

 

Bill

 

You meant "decent", right?

 

 

asta

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

Actually, public education is a function of local governments, not a national one.

 

 

If you have a federal mandate such as desegregation or No Child Left Behind, then do you think it unreasonable for the government to fund that mandate? Mandates of the federal government should be, I think, funded by the federal government.

 

You might disagree with that, and that's fine. I can see your side of it, too. But I would respectfully submit that requiring the federal government to either put up or shut up as regards funding their mandates is not exactly a radical notion. Not scary, certainly.

[sleepy]

"Atlanta's public schools are located in Dekalb and Fulton Counties, Georgia. Those districts spend $5,769 per pupil at public schools. Thirty-three independent primary schools in Atlanta charge less than that amount, and 17 of those charge less than $3,000. The median tuition is $3,312 (Table 9, p. 18).

 

Fifteen of Atlanta's 29 independent high schools charge less than the government schools' costs, and six charge less than $3,000. Median tuition is $5,600 (Table 10, p. 19)." Source

 

-- Atlanta's public schools are failing. FAILING. Apparently it has nothing whatsoever to do with funding, as those two counties encompass both inner city and what would be referred to by critics as "nice" areas.

 

 

:iagree: Yeah, this is a real source of pride for me... product of Atlanta public schools that I am. :tongue_smilie: Seriously, if 12 years of "education" at the hands of the Atlanta public school system doesn't convince one to homeschool their own children... I don't know what will.

[Jugglin'5]

"Atlanta's public schools are located in Dekalb and Fulton Counties, Georgia. Those districts spend $5,769 per pupil at public schools. Thirty-three independent primary schools in Atlanta charge less than that amount, and 17 of those charge less than $3,000. The median tuition is $3,312 (Table 9, p. 18).

 

Fifteen of Atlanta's 29 independent high schools charge less than the government schools' costs, and six charge less than $3,000. Median tuition is $5,600 (Table 10, p. 19)." Source

 

-- Atlanta's public schools are failing. FAILING. Apparently it has nothing whatsoever to do with funding, as those two counties encompass both inner city and what would be referred to by critics as "nice" areas.

 

 

 

Actually, public education is a function of local governments, not a national one.

 

 

 

You meant "decent", right?

 

 

asta

 

No, you have it all wrong, Asta. You must keep throwing good money after bad. It is the American Way.

:lol:

[laylamcb]

If you have a federal mandate such as desegregation or No Child Left Behind, then do you think it unreasonable for the government to fund that mandate? Mandates of the federal government should be, I think, funded by the federal government.

 

 

I really don't see why, Pam. I think it makes things MUCH more interesting when you mandate standards and then don't fund them appropriately, a la No Child Left Behind. Keeps those teacher types hoppin'!

 

;)

[Perry]

John Stossel had an interesting report about subsidies that blew me away. There are people living on farm land that are paid NOT TO FARM. They just receive monthly checks. The video shows a real estate agent selling a piece of property and telling the buyer about the great deal it is since you get this check in the mail from the government every month. WHAT??? It's really sad that we have this kind of government waste that no one in Washington will do anything about.

 

I didn't watch the report, but I wonder if he addressed the reasons for the set aside program. I'm not an expert on agriculture, but I do know that without it, there would be problems with overproduction and surplus, and major environmental consequences.

[Jugglin'5]

If you have a federal mandate such as desegregation or No Child Left Behind, then do you think it unreasonable for the government to fund that mandate? Mandates of the federal government should be, I think, funded by the federal government.

 

You might disagree with that, and that's fine. I can see your side of it, too. But I would respectfully submit that requiring the federal government to either put up or shut up as regards funding their mandates is not exactly a radical notion. Not scary, certainly.

 

Yes, it is scary when they want more of my already very stretched dollars to fund it. But I agree that the fed. govt. had no business to mandate those things in the first place. Like I said before, conservatives have been hoisted on their own petard here. I had an analogy about liquor cabinets, keys, big spenders, Democrats and Republicans but decided it wouldn't be prudent.:tongue_smilie:

[laylamcb]

No' date=' you have it all wrong, Asta. You must keep throwing good money after bad. It is the American Way.

:lol:[/quote']

 

Yes, Jugglin', dear, but we already threw all of what was left of our good money at the bailout. Our congressfolks are already raiding piggy banks to come up with the next stimulus package. :glare:

 

So in terms of financial sinkholes, the Atlanta school system is just SOL (not to be confused with Standards of Learning) and will have to wait its turn.

 

:crying: (All sarcasm aside, it breaks my heart to think of any kid trapped in a failing school....)

[Jenny in Atl]

"Atlanta's public schools are located in Dekalb and Fulton Counties, Georgia. Those districts spend $5,769 per pupil at public schools. Thirty-three independent primary schools in Atlanta charge less than that amount, and 17 of those charge less than $3,000. The median tuition is $3,312 (Table 9, p. 18).

 

Fifteen of Atlanta's 29 independent high schools charge less than the government schools' costs, and six charge less than $3,000. Median tuition is $5,600 (Table 10, p. 19)." Source

 

-- Atlanta's public schools are failing. FAILING. Apparently it has nothing whatsoever to do with funding, as those two counties encompass both inner city and what would be referred to by critics as "nice" areas.

 

 

 

Actually, public education is a function of local governments, not a national one.

 

 

 

You meant "decent", right?

 

 

asta

 

You will find no disagreement with me that Atlanta City public schools are awful, most of the money does not go to the kids but the upper level adm., but most all of the high schools which charge less than ~$6k are not what one would call good high schools either. Here is a run down of a number in the area. All of the best private high schools have tuition in the $10-14k range. Most on the list are k-6 (look for HS to gage the real cost of a good private education in Atl).

 

Marist School. 3790 Ashford Dunwoody Road N.E., Atlanta 30319. 770-457-7201, http://www.marist.com. Grades: 7-12. Enrollment: 1,032. Average tuition/range: $11,400.

 

Mohammed Schools of Atlanta. 735 Fayetteville Road S.E., Atlanta 30316. 404-378-4219, http://www.mohammedschoolsofatlanta.org/. Grades: PK-12. Enrollment: 280. Average tuition/range: $5,000-$8,500.

 

New Atlanta Jewish Community High School. 2012 Womack Road, Dunwoody 30338. 770-352-0018, http://www.najchs.org. Grades: 9-12. Enrollment: 116. Average tuition/range: $12,250.

 

Paideia School. 1509 S. Ponce de Leon Ave. N.E., Atlanta 30307. 404-377-3491, http://www.paideiaschool.org. Grades: PK-12. Enrollment: 865. Average tuition/range: $7,590-$13,695.

 

St. Pius X Catholic High School. 2674 Johnson Road N.E., Atlanta 30345. 404-636-3023, http://www.spx.org/. Grades: 9-12. Enrollment: 999. Average tuition/range: $7,300.

 

Yeshiva Atlanta. 3130 Raymond Drive, Atlanta 30340. 770-451-5299, http://www.yeshivaatlanta.org/. Grades: 9-12. Enrollment: 121. Average tuition/range: $13,250.

 

Westminster School. 1424 W. Paces Ferry Road N.W., Atlanta 30327. 404-355-8673, http://www.westminster.net. Grades: Pre-1-12. Enrollment: 1,739. Average tuition/range: $12,234-$14,392.

 

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/ultimateguide/2003/intown/private.html

[laylamcb]

Yes' date=' it is scary when they want more of my already very stretched dollars to fund it. But I agree that the fed. govt. had no business to mandate those things in the first place. Like I said before, conservatives have been hoisted on their own petard here. I had an analogy about liquor cabinets, keys, big spenders, Democrats and Republicans but decided it wouldn't be prudent.:tongue_smilie:[/quote']

 

Hoisted on their own petard: Beautiful. THAT was the very expression I was looking for the other day. Thanks, Jugglin'! :001_smile:

[elizabeth]

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/statepages/obamas-full-redistribution-quo.php

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Yes' date=' it is scary when they want more of my already very stretched dollars to fund it. But I agree that the fed. govt. had no business to mandate those things in the first place. Like I said before, conservatives have been hoisted on their own petard here. I had an analogy about liquor cabinets, keys, big spenders, Democrats and Republicans but decided it wouldn't be prudent.:tongue_smilie:[/quote']

 

Back to the my point, which is about the OP topic -- do you then think the government should not have mandated desegregation, but should have instead have left it to the state? And if you do think it should have been mandated, do you think it should have been funded somehow? Sen. Obama is arguing that it should have been, that equitability should have been attained at the time, even if it meant requiring the state to equitably allocate tax money to do so. Do you disagree with his argument?

Edited October 27, 2008 by Pam "SFSOM" in TN
left out part of my thought

[Stacia]

In Atlanta, there's also Pace Academy, tuition as follows:

Grades P1-5: $16,995

Grades 6-12: $19,565

 

For high school, tuition fees do not include books & other supplies like PE uniforms, additional supplies for some classes, etc...

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/statepages/obamas-full-redistribution-quo.php

 

And in case people don't like that site but would be willing to read the quote, I'll cut and paste:

 

"You know if you look at the victories and the failures of the Civil Rights movement and its litigation strategy in the Court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I would be okay.

 

But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical, it didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf and that hasn't shifted.

 

And one of the I think the tragedies of the Civil Rights movement was because the Civil Rights movement became so court focused I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change and in some ways we still suffer from that."

[Jugglin'5]

Yes, Jugglin', dear, but we already threw all of what was left of our good money at the bailout. Our congressfolks are already raiding piggy banks to come up with the next stimulus package. :glare:

 

So in terms of financial sinkholes, the Atlanta school system is just SOL (not to be confused with Standards of Learning) and will have to wait its turn.

 

:crying: (All sarcasm aside, it breaks my heart to think of any kid trapped in a failing school....)

 

Yeah, maybe I should have put all my very little all into gold after all....:001_huh:

 

I have a crazy notion about our school system. I think it should all be privatized. I believe private charities and businesses could do a much better job running the school systems. Parenst could choose specialized education, or a liberal arts education. Schools could be started that catered to ADD kids, or Aspie kids, or math geniuses, or artists. You could have Christian schools, secular schools, pagan schools, or whatever. We couldn't do much worse by low income kids than we are already doing. I think we could do much better, actually. Oh well, I can dream.

[Spy Car]

"Atlanta's public schools are located in Dekalb and Fulton Counties, Georgia. Those districts spend $5,769 per pupil at public schools. Thirty-three independent primary schools in Atlanta charge less than that amount, and 17 of those charge less than $3,000. The median tuition is $3,312 (Table 9, p. 18).

 

Fifteen of Atlanta's 29 independent high schools charge less than the government schools' costs, and six charge less than $3,000. Median tuition is $5,600 (Table 10, p. 19)." Source

 

-- Atlanta's public schools are failing. FAILING. Apparently it has nothing whatsoever to do with funding, as those two counties encompass both inner city and what would be referred to by critics as "nice" areas.

 

 

 

Actually, public education is a function of local governments, not a national one.

 

 

 

You meant "decent", right?

 

 

asta

 

Astra, even Alabama spends more than $5,769 per pupil. Only Mississippi spends less.

 

Barack Obama's point was that lawsuits brought in State Courts won legal victories in seeking a more even distribution of funding for all schools in a district. And that the US Supreme Court had not made those rulings.

 

And let's not pretend that equal resources have been allocated to "white" and "black" schools historically. Hence the need for those law-suits in State Courts. But the job of ensuring quality education is available to all is woefully incomplete.

 

It's not really controversial. His comments are just being "spun".

 

Bill

[caitlinsmom]

DH had a thing on TV that scared me enough that i had to go to bed... it was either that or stand there and puke. And I hate to puke.

 

I loved the here is a man we can have as president, but he'd never pass a background to be an FBI agent. Gee, lovely.

 

I have had nearly this same thought many a time.

[HollyinNNV]

His comments are just being "spun".

 

Bill

 

I'm sure that there are sites where his words are "spun." But, all I had to do was listen to the actual interview to be enlightened on his worldview. His words speak for themselves.

Holly

[nmoira]

 

You will find no disagreement with me that Atlanta City public schools are awful, most of the money does not go to the kids but the upper level adm., but most all of the high schools which charge less than ~$6k are not what one would call good high schools either. Here is a run down of a number in the area. All of the best private high schools have tuition in the $10-14k range. Most on the list are k-6 (look for HS to gage the real cost of a good private education in Atl).

Keep in mind too that private schools will rarely accept special needs kids or other resource intensive children.

[teamturner]

How about, far enough to make sure school children in the inner-city are able to attend schools where their educational opportunities at least slightly approximate the opportunities found in leafy suburbs?

 

That's what the "redistribution" discussion was about, and it is a worthy topic of conversation in my mind.

 

 

 

How is wanting to improve "poor or minority schools" anything more than meeting the minimum needs of our citizens? This isn't a "leg-up", it's just a basic duty of our government, and one that has not been fulfilled.

 

 

 

If you are going to help the poor, you need to ensure they get a chance to have a descent education. This is what Barack Obama was talking about.

 

Bill

 

Yes to all that you said. The education must improve in the inner city schools. But is increasing the taxes and giving the government free reign with spending the answer to this very complicated problem? When does government actually do a better job than say....anyone else? Anyone see how *quickly* the government is rebuilding New Orleans vs. volunteers?

 

I've heard that America spends more per student than any other country but I don't have a specific source so feel free to correct me. I just don't have faith in the government to fix the problems with the schools much less anything else. The NEA is not willing to make significant changes so what's the point of just keeping with the status quo and throwing more money at it?

 

As for helping people, much of the problems with the inner city schools is an overwhelming student population that only have a single parent struggling to keep the family going (no father helping at all). What if instead of throwing more money at the schools, we fund all the single moms so they can be at home and available to their kids to make sure they make the most of their education? I have no idea how much money that would take and I'm completely thinking off the top of my head. I really think that the root of the education problem is the breakdown of the family and the lack of parental supervision of the education. So I wish we could find a way to fix that problem first.

[Audrey]

 

And I can't help but feel "scary" is a code-word out of our dark past.

 

Bill

 

 

Your precise and careful wording was not lost on me. I believe it is indeed "code."

 

It's good to know which ones think like that. Sad, but good to know.

[unsinkable]

Your precise and careful wording was not lost on me. I believe it is indeed "code."

 

It's good to know which ones think like that. Sad, but good to know.

 

Can you two "explain" to "me" what you are talk"ing" about"?"

[Spy Car]

I'm sure that there are sites where his words are "spun." But, all I had to do was listen to the actual interview to be enlightened on his worldview. His words speak for themselves.

Holly

 

Did you listen to the whole interview, or even the portion that put it in "context", or just the selectively edited section?

 

Because the lifted segments out of context give a very distorted impression of what Barack Obama was talking about. It's a deliberate distortion by people who have no sense of decency.

 

It's just more Drudge Report style cheap, dishonorable, and dishonest smear-job politics.

 

But America's not buying the sleaze this time :patriot:

 

Bill

[Jugglin'5]

Can you two "explain" to "me" what you are talk"ing" about"?"

 

 

They are saying that some of us are secret racists talking in our secret code.:glare: Whatever.