This is something liberals don't want you to know.
If they wanted you to know it, the liberal media would mention it when they write the sob stories about the suffering public schools, or the thundering editorials demanding more "investment" in education.
I don't read the local papers, but I'm pretty sure that in hundreds of stories along those lines they never once have told you the fiscal reality.
Facts are to liberals as a cross is to a vampire.
They prefer to play on your emotions, and hope you don't find any facts on your own.
They could, of course, claim that the increased spending is the reason for improved education.
That would leave them in the position of having to explain why they have been decrying "cuts," but they are a nimble bunch.
More awkward would be explaining why 30 years of increased spending produced no improvement until true education reforms were put into place.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Robbery or recovery?
Gallup says 82 percent of Americans think it’s extremely or very important to “grow and expand the economy.”
That's not what the Obamacracy is doing. They are indulging in class warfare.
According to the same poll, 46 percent say it’s important to “reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor.”
That's less than half but higher than one would expect -- unless you accept the Obama solution, which is to make the rich poor as a means of equalizing.
Conservatives prefer to make the poor rich. That's what growth does. During the golden era of Reagan, all income segments saw rising incomes. Class warfare didn't work. Why worry about what someone else is earning, if you own paycheck is growing?
The question was poorly phrased because it left open how equality would be achieved.
Another question gives us more insight. Seven out of 10 people say it’s important to “increase equality of opportunity for people to get ahead.”
So, a vast majority of Americans think equal opportunity and growth are important. If so, they are conservatives.
Socialists think big government that robs the rich to pay the poor is more important than growth and prosperity.
Where they think the money for their scheme is going to come from is anyone's guess.
Maybe they actually believe the government's assumption under "static analysis" of tax proposals, which is that a 100 percent tax rate would produce a payment of 100 percent. In other words, people gladly would work all year and turn over their entire income to the government.
That's not what the Obamacracy is doing. They are indulging in class warfare.
According to the same poll, 46 percent say it’s important to “reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor.”
That's less than half but higher than one would expect -- unless you accept the Obama solution, which is to make the rich poor as a means of equalizing.
Conservatives prefer to make the poor rich. That's what growth does. During the golden era of Reagan, all income segments saw rising incomes. Class warfare didn't work. Why worry about what someone else is earning, if you own paycheck is growing?
The question was poorly phrased because it left open how equality would be achieved.
Another question gives us more insight. Seven out of 10 people say it’s important to “increase equality of opportunity for people to get ahead.”
So, a vast majority of Americans think equal opportunity and growth are important. If so, they are conservatives.
Socialists think big government that robs the rich to pay the poor is more important than growth and prosperity.
Where they think the money for their scheme is going to come from is anyone's guess.
Maybe they actually believe the government's assumption under "static analysis" of tax proposals, which is that a 100 percent tax rate would produce a payment of 100 percent. In other words, people gladly would work all year and turn over their entire income to the government.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Afterward
I'm reading a library book on my Kindle called After America: Get Ready for Armageddon. I recommend reading it, but not until Jan. 1. You don't want to spoil your Christmas.
It is pretty clear that on our present course, this country is doomed.
Sample: Within a few years, the interest on the debt we owe China alone -- which must be paid -- will be equal to the cost of the Chinese military.
We will be financing the war machine of the only other superpower, and it is not a friend of America.
How we got here is simple: We elected politicians who have no regard for this country or its future.
The current president castigated George W. Bush for the irresponsible spending during his term -- and then increased the spending dramatically.
It wasn't an "investment" in anything. It was money borrowed and wasted. Yet, it must be paid back.
Nothing has been done to spur growth. It has been growth in the private sector that has paid for the wasteful government spending of the past 50 years. If growth stops, the party is over.
Author Mark Steyn says it is over. He offers little hope that any course correction we make now will return us to prosperity, and there is no course correction in sight. The current argument is over how much MORE to go into debt, not how to reduce the spending.
The two major parties don't matter. The Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 produced the Contract with America, which promised to eliminate a number of useless government programs. By 2000 spending on those programs had increased 13 percent.
That is why we have the Tea Party movement. They alone seem to recognize what we face.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Pray for your children.
It is pretty clear that on our present course, this country is doomed.
Sample: Within a few years, the interest on the debt we owe China alone -- which must be paid -- will be equal to the cost of the Chinese military.
We will be financing the war machine of the only other superpower, and it is not a friend of America.
How we got here is simple: We elected politicians who have no regard for this country or its future.
The current president castigated George W. Bush for the irresponsible spending during his term -- and then increased the spending dramatically.
It wasn't an "investment" in anything. It was money borrowed and wasted. Yet, it must be paid back.
Nothing has been done to spur growth. It has been growth in the private sector that has paid for the wasteful government spending of the past 50 years. If growth stops, the party is over.
Author Mark Steyn says it is over. He offers little hope that any course correction we make now will return us to prosperity, and there is no course correction in sight. The current argument is over how much MORE to go into debt, not how to reduce the spending.
The two major parties don't matter. The Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 produced the Contract with America, which promised to eliminate a number of useless government programs. By 2000 spending on those programs had increased 13 percent.
That is why we have the Tea Party movement. They alone seem to recognize what we face.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Pray for your children.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Merit badges
Trying to follow the logic in the arguments against higher pay for good teachers can be perplexing.
For example, from a paper further south: "Some will receive merit pay, not all. Let's just hope it will be the right teachers and that the merit pay criteria has merit."
That was her conclusion after arguing, essentially, that there was no way to discern whether any teacher was better than another.
If that is the case, how can we tell whether the "right teachers" get merit pay?
Strangely enough, if you walk into any public school and ask someone on the faculty who are the best teachers, you probably will be given the names of several teachers. How do they know?
Years ago a professor at the University of Florida devised an assessment form that statistical testing showed was accurate. Still, the powerful special interests that protect the education monopoly managed to kill the merit pay system is use at the time, which was based on that assessment.
Teacher unions maintain that all teachers are created equal and do equal work and must get equal pay. Except that if they continue to live and breathe they should be paid more.
To return to the teacher's complaint that not all will receive merit pay.
All are the best?
Teaching is a job, not magic. We can tell who is doing a good job and those who do should be paid more, as they are in every other profession. Furthermore, those who are not doing the job should be terminated, as they are in any other profession where unions do not prevent good management.
For example, from a paper further south: "Some will receive merit pay, not all. Let's just hope it will be the right teachers and that the merit pay criteria has merit."
That was her conclusion after arguing, essentially, that there was no way to discern whether any teacher was better than another.
If that is the case, how can we tell whether the "right teachers" get merit pay?
Strangely enough, if you walk into any public school and ask someone on the faculty who are the best teachers, you probably will be given the names of several teachers. How do they know?
Years ago a professor at the University of Florida devised an assessment form that statistical testing showed was accurate. Still, the powerful special interests that protect the education monopoly managed to kill the merit pay system is use at the time, which was based on that assessment.
Teacher unions maintain that all teachers are created equal and do equal work and must get equal pay. Except that if they continue to live and breathe they should be paid more.
To return to the teacher's complaint that not all will receive merit pay.
All are the best?
Teaching is a job, not magic. We can tell who is doing a good job and those who do should be paid more, as they are in every other profession. Furthermore, those who are not doing the job should be terminated, as they are in any other profession where unions do not prevent good management.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Poor us
Liberals, bless their compassionate hearts, want to eliminate poverty.
Well, it is possible to increase or reduce the level of poverty, because the poverty level is defined by the government. Change the definition and you change the amount of poverty.
But it can't be eliminated. Poverty describes a relative condition. Those who have less than most others are in poverty.
Thus, if most of us made $100 million a year, those who made a mere million would be in poverty.
Heritage Foundation has written often on this subject and documented that people said to be in poverty tend to have nice homes, autos, TVs, computers and other amenities. Hardly comparable to the wretched souls lining the streets of Calcutta holding begging bowls and asking for alms.
To eliminate poverty would require everyone to earn the same income. While that might resonate in some college dorm discussion, even Karl Marx knew it would not happen, and it never did in Communist Russia. There were always the haves -- high-ranking Party members -- and the have-nots: Everyone else.
What conservatives want is for everyone to have an education, a job and equal opportunity to increase his standard to living to whatever level he desires.
That is possible, unlike the dreams of the liberal idealists and Utopians.
Well, it is possible to increase or reduce the level of poverty, because the poverty level is defined by the government. Change the definition and you change the amount of poverty.
But it can't be eliminated. Poverty describes a relative condition. Those who have less than most others are in poverty.
Thus, if most of us made $100 million a year, those who made a mere million would be in poverty.
Heritage Foundation has written often on this subject and documented that people said to be in poverty tend to have nice homes, autos, TVs, computers and other amenities. Hardly comparable to the wretched souls lining the streets of Calcutta holding begging bowls and asking for alms.
To eliminate poverty would require everyone to earn the same income. While that might resonate in some college dorm discussion, even Karl Marx knew it would not happen, and it never did in Communist Russia. There were always the haves -- high-ranking Party members -- and the have-nots: Everyone else.
What conservatives want is for everyone to have an education, a job and equal opportunity to increase his standard to living to whatever level he desires.
That is possible, unlike the dreams of the liberal idealists and Utopians.
Inconvenient truth
The Prophet Al Gore sayeth that the Great Global Warming shall bring forth storms and hurricanes in ever-increasing intensity, spreading a swath of devastation across the land.
We have now gone six years without a Cat Three hurricane -- the longest period in more than a century that the U.S. has avoided a Cat Three storm or greater.
There has been no global warming in years.
Another release of emails among alarmists gives further evidence how far they go to strike down and shout out any science that does not agree with their fanciful theories.
The public gets it. Global warming ranks among the least of concerns Americans have, polls show.
Nevertheless, alarmists are meeting again next week to try to fashion some way to extort billions from industrialized nations, to be spread around among the tyrants and despots they favor.
We have now gone six years without a Cat Three hurricane -- the longest period in more than a century that the U.S. has avoided a Cat Three storm or greater.
There has been no global warming in years.
Another release of emails among alarmists gives further evidence how far they go to strike down and shout out any science that does not agree with their fanciful theories.
The public gets it. Global warming ranks among the least of concerns Americans have, polls show.
Nevertheless, alarmists are meeting again next week to try to fashion some way to extort billions from industrialized nations, to be spread around among the tyrants and despots they favor.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Eek. The sea is rising!
Found this chart on a global warming alarmist site.
Note a couple of things. Over 120 years, the oceans rose 200 mm. That's less than 8 inches.
Also, that has occurred, according to this chart, at a fairly even pace, with half of it occurring long before autos and power plants were in large numbers.
It also followed "the little ice age," a cooling period when presumably the sea levels declined.
Those evil devices, as we know from alarmist hysteria, are to blame for the rapid warming of the planet they keep predicting, which is not taking place.
Barack Obama promised to halt the seas from rising, if elected. He also promised to increase employment.
Now, it turns out, those events will only happen during his second term.
Note a couple of things. Over 120 years, the oceans rose 200 mm. That's less than 8 inches.
Also, that has occurred, according to this chart, at a fairly even pace, with half of it occurring long before autos and power plants were in large numbers.
It also followed "the little ice age," a cooling period when presumably the sea levels declined.
Those evil devices, as we know from alarmist hysteria, are to blame for the rapid warming of the planet they keep predicting, which is not taking place.
Barack Obama promised to halt the seas from rising, if elected. He also promised to increase employment.
Now, it turns out, those events will only happen during his second term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
