Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: "Romney's 'Free Stuff' Speech Is a New Low", by Matt Taibbi.

Posted 1 year ago on July 14, 2012, 5:47 a.m. EST by shadz66 (17898)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

"Romney's 'Free Stuff' Speech Is a New Low".

by Matt Taibbi

(July 14, 2012 "Rolling Stone" / http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog )

Wow. If you live long enough, you’ll see some truly gross things in politics, but Mitt Romney’s work this past week "courting black support" was enough to turn even the strongest stomach.

Romney really showed us something in his luridly self-congratulating N.A.A.C.P. gambit, followed by the awesomely disgusting "free stuff" post-mortem speech he delivered the next night in front of friendlier audiences. The twin appearances revealed the candidate to be not merely unlikable, and not merely a fatuous, unoriginal hack of a politician, but also a genuinely repugnant human being, a grasping corporate hypocrite with so little feel for how to get along with people that he has to dream up elaborate schemes just to try to pander to the mob.

At first, it was hard to say what exactly Romney was thinking when he decided to address the N.A.A.C.P. He plunged into the speech with a creepy kamikaze smile and a rushed, weird (even for him) delivery, acting like someone proud of what a ballsily moronic dare he was attempting – like a high school kid mooning a squad car from the back of a school bus, or Peter McNeeley rushing face-first into the ring with Mike Tyson.

Now, it would have been one thing if Romney had put some real thought into this, if he had taken a day or two or three and really pondered the question of why 90% of black voters vote Democratic. That’s a serious question, and it would have been something if Romney had really attempted to bridge what has turned into a disturbingly ugly gap between most nonwhite Americans and political conservatives.

Without accepting blame or admitting guilt, he could have talked about the increasingly strident tone of the national debate over racially charged issues, and wondered aloud if politicians on both sides perhaps needed to find a new way to talk about these things without fearmongering, stereotyping, or trading accusations. He could have met the racial-tension issue head on, in other words, just by saying out loud the simple truth that white and nonwhite Americans, and Democrats and Republicans both, need to find more civilized ways to talk about their political concerns. If he had owned the problem, that would have been a big step forward, for all of us.

Of course, that’s expecting a lot. But even if he had just come up with a fresh, earnest new way to articulate the conservative argument, something beyond the usual sloganeering, that would have been really interesting.

But he didn’t. He came out with the same half-assed, platitude-filled stump speech he usually doles out at campaign stops, literally the same exact speech, only he added quotes from Frederick Douglass, Benjamin Hooks, and Dr. King. As he told a mostly white audience in Montana the next night: “I gave them the same speech I am giving you.” He seemed almost proud of the fact that he didn’t put any extra thought into what he was going to say in his first big address to black America. If some speeches feel like a verbal embrace, Romney’s felt like a stack of cardboard emptied from the bay of a dump truck.

So given that he didn’t say anything new in the speech besides what he always says – government is the enemy of all life forms, we can’t blame the rich, etc. – the true meaning of the speech had to be in the very fact that he gave it in the first place. So what was he trying to accomplish? Surely he didn’t think he was going to be getting converts by promising to repeal “Obamacare,” crush teachers’ unions, and “help those who need help.”

No, he delivered those lines like a man expecting, maybe even wanting to get booed. And sure enough, after the event, it was hard not to notice how gleefully Fox and Hannity and the like played and replayed the video of the Mittster gamely dying on the cross of racial outreach. The rhetorical theme on those outlets was something like, “This is what happens when you promote the cause of free enterprise and self-sufficiency in front of the N.A.A.C.P.!” As Charles Blow in the New York Times put it:

The speech sounded like it was designed not for the audience in the room, but for those in Republican living rooms.

It sounded as though he wanted to show force and fearlessness: “Look folks, I walked into hostile territory unafraid and unbowed.” This was his version of a Daniel in the lions’ den speech.

Talk tough. Get heckled and booed for telling the truth to those who don’t want to hear it. Take the president down a couple of pegs in front of the most loyal segment of his supporters…

So Romney did that, and then the next night he went to Montana and he discussed the experience in front of a friendlier audience. And this is what he said:

When I mentioned I am going to get rid of Obamacare they weren’t happy, I didn’t get the same response. That’s O.K, I want people to know what I stand for and if I don’t stand for what they want, go vote for someone else, that’s just fine…

But I hope people understand this, your friends who like Obamacare, you remind them of this, if they want more stuff from government tell them to go vote for the other guy — more free stuff.

So now this is the message: I tried to reason with the blacks, I really did, but it turns out they just want a free lunch.

How’s that for bridging the racial divide? Time to wake up the Nobel committee in Oslo!

As far as free lunches go, we of course just witnessed the biggest government handout in history, one that Romney himself endorsed. Four and a half trillion dollars in bailout money already disbursed, trillions more still at risk in guarantees and loans, sixteen trillion dollars in emergency lending from the Federal Reserve, two trillion in quantitative easing, etc. etc. All of this money went to Romney’s pals in the Wall Street banks that for years helped Romney take over companies with mountains of borrowed cash. Now, after these banks crashed, executives at those same firms used those public funds to pay themselves massive salaries, which is exactly the opposite of “helping those who need help,” if you’re keeping score.

That set of facts alone made the “free stuff” speech shockingly offensive. But the problem isn’t just that Romney’s wrong, and a hypocrite, and cynically furthering dangerous and irresponsible stereotypes in order to advance some harebrained electoral ploy involving white conservative voters. What makes it gross is the way he did it.

Romney can’t even be mean with any honesty. Even when he’s pandering to viciousness, ignorance and racism, it comes across like a scaly calculation. A guy who feels like he has to take a dump on the N.A.A.C.P. in Houston in order to connect with frustrated white yahoos everywhere else is a guy who has absolutely no social instincts at all. Someone like Jesse Helms at least had a genuine emotional connection with his crazy-mean-stupid audiences. But Mitt Romney has to think his way to the lowest common denominator, which is somehow so much worse.

Most presidents have something under the hood – wit, warmth, approachability, something. Even the most liberal football fan could enjoy watching an NFL game with George Bush. And even a Klansman probably would have found some of LBJ’s jokes funny. The biggest office in the world requires someone who buzzes with enough personality to fill the job, and most of them have it.

But Romney doesn’t buzz with anything. His vision of humanity is just a million tons of meat floating around in a sea of base calculations. He’s like a teenager who stays up all night thinking of a way to impress the prom queen, and what he comes up with is kicking a kid in a wheelchair. Instincts like those are probably what made him a great leveraged buyout specialist, but in a public figure? Man, is he a disaster. It’s really incredible theater, watching the Republicans talk themselves into this guy.

~

fiat lux ...

~

Copyright ©2012 Rolling Stone

[Article copied verbatim under "Fair Use" from : http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/romneys-free-stuff-speech-is-a-new-low-20120713 ]

294 Comments

294 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I think Romney was brilliant to address the NAACP audience. The real question should be why did Obama NOT did speak to them last election or this time.

The black vote is historically taken for granted by both parties most of the time. Republicans have little to gain by appealing to black voters, but neither do Democrats.

Democrats have the black vote tied up and don’t have to work for it, but decades of voting for Democratic politicians have gained black voters what, exactly? Poverty and unemployment rates permanently above the national average? Educational achievement below just about every other group? Ten percent of black men in the grip of the criminal justice system? Democrats like to blame these outcomes on the malice of GOP politicians, but Democratic policies have failed to do anything to bring blacks into the American dream.

In wide areas of policy, black interests aren’t aligned with Democratic Party interests. Consider education. Most blacks polled would love for their children to have access to better schools, and they consider vouchers a good way to do that. Democrats profess love for public education, though you’ll find few in Washington who can afford it who don’t send their kids to private schools. Following the lead of a constituency much more important to them than blacks – teachers’ unions – they steadfastly oppose a policy that black parents desperately want.

There is also a conservative entrepreneurial spirit in black America that is stifled by Democratic policy. The black community is socially conservative as well; same-sex marriage isn’t an issue that plays well with them.

In a close campaign, Mitt Romney has a large incentive to go to the NAACP and speak to black America, not white racists. He doesn’t need to win a majority of blacks anywhere, just push up the GOP share by a percent or two. Conservative blacks, and there are a lot of them, are a more important audience to Romney

It’s inconceivable to some on the left that a black person could ever vote Republican, or that Republicans could ever have an interest in black voters. They consider black conservatives who vote Republican to be traitors, “Oreo cookies,” ingrates to the benevolent masters of the great Democratic plantation. A Republican who addresses a black audience is supposed to know that, so must have an ulterior motive for going there.

In reality, what started out with boos when he mentioned "Obamacare", which I believe were planned, ended with applause and a standing ovation at the end.

[-] 7 points by francismjenkins (3713) 1 year ago

With all due respect, this entire post sort of presumes that our two party duopoly is actually representative of our population, when in fact it only represents a fraction of 1% of our population. The answer isn't for republicans to find ways to attract African Americans, but rather, we (as a society) must find better ways to manage our affairs (since the current political order does not serve the vast majority of people).

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

You do know that he brought his own cheering section who were not NAACP members to applaud on cue?

People who vote for those who go out of their way to suppress their votes and oppose their issues aren't Oreos, they are stupid, which is more prevalent among low income, older white men, white women married to older white men, southerner's etc. Some people call this exceptionalism.

Are there stupid black people? Sure, Romney brought them with him. The numbers were small.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I don't know how "stupid" those blacks on the GOP gravy train are. There could be a career or at least employment during elections for such people.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Do you think they are being bought?

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Like any group of people I am sure there are many motivations. No doubt career opportunities in politics and the media exist for African Americans who work in tandem with white supremacists against the interests of the vast majority of their own communities. And withon any one person there could be several motivations for the same behavior, some altruistic and some strictly selfish.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

People are complex and therefore the world.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

The times they are a changing!

Black folks are waking up and pretty much done living on the Democrat Plantation.

They are tired of being given enough to get by and forced to go to schools with tenured union teachers where they graduate High School with a second grade reading level. They want school choice, charter schools, and vouchers.

They are tired of having the entrepreneurial ambitions blocked by regulations that require you to have a lawyer, and accountant, and a compliance officer to open a lemon aide stand or sell cookies.

They are tired of being blocked by Democrap policies like Dodd-Frank that make it impossible for a bank to give them a loan because their credit risk is too high even though the idea for a business is sound.

Many of them are moving out of the ghetto and becoming successful capitalists. They days of following a party like sheep because they might get a hand out are over. They can see beyond the plantation fence. They are movin on up to the East side and telling the government "No thank you, I don't need your policies that attempt to run and control my life because you suck at it."

[-] 3 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 1 year ago

If I were to ever have children, I'd be sure that they went to a public School.

I believe that public schools offer something more than mental education, but rather public schools offer good social education. I believe voucher programs would contribute more to the stratification and inequality that our nation already engenders because of capitalism. TO put it bluntly, public schools allow individuals to interact with kids from other social economic backgrounds, and voucher programs, inevitably leading to the proliferation of private schools, would role back Brown vs Board of education.

I believe your premise, that if children had the best learning environments, IE, school supplies, peers and instructors, they would be more successful, is flawed. It is kinda analogous to the belief that if you make drugs illegal that you can force people to stop using them. Kids do what kids want to do, and no amount of social engineering is going to change that.

Segregated primary schooling, as far as I can surmise, would have a more negative impact on society. The lack of Intelligence in America is more of a cultural problem than an institutional one.

Public schools provide the socialization skills. Parents provide the drive for children to learn in any environment they are in.

[-] 3 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

In Newark NJ the public school system spends more than $21,000 per pupil. The public school graduation rate in that town is 25.8 percent.

The Catholic school tuition rate in that same town is $8,475 or one third the cost. They have a 99% graduation rate.

Now I am an atheist however if I lived in that town and had the money I would send my kids to the Catholic school. Now if we allowed folks in that town to take a voucher for $8,475 and use it at St Michael's the tax payers would save $15,475 and the children would have a 99% chance of graduation with a 12th grade reading level.

It's not social engineering, it is common sense.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

The kids in the Catholic schools live in homes with caring and capable parents. They have books and quiet for study and someone who says "I want to see your homework." Not rocket science. If you can pick your students you can get great results.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Actually many of the Charter schools and some private schools have a lottery system to get in. Those that did not get in had the same home environment and suffered in the public school system.

In any case if most inner city parents want to send their kids to charter and/or private schools. More charter schools and voucher system would enable that. Why would you want to stop them?

Why would you want to hold them back?

Do you believe the these opportunities should only be for rich kids or kids with parents that want to work four jobs?

[-] 3 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

And these wonderful schools exclude or kick out problem kids. Where then do these kids go? One guess.

http://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/10/now-it-can-be-told-the-secrets-to-success-and-riches/

Common Core Standards: A Boon for Edu-BizEmergency Manager in Muskegon Heights Picks Charter Corporation » Now It Can Be Told! The Secrets to Success and Riches July 10, 2012 // 42 Bruce Baker has distilled the qualities of successful charter schools. In this post, Baker looks at the reasons that some NYC charter schools succeed.

The reason for creating charters in the late 1980s was that they would have the freedom to try new ideas and thereby to help public schools improve.

As the charters tried new things, public schools would learn from their experience and would improve.

The charters were supposed to gain freedom from most state regulation in exchange for their willingness to be held accountable.

After twenty years of charter school experimentation, we now have a pretty solid idea of “what works.”

The same things that “work” in charter schools should also work in public schools.

We should not waste time. Let’s learn from the charters so all schools can be successful schools.

First, the best charters spend considerably more money so that they can provide additional services and tutoring. Some spend thousands more per student.

That is an important lesson. Every public school that wants to see dramatic improvement should get extra funding.

Second, the charters are free of burdensome regulation by the states and districts.

That’s an important finding. The states and districts should immediately give public schools the same regulatory relief now available to charters.

Third, the charters do not accept the same proportion of students with special needs or students who are English language learners.

Uh-oh. That’s a hard one. Public schools are required by state and federal laws to have their doors open to all students. I don’t think that public schools can follow the charter model here. If public schools didn’t take these students, where would they go?

Fourth, the charters have even more money to spend because of the small proportion of children with disabilities and English language learners; this is a budget plus. But again, I don’t think public schools can maximize their dollars by excluding the most expensive-to-educate kids. So that’s another no-go.

Fifth, the charters make their own disciplinary rules and can toss out kids who misbehave by their rules, like bringing chips to school or not looking in the eyes of the teacher, or speaking up when they are supposed to walk in silence. But if public schools kicked out kids for minor infractions, where would they go? To another public school.

Sixth, the charters have longer school days, longer school weeks, and a longer school year. More time to teach, more time to get ready for state tests. Public schools can do that too, unless those pesky unions insist on being paid more for working longer hours.

Seventh, charters keep their costs low by encouraging or tolerating or not minding constant turnover among the teachers. That way, the bulk of teachers are in year one or two, at the bottom of the salary scale, and they are more malleable. Senior teachers cost more, and have ideas of their own. But public schools will have a hard time learning this lesson because senior teachers have job rights. Of course, with the current move on to eliminate seniority and tenure, even public schools will soon be dealing mainly with inexperienced and malleable teachers in their first year. Who will train the new teachers if the senior teachers have left? Well, that’a a problem we will deal with some other time. No one has time to think about that now.

But one thing seems clear: If public schools get more money; if they can be freed of regulations, if they can exclude the most challenging students, if they have longer hours, if they have constant teacher turnover to save money, if they can keep out or push out the students who don’t obey or who can’t pass the tests, then they too will get fabulous results.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Great discussion. Great information. Any idea why we spend money for a Federal Education Department. Epic Fail. I keep thinking we need to terminate the department unless we just keep them to issue student loans at 1-2% interest (as an investment in our future since money is created out of thin air anyway).

Of course expections is one of the things you are talking about. I kind of repect the German system: at the middle school level students choose between a track for a technical/apprentice career, a high school degree and termiantion of education, and a college prep high school education.

I guess this is goals based counciling. Charter Schools must have student goals as well.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Different cultures - same practices. Business is very much the same everywhere.

Just like here it is not always what you know - it is more often who you know.


[-] 1 points by Middleaged (928) 1 minute ago

Not sure how to verify this. I know a bit about Korea. But recently met a Chinese American who lives and works in the US for the last 20 years. He is from one of the big Cities on the Coast of China.

He says in Korea the big corporations have a kind of oligopoly due to their connections with government/political parties. The big names you know from South Korea are oligopolies. But it is kind of normal in the sense that overseas you have to pay some fees or bribes to get business done. We have laws against bribery, but it doesn't change the way the world works. In Korea relationships are very important and "Gifts" are very important.

So maybe ... in South Korea success is not mainly competition, but being connected. Of course in the world market place, I like Samsung and Hyundai. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

First - Public schools in Newark spend nearly three times the $ per pupil as private schools in the same town. $22,300 vs $8,200

Second I agree

Third, Charter schools accept kids by lottery so they have to accept who is picked and yes they have special needs kids.

Fourth is the same as third

Fifth I went to a Catholic school and I can tell you one thing that is different that makes it work: discipline. You wear a uniform, you walk two by two to the assembly, you don't dare talk back nastily, you don't dare write on the wall. The kick out ratio is low because the discipline starts on day one. There is no more kick out than there is in public schools. Som public schools have a hire suspension rate.

Also, there are charter schools and private schools that specifically deal with children with behavioral issues.

Sixth Public schools do not have longer schools days because of teacher unions.

Seventh - Some charter schools pay their teachers over $100,000 and there is very little turnover. There is no tenure so teachers make sure they perform to earn their $100K.

But one thing is clear

Giving inner city parents the same school choice that rich folks have is worth trying. Vouchers and charter schools are the way to get there. Currently so many people want to get their children into charter schools and so few schools that they have annual lotteries. That is horrific to watch.

Imagine yourself an enthusiastic, energetic, motivated young sixth grade student sitting there hoping they will call your name. Those that do not get picked in the lottery walk away with tear filled eyes. Tears caused by the knowledge that they are heading back to the shit hole called the public school.

Let's set it up so that every child a chance and end the need for a lottery system.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Great discussion. Great information.

I've lived in Asia and seen students very well behaved. They have additional activities in addition like English Tutor/English Classes, Piano or music classes, martial arts, and national competitions for students. The parents work long hours to make sure the kids have additional classes or English tutoring, or prep for college entrance exams.

I always felt coworkers from Catholic schools were more competitive and better prepared than I was. I wished I had that kind of structure and discipline growing up.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

http://www.nytimes.com/schoolbook/2012/06/19/charter-schools-face-opposition-to-plan-for-special-needs-children/

Darcy McCusker • June 19, 2012, 11:09 PM I think you are overestimating the ability of charter schools with regards to special education students.

First, it's well known that charters have fewer special education students to start with. Citywide, 16% of students have IEPs, which does include D75 schools. Only 11% of students at charters have IEPs. Perhaps that is because they currently have fewer services, particularly at the more restrictive end of the spectrum, exactly the problem this bill tends to correct.

As a result of having fewer services at the more restrictive end of the spectrum, charters serve students who have more mild disabilities. If a student needs a self contained class that they cannot receive at a charter school, they will leave and go to the public school where they can get it. As a special education teacher, I know that as a child moves down the spectrum, each step closer to mainstreaming requires a little less work. The amount of work to move a child from self-contained to CTT is exponential more than the work to move a child from CTT to SETTS or from SETTS to related services only. Since they serve less severe students, it requires less effort to move students more effectively. To say that ability to move students makes them “far superior” to public schools is an equivocation that misrepresents the differences between the populations served by public and charter schools.

Giving charters a greater ability to provide special education services is an admirable thing, but it will not immediately or dramatically improve outcomes for special education students. I think that if charters had the same special education services AND student populations as public schools, they would get essentially the same results.

Parents will look for the safest place for their kids. Schools that exclude the most problematic kids (charter and private schools) will be attractive to many parents and kids. This also explains the popularity of Catholic Schools. If your kid is there and a kid in her class is a disciplinary problem you know that that problem kid will be gone. I raised two kids in the public school system and then two step children. We did everything we could to get our kids into the schools with the least problems of course. The fact that many public schools suck is not the fault of teachers. My daughter teaches in a school in the South Bronx. If she wants supplies she buys them or begs a teacher in the charter school that's in the same building to do her a favor, because these charter school teachers have more of everything than they need. Strange coincidence....

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Are you aware of the absolute abject poverty in Newark? WTF? Try a wealthy town in NJ, please, then make your comparison.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I actually care more about helping the poor folks in Newark than I care about helping the folks in a wealthy town.

In Somerset county NJ, the richest county in NJ, they spend on average $12,300 per pupil. The "poor" town of Newark gets more state and federal funding and spends $23,500 per pupil. Those folks in Newark are not getting what we are paying for.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

There are deep societal issues that cause the problems in the education systems of places like Newark and Plainfield. Money can only go so far. In Somerset County few people send their kids to private schools because the public schools are so good.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Actually some of the best private schools in the country are in Somerset county.

The Pingry School, Gill St Bernard, Cedar Hill Prep, The Waldorf School, Rutgers Preparatory, Immaculata High School, Mt St Mary Academy High School, The Albrook School, Mendham Country School, Far Hills Country Day School, and about a dozen of the best Montessori schools.

A second point is that private schools in Newark are doing a better job than public schools in Somerset county.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

The 1% from all over NJ go to those schools.

"Somerset County is the ninth-wealthiest county in the United States by per capita income and the highest in New Jersey." - Wikipedia.

Newark, NJ: Estimated per capita income in 2009: $17,396 - from www.city-data.com.

You simply cannot compare the two places. It is ridiculous.

The private schools in Newark are largely made of up the children of Rutgers' professors and the wealthy that live in surrounding wealthy towns such as Maplewood, Millburn, etc.

[-] 2 points by 2percent (0) 1 year ago

I am not a social scientist or researcher, but I believe the following ideas are true.

1) Education comes from home! If parents place an emphasis on learning, by makes sure the kids go to school, checks their homework, attends parent/teacher conferences, there is a good chance of educating children.

2) Take the teachers from the best high schools with the best academic achievement and the highest percentage of kids going to college and change the teaching staff with the lowest ranking high school. After 4 to 6 years, check the the results and see if the achievement results and you will not see a statistical difference.

3) More money for the schools will not solve the problem. This is problem created in the home.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

What about an apprenticeship program for teachers? They get their education - and as part of the education they work with the best most successful in the field of teaching and carry on the methods that are proven. They are now the next generation of successful teachers and they can continue to improve the process.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

http://www.bloomberg.com/podcasts/bloomberg-edu/

Levin, Cavanagh, Ripley on Canada’s Education System (Audio)

Jul 13, 2012

Ben Levin, Ontario's former deputy minister of education and a University of Toronto professor of education leadership and policy, Sean Cavanagh, assistant editor for "Education Week," and Amanda Ripley, journalist and author, discuss education equity, system-wide reforms and funding across Canada's school districts. They talk with Jane Williams on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg EDU."

Download

Quite interesting. They respect teachers and the teachers have strong unions. People in the top of college classes compete to become public school teachers.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Thanks for the link - I bookmarked it and am listening to the 1st segment.

Yes our educational system like our health car system needs help - lots of help.

Yes - I think it is wise to study successes around the world - Canada being right next door and being similar in many ways to the USA is a very good case to study.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

And, what happens in the home is in large part a function of our society.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

And a current major failure - home has become a place to fall over between work hours and little more.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

True.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Another reason to - Keep-on Keeping-on.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

There is a lot of truth in what you are saying here. What's needed is something quite drastic and revolutionary - a cultural revolution - and formal education has to be made demonstrably the road to a good life and also to have intrinsic value beyond that.

IN NYC for example it's shown that whites with criminal records have better opportunities to get jobs than blacks with eq

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

A lack of effort at home clearly can derail an education. We do have to address those real problems.

That is not the end of it though. There are other problems that must be addressed as well. More money doesn't have to be the solution. But I wouldn't exclude more money as a possible requirement. If we did that we would be saying that our concern is about spending money, not educating children.

Is that what you are concerned about. Is it that you just don't want to spend more money? Thats ok we got a whole party that takes that position. Certainly limiting the blame to "the home" removes the need to spend more.

Or do you want to see people educated.

Y'know it costs more money when people are uneducated, Does that make you feel better about spending to educate people.

Peace

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I think progressives make a grave error in dismissing the influence of home and neighborhood on children's educational outcomes as well as the influence of a fatalistic expectation and self expectation of failure in school and in life. The situation is very complex, it will take among other things money to remedy.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

progressives I know do not dismiss the influence of home and neighborhood. I think anyone who dismisses that side of things make a grave mistake.

I think anyone who dismisses the other areas also make a grave mistake.

Peace

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

The solution is not only in the schools unless the schools become boarding schools. I think we agree. I am reminded of an uproar over Cuba when early in their revolution they instituted sleep in schools for children of the poor. Why? To rescue them and help them become functioning members of the hoped for revolutionary society.

http://www.havanatimes.org/?p=12491

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

You are the one suggested comparing the two places not me.

I was comparing public and private schools in Newark. That is, in the same town.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

You were the one who brought up Somerset County. Not I. You can't compare public and private schools in Newark anyway, completely different populations.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Either you have an issue with your memory or someone is posting and pretending to be you.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (6852) 2 hours ago

"Are you aware of the absolute abject poverty in Newark? WTF? Try a wealthy town in NJ, please, then make your comparison."

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Not appreciating your insults. I don't have time to go back over this now. I have to go somewhere and I'm not interested in junior high nonsense. You were comparing public and private schools in Newark. I thought you should try to do the same thing in a wealthier area. Then you compared Newark to Somerset, but truthfully, my mind's getting fuzzy now and I gotta go. Go ahead and post all the insults you want.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Everyone should read flip's comment below. Thanks, flip. Great job.

[-] 1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

he is a moron - don't bother with him - here is some info about charter schools and waiting for superman! · WFS says that lack of money is not the problem in education. Yet the exclusive charter schools featured in the film receive large private subsidies. Two-thirds of Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children’s Zone funding comes from private sources, effectively making it a highly resourced private school. Promise Academy, the Harlem Children’s Zone charter school, is in many ways an excellent school, but it is dishonest for the filmmakers to say nothing about the funds it took to create it and the extensive social supports including free medical care and counseling provided by the Harlem Children’s Zone.

In New Jersey, where court decisions mandated similar programs, such as high quality pre-Kindergarten classes and extended school days and social services in the poorest urban districts, achievement and graduation rates increased while gaps started to close. But public funding for those programs is now being cut and progress is being eroded. Money matters! Of course, money will not solve all problems (because the problems are more systemic than the resources of any given school) -- but the off-handed rejection of a discussion of resources is misleading.

· WFS implies that testing is a reasonable way to assess student progress. The debate of “how to raise test scores” strangles and distorts strong education. Most test score differences stubbornly continue to reflect parental income and neighborhood/zip codes, not what schools do. As opportunity, health and family wealth increase, so do test scores.

This is not the fault of schools but the inaccuracy, and the internal bias, in the tests themselves. Moreover, the tests are too narrow (on only certain subjects with only certain measurement tools). When schools focus exclusively on boosting scores on standardized tests, they reduce teachers to test-prep clerks, ignore important subject areas and critical thinking skills, dumb down the curriculum and leave children less prepared for the future. We need much more authentic assessment to know if schools are doing well and to help them improve.

· WFS ignores overall problems of poverty. Schools must be made into sites of opportunity, not places for the rejection and failure of millions of African American, Chicano Latino, Native American, and immigrant students. But schools and teachers take the blame for huge social inequities in housing, health care, and income.

Income disparities between the richest and poorest in US society have reached record levels between 1970 and today. Poor communities suffer extensive traumas and dislocations. Homelessness, the exploitation of immigrants, and the closing of community health and counseling clinics, are all factors that penetrate our school communities. Solutions that punish schools without addressing these conditions only increase the marginalization of poor children.

· WFS says teachers’ unions are the problem. Of course unions need to be improved -- more transparent, more accountable, more democratic and participatory -- but before teachers unionized, the disparity in pay between men and women was disgraceful and the arbitrary power of school boards to dismiss teachers or raise class size without any resistance was endemic.

Unions have historically played leading roles in improving public education, and most nations with strong public educational systems have strong teacher unions.

In the Finnish education system, much cited in the film as the best in the world, teachers are -- gasp! -- unionized and granted tenure, and families benefit from a cradle-to-grave social welfare system that includes universal daycare, preschool and healthcare, all of which are proven to help children achieve better results in school. In fact, even student teachers have a union in Finland and, overall, nearly 90% of the Finnish labor force is unionized.

The demonization of unions ignores the real evidence.

· WFS says teacher education is useless. The movie touts the benefits of fast track and direct entry to teaching programs like Teach for America, but the country with the highest achieving students, Finland, also has highly educated teachers.

A 1970 reform of Finland’s education system mandated that all teachers above the kindergarten level have at least a master’s degree. Today that country’s students have the highest math and science literacy, as measured by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), of all the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries.

· WFS decries tenure as a drag on teacher improvement. Tenured teachers cannot be fired without due process and a good reason: they can’t be fired because the boss wants to hire his cousin, or because the teacher is gay (or black or...), or because they take an unpopular position on a public issue outside of school.

A recent survey found that most principals agreed that they had the authority to fire a teacher if they needed to. It is interesting to note that when teachers are evaluated through a union-sanctioned peer process, more teachers are put into retraining programs and dismissed than through administration-only review programs. Overwhelmingly teachers want students to have outstanding and positive experiences in schools.

· WFS says charter schools allow choice and better educational innovation. Charters were first proposed by the teachers’ unions to allow committed parents and teachers to create schools that were free of administrative bureaucracy and open to experimentation and innovation, and some excellent charters have set examples. But thousands of hustlers and snake oil salesmen have also jumped in. While teacher unions are vilified in the film, there is no mention of charter corruption or profiteering. A recent national study by CREDO, The Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford, concludes that only 17% of charter schools have better test scores than traditional public schools, 46% had gains that were no different than their public counterparts, and 37% were significantly worse.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Your suggestion to look at wealthy areas really has no relevance to my point. I misunderstood what you meant by "make a comparison" however I was foolish for following you down that path in the first place.

My original point was that IN NEWARK, many black folks want to send their kids to PRIVATE and CHARTER schools. The teachers unions are spending millions trying to block the charter schools and voucher programs. The Democrat party is accepting their money and pandering to their wants. The National Education Association (NEA) is the single largest campaign contributor in the United States.

Which goes back to my earlier point which was I understand why Romney appeared ant the NAACP event. He is not taking them for granted and is speaking to their wants.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

You missed my point completely.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Let's go to the slow motion replay...

You said:

"Try a wealthy town in NJ, please, then make your comparison."

So I made a comparison between a wealthy area and Newark.

To which you replied:

"Education is very complicated. But that Somerset County and Newark are not comparable is not."

Conclusion:

I did what you asked and you tell me what I did was wrong.

Sidebar: I hope you are not a teacher!

[-] 1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

did you see waiting for superman - send this to your fat (really fat) friend in the governors house -
· WFS says that lack of money is not the problem in education. Yet the exclusive charter schools featured in the film receive large private subsidies. Two-thirds of Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children’s Zone funding comes from private sources, effectively making it a highly resourced private school. Promise Academy, the Harlem Children’s Zone charter school, is in many ways an excellent school, but it is dishonest for the filmmakers to say nothing about the funds it took to create it and the extensive social supports including free medical care and counseling provided by the Harlem Children’s Zone.

In New Jersey, where court decisions mandated similar programs, such as high quality pre-Kindergarten classes and extended school days and social services in the poorest urban districts, achievement and graduation rates increased while gaps started to close. But public funding for those programs is now being cut and progress is being eroded. Money matters! Of course, money will not solve all problems (because the problems are more systemic than the resources of any given school) -- but the off-handed rejection of a discussion of resources is misleading.

· WFS implies that testing is a reasonable way to assess student progress. The debate of “how to raise test scores” strangles and distorts strong education. Most test score differences stubbornly continue to reflect parental income and neighborhood/zip codes, not what schools do. As opportunity, health and family wealth increase, so do test scores.

This is not the fault of schools but the inaccuracy, and the internal bias, in the tests themselves. Moreover, the tests are too narrow (on only certain subjects with only certain measurement tools). When schools focus exclusively on boosting scores on standardized tests, they reduce teachers to test-prep clerks, ignore important subject areas and critical thinking skills, dumb down the curriculum and leave children less prepared for the future. We need much more authentic assessment to know if schools are doing well and to help them improve.

· WFS ignores overall problems of poverty. Schools must be made into sites of opportunity, not places for the rejection and failure of millions of African American, Chicano Latino, Native American, and immigrant students. But schools and teachers take the blame for huge social inequities in housing, health care, and income.

Income disparities between the richest and poorest in US society have reached record levels between 1970 and today. Poor communities suffer extensive traumas and dislocations. Homelessness, the exploitation of immigrants, and the closing of community health and counseling clinics, are all factors that penetrate our school communities. Solutions that punish schools without addressing these conditions only increase the marginalization of poor children.

· WFS says teachers’ unions are the problem. Of course unions need to be improved -- more transparent, more accountable, more democratic and participatory -- but before teachers unionized, the disparity in pay between men and women was disgraceful and the arbitrary power of school boards to dismiss teachers or raise class size without any resistance was endemic.

Unions have historically played leading roles in improving public education, and most nations with strong public educational systems have strong teacher unions.

In the Finnish education system, much cited in the film as the best in the world, teachers are -- gasp! -- unionized and granted tenure, and families benefit from a cradle-to-grave social welfare system that includes universal daycare, preschool and healthcare, all of which are proven to help children achieve better results in school. In fact, even student teachers have a union in Finland and, overall, nearly 90% of the Finnish labor force is unionized.

The demonization of unions ignores the real evidence.

· WFS says teacher education is useless. The movie touts the benefits of fast track and direct entry to teaching programs like Teach for America, but the country with the highest achieving students, Finland, also has highly educated teachers.

A 1970 reform of Finland’s education system mandated that all teachers above the kindergarten level have at least a master’s degree. Today that country’s students have the highest math and science literacy, as measured by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), of all the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries.

· WFS decries tenure as a drag on teacher improvement. Tenured teachers cannot be fired without due process and a good reason: they can’t be fired because the boss wants to hire his cousin, or because the teacher is gay (or black or...), or because they take an unpopular position on a public issue outside of school.

A recent survey found that most principals agreed that they had the authority to fire a teacher if they needed to. It is interesting to note that when teachers are evaluated through a union-sanctioned peer process, more teachers are put into retraining programs and dismissed than through administration-only review programs. Overwhelmingly teachers want students to have outstanding and positive experiences in schools.

· WFS says charter schools allow choice and better educational innovation. Charters were first proposed by the teachers’ unions to allow committed parents and teachers to create schools that were free of administrative bureaucracy and open to experimentation and innovation, and some excellent charters have set examples. But thousands of hustlers and snake oil salesmen have also jumped in. While teacher unions are vilified in the film, there is no mention of charter corruption or profiteering. A recent national study by CREDO, The Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford, concludes that only 17% of charter schools have better test scores than traditional public schools, 46% had gains that were no different than their public counterparts, and 37% were significantly worse.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Good comment, Great info.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Fifty years of failing inner city schools has set up an environment where most parents in inner cities want to send their kids to charter and private schools.

Why would you want to prevent them from being able to do that?

Why do you believe that private schools should only be for the rich?

Why do you believe that parents should not have a choice and must send their child to a crappy school because of the zipcode, block, and lot they live on?

It is time for change.

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." -- Albert Einstein

[-] -1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

thank you very much for telling me what i think - i didn't realize how silly i was to want the finnish model over your gop rich man schools - let's dismantle everything we got in the last 100 years - libraries, public schools, social security, unemployment - and let's finnish the job of destroying the commons. should i go on - no point really. you have your free market religion and you are either a rich man or a quilsing - well i guess you could be an unwitting tool of the rich man. can you tell me which it is?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

He shoots - He scores - and the crowd goes wild - it's pandemonium in the park here folks - as Flip slapsdown an anti-ows'er.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Why would you want to dismantle everything that is just stupid.

It would be nice to allow parent's to have control over where and how their children are educated. I would call that a step forward.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

They also have hand picked teachers and very up to date materials.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Education is very complicated. But that Somerset County and Newark are not comparable is not.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Part of the problem - A VERY MAJOR PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Is environment.

If you live in hell what chance you will be motivated by that to succeed and what chance that you will be beaten down by what you see and experience. From the cradle to the grave. A sick society breeds sickness.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

That's the key. We live in a very sick society. I live in a wealthy town with some of the best schools in my state. If you cross over one road, you end up in one of the worst school districts in my state simply by being in a poor town that happens to border my town. That's not the America I want to live in. So, if a kid lives on one side of that road, they go to the good schools, if they live across the street, they're screwed!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

This is what needs to be addressed and it was in small part prior to the meltdown and the starvation of the middle class - communities were being invested in - again in a small way - but progress was being seen where improvements were made in communities.

We need to reinvest in all of America and in all world wide communities if we are to see an end to sick society/world.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

If you and everyone you know gets "tossed" regularly by cops, if you know that a white with the same credentials as your cousin who played by the rules gets the job first even with the white guys little drug conviction (that's the reality admitted to by NYC's own government- they don't or can't enforce anti discrimination laws) you might go for instant gratification and f*ck the classroom bs. On top of that there is an issue that rarely gets mention- language!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland_Ebonics_controversy

Educators in Oakland realized that low income African American kids did not grow up in what could be called "english speaking" environments - they speak Ebonics! They need an approach similar to that granted to Vietnamese and Mexican kids-- Well, the roof fell in on that! That would imply that African Americans are a people even a nationality or like Malcolm believed and preached a nation!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Well - all I know is that you need to "speak to the individual" - "not at" the individual. This is I should think communications 101.

Yes a good teacher will find common ground from which to work.

[-] 0 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 1 year ago

Again, You Conservatives always counting those pennies. Yeah, I remember growing up with those over sheltered, non clue having youth who went to catholic schools. You should see them once they get to collage. Because the school's curriculum was weak and the children were sheltered during High school, they were ill-educated about life to fair well without parent supervision and with rigorous deadlines. Now, private schooled children were not the ones dropping out or coming in hung over the most in the college i went to, but they were second behind the home schooled bunch.

Also, FYI, It is the parents who guide their children. Most parents have become so consumed with success that they turn their children off of such flights of fancy and waist of time. I rather learn from life any day than be taught by so called professionals.

As a High School Drop out, I believe the whole of society puts too much emphasis on high school and school in general. Life teaches more than any teacher could ever dream of teaching. Shit, I've often said, and to a small degree still believe, school is more of a glorified baby sitting racket than a necessity of life. If there are children entering the work force with limited reading skills than someone close to home did a disservice to their child.

But no one made a mint being a plethoric reader, maybe that is why the family and the education institutions don't work so hard to encourage reading.

Also, you have to realize that a lot of the data you go rambling off is created and disseminated so as to make the claim you now make. Face it, every generation is smarter than the last, and if you cant see that, you have not been paying attention. AN example would be how this generation has convinced you to leave your children's education in the hands of profiteers. lol.

[-] 4 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

It is not about counting pennies. Parents are willing to work a second job so their kids can go to St Michael's and have a 99.5% chance of graduating with a good solid understanding of writing, math, physics, chemistry, geography, computer science, music, art... They want their children to have the skills to work in a profession that requires an education like a doctor, nurse, scientist, computer programmer, accountant, engineer...

Because there are a limited number, to get the charter schools in Newark there is a lottery system. Those that do not get in are relegated to the public schools where with they suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. They have great parents but spend their days in a lousy school system.

Children spend more awake time with their teachers than they do with their parents, especially today both parents working and the kids in after school baby sitters club. Teacher have the greatest opportunity to guide children since they have them from 8AM to 3PM sometimes 5PM every day. It amazes me that in some of these public schools they can have these kids for 35 hours a week for 13 years and not be able to teach them simple reading and writing. Forget about physics, chemistry and the rest.

Society seems to be finally waking up to put more emphasis on school. We cannot keep doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 50 years and expect a different outcome. That is the definition of insanity.

I have no problem with a school making a profit on education. In order to make that profit they have to provide a product that I am willing to pay for. In many instances working a second job to do it. Education is the most important purchase a parent can make for their child. Private schools must compete with other schools and prove that it is worth me paying them. For more than 50 years, public schools in Newark get the $20,000 per pupil whether they teach them or not. Now they are afraid. They are very afraid. They should be afraid. Fear is a great motivator. Charter schools and private school vouchers are threatening they monopoly hold in their victims, the citizens that used to be stuck with them because they live in the wrong zip code.

Instead of improving the product they provide, public school teacher unions spend hundreds of millions lobbying congress to protect their hold on the system. The National Education Association is the single largest campaign contributor in the nation. They are trying to buy protection and the expense of our children.

You are correct that not every profession requires a high school degree. The fact is however I would never go to a doctor who was a high school drop out from anywhere. I would never hire an engineer or scientist that was a HS dropout. I would let him cut my lawn, wash my car, or take my garbage away but that is about it.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Yeah lets have parents spend even less time with their families.

NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

What are you referring to. Did I suggest that?

No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I accused you of nothing.

You point out in your opening paragraph that that is what is expected. Parents to work a second job to put their kids into a private school.

And I said - HELL NO. As that is part of the problem with our sick society. Broken families.

I also do not feel that private schools - charter schools - schools for profit - any which way you want to call them - they are not the answer.

That is all that I mean.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

OK, so in a sense you were agreeing with me.

This forum has a horrible layout. You post was so far away from mine that it was hard to know what you were responding to

It really does not matter if you or I believe or can prove that charter or private schools are better than public schools in inner cities. What matters is that parents in these cities want to send their kids to charter and private schools. Allowing more charter schools and implementing a voucher system could make this happen without them having to work a second job.

My only conclusion is that someone who opposes these parent's right to use a voucher to choose a school prefers that only rich kids have these opportunities. Either that or they believe that family time together does not matter and the parent working a second or third job is fine. Parent's choices should not be determined by the zip code, block and lot they live on.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Show me the studies.

Institutions can make all the claims they want. It is almost the same as fossil fuel advertizing clean coal. It is a claim that is false. BTW - as there is no such thing as clean coal. But the industry can supply reports ( of their own making ) to say/prove that it is so.

ALSO: our public schools were of the best in the world 40 years ago. It is really only in the last 25 to 30 years that they have gone down hill. Follow the trend of loss of income in the working and middle class the loss of employment etc etc and notice a mirroring trend.


[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2584) 1 minute ago

But we already know that private schools in these sick environments are successful. We have tried fixing public schools in these areas for the past 50 years to no avail.

We need to do something different than what we have already tried. Giving inner city parent the same school choice that rich folks have is worth trying for the next 50 years. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Giving inner city parents the same school choice that rich folks have is worth trying. Vouchers and charter schools are the way to get there. Currently so many people want to get their children into charter schools and so few schools that they have annual lotteries. That is horrific to watch.

Imagine yourself an enthusiastic, energetic, motivated young sixth grade student sitting there hoping they will call your name. Those that do not get picked in the lottery walk away with tear filled eyes. Tears caused by the knowledge that they are heading back to the shit hole called the public school.

Let's set it up so that every child a chance and end the need for a lottery system.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Like I said you have serious comprehension issues - you apparently have little comprehension of reality. You also like to put your words in other peoples mouths.

Go shill somewhere that you might get away with your version of reality. The supremacists would probably accept you with open arms as they are mentally defective/dysfunctional.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Jesse Jackson on the other hand is leading the march for more charter schools and vouchers.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

In reply to your comment:

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2684) 4 hours ago

Let's give inner city kids and parent a chance at that dream even if you think that dream may be false. It is what they want. You have not proven public schools in Newark are better then, lets say, St Michael's. Good Luck ;-)

Let's give poor kids them the same options that rich kids have.

Let's set it up so that every child a chance and end the need for a lottery system.

Let's end the tears on lottery day.

Why would you want to limit their options? Why do you want to kill their dreams? ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink


I am not looking to kill dreams of better education for all.

The fact is that you persist in ignoring facts.

There is not a simple fix for education - it is a matter of healing society that will heal the educational system.

Obviously you have disregarded some good information provided by others ( like flip's comment that I copied for you to review "below" ).

You have a tendency to ignore reality. Then your solutions are so much more workable - Hey? Problem is - only in your own mind - do they work.


[-] 1 points by flip (2615) 20 hours ago

he is a moron - don't bother with him - here is some info about charter schools and waiting for superman! · WFS says that lack of money is not the problem in education. Yet the exclusive charter schools featured in the film receive large private subsidies. Two-thirds of Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children’s Zone funding comes from private sources, effectively making it a highly resourced private school. Promise Academy, the Harlem Children’s Zone charter school, is in many ways an excellent school, but it is dishonest for the filmmakers to say nothing about the funds it took to create it and the extensive social supports including free medical care and counseling provided by the Harlem Children’s Zone.

In New Jersey, where court decisions mandated similar programs, such as high quality pre-Kindergarten classes and extended school days and social services in the poorest urban districts, achievement and graduation rates increased while gaps started to close. But public funding for those programs is now being cut and progress is being eroded. Money matters! Of course, money will not solve all problems (because the problems are more systemic than the resources of any given school) -- but the off-handed rejection of a discussion of resources is misleading.

· WFS implies that testing is a reasonable way to assess student progress. The debate of “how to raise test scores” strangles and distorts strong education. Most test score differences stubbornly continue to reflect parental income and neighborhood/zip codes, not what schools do. As opportunity, health and family wealth increase, so do test scores.

This is not the fault of schools but the inaccuracy, and the internal bias, in the tests themselves. Moreover, the tests are too narrow (on only certain subjects with only certain measurement tools). When schools focus exclusively on boosting scores on standardized tests, they reduce teachers to test-prep clerks, ignore important subject areas and critical thinking skills, dumb down the curriculum and leave children less prepared for the future. We need much more authentic assessment to know if schools are doing well and to help them improve.

· WFS ignores overall problems of poverty. Schools must be made into sites of opportunity, not places for the rejection and failure of millions of African American, Chicano Latino, Native American, and immigrant students. But schools and teachers take the blame for huge social inequities in housing, health care, and income.

Income disparities between the richest and poorest in US society have reached record levels between 1970 and today. Poor communities suffer extensive traumas and dislocations. Homelessness, the exploitation of immigrants, and the closing of community health and counseling clinics, are all factors that penetrate our school communities. Solutions that punish schools without addressing these conditions only increase the marginalization of poor children.

· WFS says teachers’ unions are the problem. Of course unions need to be improved -- more transparent, more accountable, more democratic and participatory -- but before teachers unionized, the disparity in pay between men and women was disgraceful and the arbitrary power of school boards to dismiss teachers or raise class size without any resistance was endemic.

Unions have historically played leading roles in improving public education, and most nations with strong public educational systems have strong teacher unions.

In the Finnish education system, much cited in the film as the best in the world, teachers are -- gasp! -- unionized and granted tenure, and families benefit from a cradle-to-grave social welfare system that includes universal daycare, preschool and healthcare, all of which are proven to help children achieve better results in school. In fact, even student teachers have a union in Finland and, overall, nearly 90% of the Finnish labor force is unionized.

The demonization of unions ignores the real evidence.

· WFS says teacher education is useless. The movie touts the benefits of fast track and direct entry to teaching programs like Teach for America, but the country with the highest achieving students, Finland, also has highly educated teachers.

A 1970 reform of Finland’s education system mandated that all teachers above the kindergarten level have at least a master’s degree. Today that country’s students have the highest math and science literacy, as measured by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), of all the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries.

· WFS decries tenure as a drag on teacher improvement. Tenured teachers cannot be fired without due process and a good reason: they can’t be fired because the boss wants to hire his cousin, or because the teacher is gay (or black or...), or because they take an unpopular position on a public issue outside of school.

A recent survey found that most principals agreed that they had the authority to fire a teacher if they needed to. It is interesting to note that when teachers are evaluated through a union-sanctioned peer process, more teachers are put into retraining programs and dismissed than through administration-only review programs. Overwhelmingly teachers want students to have outstanding and positive experiences in schools.

· WFS says charter schools allow choice and better educational innovation. Charters were first proposed by the teachers’ unions to allow committed parents and teachers to create schools that were free of administrative bureaucracy and open to experimentation and innovation, and some excellent charters have set examples. But thousands of hustlers and snake oil salesmen have also jumped in. While teacher unions are vilified in the film, there is no mention of charter corruption or profiteering. A recent national study by CREDO, The Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford, concludes that only 17% of charter schools have better test scores than traditional public schools, 46% had gains that were no different than their public counterparts, and 37% were significantly worse. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] -3 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

So here is what I get from your post.

It does not matter what the students or their parents want because you have propaganda oops I mean data from study that shows charter schools are only a little bit better.

So these kids and parents should quit their crying, shut up and accept their fate.

I think that about sums it up.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Like I said you have serious comprehension issues - you apparently have little comprehension of reality. You also like to put your words in other peoples mouths.

Go shill somewhere that you might get away with your version of reality. The supremacists would probably accept you with open arms as they are mentally defective/dysfunctional.


[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2684) 6 minutes ago

So here is what I get from your post.

It does not matter what the students or their parents want because you have propaganda oops I mean data from study that shows charter schools are only a little bit better.

So these kids and parents should quit their crying, shut up and accept their fate.

I think that about sums it up. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Are you or are you not against school choice via a voucher system. I believe I know the answer

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

A false dream is still false - you have not proven the efficacy of charter schools.

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Let's give inner city kids and parent a chance at that dream even if you think that dream may be false. It is what they want. You have not proven public schools in Newark are better then, lets say, St Michael's. Good Luck ;-)

Let's give poor kids them the same options that rich kids have.

Let's set it up so that every child a chance and end the need for a lottery system.

Let's end the tears on lottery day.

Why would you want to limit their options? Why do you want to kill their dreams?

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

True - a families choices should not be limited for their child's education.

I just do not think that school for profit is the way to go - there have been reports that charter schools will artificially inflate their students grades to make them more acceptable for advanced schooling institutions as well as more acceptable to prospective employers.

Costs need to be addressed across the board - and parents need time to be with their families - and neighborhoods need to be good environments for the people who live there.

Sick environments lead to sick inhabitants.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I do not have a problem if a school makes a profit educating my child. My doctor makes a profit, my dentist makes a profit, the bakery where I buy awesome cakes, pies and cookies makes a profit. As long as I am getting a good product for a reasonable price I am OK with the supplier making a profit.

In this case the private schools charge less than half, almost a third, of what Newark spends per pupil and they are getting a 99.5% graduation rate with advance proficiency in reading math and science.

If they charge less, achieve more, I am fine with them making a profit.

Choice leads to competition which leads to higher quality and lower cost.

[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Sure - but it is not going to help if it is not all aspects of the neighborhood. You can not transplant one aspect of a healthy community into a sick environment and expect it to be the answer or even successful on it's own. The illness is systemic by area.


[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2584) 9 minutes ago

I an not sure what that has to do with my point.

You made a point that a company could lure you in and then raise their prices. Multinational or not, partnered or not, someone else will come in and kick your ass.

Again, my point was that choice leads to competition leads to higher quality at a lower cost.

Giving inner city parent the same school choice that rich folks have is a great idea. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

But we already know that private schools in these sick environments are successful. We have tried fixing public schools in these areas for the past 50 years to no avail.

We need to do something different than what we have already tried. Giving inner city parent the same school choice that rich folks have is worth trying for the next 50 years.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

That is the nature of business and competition.

But also consider: World market place and relationships.

However, during the Asian financial crisis, Kia declared bankruptcy in 1997; in 1998 Hyundai Motor Company acquired 51% of the company outbidding Ford Motor Company which had owned an interest in Kia Motors since 1986. From Kia Motors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hyundai Motor Company (Hangul: 현대자동차 주식회사; Hanja: 現代自動車株式會社) (Hangul: 현대; Hanja: 現代; MR: Hyŏndae, IPA: [hjə́ːndɛ],[2] modernity; KRX: 005380) is a South Korean multinational automaker headquartered in Seoul, South Korea. Hyundai was founded in 1967 and it, along with Kia, together comprise the Hyundai Motor Group, which is the world's fourth largest automobile manufacturer in the world based on annual vehicle sales in 2010.[3] In 2008, Hyundai (without Kia) ranked as the eighth largest automaker.[4] In 2010, Hyundai sold over 3.6 million vehicles worldwide. From : Hyundai Motor Company - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice in both the relationship with Japan China and America. Samsung is also very interesting with many international partnerships.

Samsung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung Samsung Group is a South Korean multinational conglomerate company headquartered in Samsung Town, Seoul. It comprises numerous subsidiaries

LG Corp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. LG is also multinational with many partnerships.

Thing is none of these operations/companies are black and white as to ownership/partnership/associations.


[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2584) 6 minutes ago

Japanese raised their prices and now South Korea is kicking their ass. They are coming out with better products at a lower cost. Kia, Hyundai, Samsung LG, all great products at a lower cost than the Japanese counterparts. I would say better than Japanese products with better warranties as well.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Not sure how to verify this. I know a bit about Korea. But recently met a Chinese American who lives and works in the US for the last 20 years. He is from one of the big Cities on the Coast of China.

He says in Korea the big corporations have a kind of oligopoly due to their connections with government/political parties. The big names you know from South Korea are oligopolies. But it is kind of normal in the sense that overseas you have to pay some fees or bribes to get business done. We have laws against bribery, but it doesn't change the way the world works. In Korea relationships are very important and "Gifts" are very important.

So maybe ... in South Korea success is not mainly competition, but being connected. Of course in the world market place, I like Samsung and Hyundai.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I an not sure what that has to do with my point.

You made a point that a company could lure you in and then raise their prices. Multinational or not, partnered or not, someone else will come in and kick your ass.

Again, my point was that choice leads to competition leads to higher quality at a lower cost.

Giving inner city parent the same school choice that rich folks have is a great idea.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Have you ever considered the aspect of opening a new market?

The Japanese did and the Chinese are following in the same tradition.

For profit schooling in the public education grades of 1 thru 12 is the same thing - enter the market at the lowest cost - when you have captured your market - raise the price.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Japanese raised their prices and now South Korea is kicking their ass. They are coming out with better products at a lower cost. Kia, Hyundai, Samsung LG, all great products at a lower cost than the Japanese counterparts. I would say better than Japanese products with better warranties as well.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Here is a Hedge Fund manager that says Read Read Read to be successful at investing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/11-insights-barton-biggs-2012-5?op=1#ixzz20momQmlQ

But your comments are valid.

I knew a guy from Detroit that went to Catholic School. He was smart, tough and competitive. I was public school and am still trying to make up for my education. But a college degree didn't make me brilliant either.

I suppose you are talking about confidence and determination. That is a big strength that everyone needs to have.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

My daughter teaches in the South Bronx. She has no classroom supplies. The advice she gets is to cultivate a friendship with a charter school teacher. They have supplies enough to give them away.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

"The lack of Intelligence in America is more of a cultural problem than an institutional one"....

Exactly. All this hoopla about teachers, unions, schools, taxes, etc. The simple truth is that parents arent as concerned with education as they used to be. The entire culture is all about idiocy.

[-] 2 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

Really---------------------------------

Here, Joe, you said:

"Many of them are moving out of the ghetto and becoming successful capitalists. They days of following a party like sheep because they might get a hand out are over. They can see beyond the plantation fence. They are movin on up to the East side and telling the government "No thank you, I don't need your policies that attempt to run and control my life because you suck at it."

Do you realize what you said there is a fabrication?

The poor are getting poorer and blacks are disproportionally even poorer. Of all the minorities the highest unemployment rate is amongst the black population.

I believe you have definitely been watching way too much Sean Hannity and the other clown acts on fox news. Mittney didn't talk to the NAACP, he used them for a prop to get their base excited, like you. Red meat, like it. Delicious. I could tell, you really are truly inspired. Wow, the blacks can get off the plantation, right Joe? They don't need no stinking food stamps, right Joe? Let them starve.

Come Together NOW

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Well said. Joe doesn't really hear reason. but it was a good effort.

Solidarity

[-] 3 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 1 year ago

TRUTH & REASON


LoL. It's to be expected. But I think he does come here because this motivates him to see just exactly how we're thinking this through (yes, Joe, I hit that nail). I'm sure he'll learn a thing or two that may help him see a truth or two a little clearer but I'm certain he'd never admit it. And that's perfectly fine. Strangely enough, we need him. He's like a mini-Sean Hannity, or Rush Limbaugh. We have to consider both sides, just like he does here.

LoL. I've had some experience here, and just as remember some stories, it is comical at times.

I think a big point here is this: If we can disagree and do so in respectful positive atmosphere, it is admirable. Shows utmost respect, which I tend towards at all times. I really can't perceive a world where we just agree constantly to ad nausea. Perfection is a grand idea but it's conceptual only, it's physical manifestation is known missing. No, rather, we're here for something, and for those who have not taken action as yet, they can do so NOW. We have a purpose and it requires action to fulfill

Good Luck on This Cosmic Journey!

Through the Wormhole

Buckle up.



Come Together NOW

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Very good. I am mostly respectful. And strive to encourage all I interact with to do the same.

I also welcome debate. I've learned some, I think others have as well, I wouldn't be surprised if joe learned as well.

I hope so.

Peace

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I don't watch cable news, I am not planning to vote for mittens. I litterly don't eat red meat.

At the same time I do not try to spin what someone said at a NAACP event.

Finally, more whites use food stamps ans social programs. I watched a program where two men showed up at the unemployment office showing there were 43 jobs within 5 blocks of the office, there were more whites than blacks on the line. Only three people showed up to apply and all were black.

I am OK with safety nets but I am not in favor of permanent support. If you give A man a fish he can eat for a day. Teach him to fish and he can eat for a lifetime.

We need to fix our education system.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

That does not change the fact that most inner city parents want to send their kids to charter or private schools so they can have a better education and move up the ladder.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Charter schools are not any better in turning out college students and people who go on to be well employed than are the ordinary public schools, although the charter schools at least here in NYC are given much more in resources.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2010/0629/Study-On-average-charter-schools-do-no-better-than-public-schools

The vouchers spoken of for use in private schools don't cover the tuition at the best of them. Most poor people could not take such a voucher and send her kid to a top ranked private school without some other sort of help.

BTW I'd like to see statistical evidence as to what you say most inner city parents want. It wouldn't negate the fact that in this instance if that assertion of yours is true it would prove that inner city parents like any other group of people can be manipulated and bamboozled.

http://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/10/now-it-can-be-told-the-secrets-to-success-and-riches/

Common Core Standards: A Boon for Edu-BizEmergency Manager in Muskegon Heights Picks Charter Corporation » Now It Can Be Told! The Secrets to Success and Riches July 10, 2012 // 42 Bruce Baker has distilled the qualities of successful charter schools. In this post, Baker looks at the reasons that some NYC charter schools succeed.

The reason for creating charters in the late 1980s was that they would have the freedom to try new ideas and thereby to help public schools improve.

As the charters tried new things, public schools would learn from their experience and would improve.

The charters were supposed to gain freedom from most state regulation in exchange for their willingness to be held accountable.

After twenty years of charter school experimentation, we now have a pretty solid idea of “what works.”

The same things that “work” in charter schools should also work in public schools.

We should not waste time. Let’s learn from the charters so all schools can be successful schools.

First, the best charters spend considerably more money so that they can provide additional services and tutoring. Some spend thousands more per student.

That is an important lesson. Every public school that wants to see dramatic improvement should get extra funding.

Second, the charters are free of burdensome regulation by the states and districts.

That’s an important finding. The states and districts should immediately give public schools the same regulatory relief now available to charters.

Third, the charters do not accept the same proportion of students with special needs or students who are English language learners.

Uh-oh. That’s a hard one. Public schools are required by state and federal laws to have their doors open to all students. I don’t think that public schools can follow the charter model here. If public schools didn’t take these students, where would they go?

Fourth, the charters have even more money to spend because of the small proportion of children with disabilities and English language learners; this is a budget plus. But again, I don’t think public schools can maximize their dollars by excluding the most expensive-to-educate kids. So that’s another no-go.

Fifth, the charters make their own disciplinary rules and can toss out kids who misbehave by their rules, like bringing chips to school or not looking in the eyes of the teacher, or speaking up when they are supposed to walk in silence. But if public schools kicked out kids for minor infractions, where would they go? To another public school.

Sixth, the charters have longer school days, longer school weeks, and a longer school year. More time to teach, more time to get ready for state tests. Public schools can do that too, unless those pesky unions insist on being paid more for working longer hours.

Seventh, charters keep their costs low by encouraging or tolerating or not minding constant turnover among the teachers. That way, the bulk of teachers are in year one or two, at the bottom of the salary scale, and they are more malleable. Senior teachers cost more, and have ideas of their own. But public schools will have a hard time learning this lesson because senior teachers have job rights. Of course, with the current move on to eliminate seniority and tenure, even public schools will soon be dealing mainly with inexperienced and malleable teachers in their first year. Who will train the new teachers if the senior teachers have left? Well, that’a a problem we will deal with some other time. No one has time to think about that now.

But one thing seems clear: If public schools get more money; if they can be freed of regulations, if they can exclude the most challenging students, if they have longer hours, if they have constant teacher turnover to save money, if they can keep out or push out the students who don’t obey or who can’t pass the tests, then they too will get fabulous results.

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Public schools receive nearly three times the dollars per student as private schools.

Giving inner city parents the same school choice that rich folks have is worth trying. Vouchers and charter schools are the way to get there. Currently so many people want to get their children into charter schools and so few schools that they have annual lotteries. That is horrific to watch.

Imagine yourself an enthusiastic, energetic, motivated young sixth grade student sitting there hoping they will call your name. Those that do not get picked in the lottery walk away with tear filled eyes. Tears caused by the knowledge that they are heading back to the shit hole called the public school.

Let's set it up so that every child a chance and end the need for a lottery system.

[-] 3 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

You are a bald faced liar Farmer Joe:

"Public schools receive nearly three times the dollars per student as private schools."

http://nepc.colorado.edu/newsletter/2009/08/private-school-expenditures-detailed-first-time

Private School Expenditures Detailed for First Time

Ground-breaking study has major implications for public school spending and voucher programs

Contact: Bruce Baker -- (732) 932-7496 ext. 8232; bruce.baker@gse.rutgers.edu Kevin Welner -- (303) 492-8370; kevin.welner@gmail.com

BOULDER, Colo. and TEMPE, Ariz. (August 18, 2009) -- Private school spending varies far more widely than spending on public education, a new report finds. Further, the differences in spending among different parts of the private school sector reflect clear patterns with major implications for voucher policies and even for spending levels in the public sector.

Those are some of the findings in a first-ever, comprehensive examination of some 1,500 private schools nationally conducted by Rutgers University associate professor and school finance expert Bruce D. Baker.

The report, Private Schooling in the U.S.: Expenditures, Supply, and Policy Implications, is jointly published by the Education and the Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder and the Education Policy Research Unit at Arizona State University. It is based on a review of financial and enrollment information contained in IRS tax returns combined with data from the National Center for Education Statistics.

Baker presents comparisons of expenditures among different types and affiliations of private schools, and the report also compares those expenditures with public school expenditures for districts in the same state and labor market. Results indicate that (1) the less-regulated private school sector is more varied in many key features (teacher attributes, pay and school expenditures) than the more highly regulated public schooling sector, (2) these private school variations align and are largely explained by affiliation -- primarily religious affiliation -- alone, and (3) a ranking of school sectors by average spending correlates well with a ranking of those sectors by average standardized test scores.

"On average," Baker explains, "the private schools studied spend more than public schools in the same metropolitan areas (and nationally), although some spend much less. Some private schools have lower pupil-to-teacher ratios than public schools, while others have comparable ratios. Some have comparable teacher salaries, and some pay their teachers much less. And, some have teachers with stronger academic qualifications than public school teachers, while others have teachers with weaker academic qualifications."

What's "most striking" about such patterns, Baker observes, is that they are largely explained by religious affiliation alone. Christian Association Schools have the lowest spending, the lowest salaries, teachers with the weakest academic records, and the highest pupil-to-teacher ratios. Moreover, earlier research concludes that these schools have the lowest student test scores. Catholic schools tend to approximate public schools in all these areas. Hebrew schools and independent day schools (generally not religiously affiliated) have higher spending -- often substantially higher -- and this is reflected in these resource categories.

Baker's findings may provide some insights into why research on voucher programs has yielded mixed results regarding student achievement levels for participating low income students. The potentially high-performing parts of the private school sector are the ones that spend much more than available voucher subsidies. In fact, they spend much more than public schools. Private independent day schools -- which have the academically strongest teachers and the smallest classes among private schools -- will, Baker points out, "remain well out of reach of voucher recipients." In many markets, such schools on average spend twice what public schools spend, which in turn is often twice the voucher levels allocated. Thus, even under a voucher scheme that paid what public schools receive per pupil, these private schools would have to subsidize half the total cost of teaching voucher students to match what they spend on their non-voucher students.

Furthermore, even for lower-priced Christian Association Schools and Catholic schools, which are the schools that do often participate in voucher programs, voucher funding levels are likely to provide less money than they need to cover existing costs, raising the schools' financial stress and possibly reducing program quality.

Baker recommends that policy makers who would look to private schools for lessons on how to improve public education begin with a clear awareness of the stark differences among subsets of private schools, avoiding policy recommendations based on averages or isolated instances. He also points to the importance of understanding the differences between private school spending and tuition, given that spending is often subsidized by outside resources (which themselves are often taxpayer subsidized). Regarding voucher policies, policy makers need to understand the tradeoff between attempts to craft policies with a limited impact on the public treasury and to craft policies that provide real choice to voucher recipients. Current policies appear to sacrifice choice for fiscal prudence, but this report demonstrates that the result is access to only a couple parts of the private sector, both of which have strong religious affiliations and neither of which appears to offer academic benefits over public schools.

Find Bruce Baker's report, Private Schooling in the U.S.: Expenditures, Supply, and Policy Implications, on the web at: http://epicpolicy.org/publication/private-schooling-US

[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Bravo. Though I think your comment will be denied by joetheframer - as it does not agree with his agenda.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Joethefarmer a right winger which automatically means he has a problem with facts. I could post links showing he's factually in error from now 'till the coming of the Mahdi and it would not dent his convictions. He will go on spewing convenient lies and false assertions. It's the old nazi technique we all are familiar with- a lie told over and over and over becomes the truth.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Yes - a total propaganda anti-humanity loser is joetheframer.

Good to see that there are those who see through his BS of subtle lies and mind poisons.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Amount of money pumped in is irrelevant. Its all about how much the parents want to participate.

Many students around the globe are outpacing ours with much worse classrooms and very little supplies.

We have a serious culture problem here in the states. That is the reason for such low test scores.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I tend to think we have a corruption problem. You have to show me that the Korean and Canadian and Finnish have no supplies in their classrooms and worse classrooms. I do not believe that. I know that we spend lots of money per pupil here. So why does my daughter who teaches in a public school in the Bronx not have classroom supplies but the charter schools have more than they need ?

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Every good teacher will tell you that all they need is a room, pencils and notebooks. But if the parents dont care, and never even put in the time to teach their kids to wait their turn to speak and sit still, then you can pay them all you want, the results are going to suck.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Therefore let's not provide any supplies, let's not pay the teachers a living wage, let's save money because "these kids" are a lost cause anyhow... right?

[-] -2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Thats not what I am saying at all. Im saying the reason the education levels in this country suck is that its not important to the culture.

Same reason your daughter doesnt get paid shit, its not important to our society (Im 100% paying teachers well).

Its why you will find a lot of homeschooled kids that go and take the SAT's and crush them. They were raised in an environemnt that valued education.

Our population is too busy watching tv and eating fast food, and our government is too busy blowing a hole in the middle east and africa. Our priorities are totally out of whack.

They could give her a raise, and give her the supplies she needs, and I bet she would still have a hell of a time beating the average grades for this country, which are below average on a global scale.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

True we have a very corrupt culture, one of privileged citizens of an imperial metropolis, expecting to rule the world. For our black youth, it's different. Experiences of their older peers demonstrate that hard work in school is not likely to pay off in the real world. (edit) Still at least in my daughter's experiences supplies do make their way to the charter school classrooms while my daughter has to beg for them or buy them herself. I detect criminal corruption as I do not doubt these supplies exist in some budget or other. The Bloomberg administration has been quite corruption friendly from taxi credit card readers to cititime to....

http://mayorbloombergkingofnewyork.blogspot.com/2012/07/mayor-bloomberg-mega-scandals-blacked.html

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

You need to read more carefully I was talking about in Newark, NJ. **I repeated that fact several times.

Because the schools are so bad, Newark, Camden, Asbury and 10 other districts were declared "abbot districts" ten years ago and receive state and federal funding. They have been pumping in the dollars year after year and nothing has changed.

I cannot find the latest numbers however According to the National Center for Education Statistics, a federal reporting agency, per pupil spending in Newark for the $19,058 in 2009-10 The tuition at St Michaels in Newark is $7,800 That 2.4 times the cost. So I was a little bit off but not much.

Giving inner city parents the same school choice that rich folks have is worth trying. Vouchers and charter schools are the way to get there. Currently so many people want to get their children into charter schools and so few schools that they have annual lotteries. That is horrific to watch.

Imagine yourself an enthusiastic, energetic, motivated young sixth grade student sitting there hoping they will call your name. Those that do not get picked in the lottery walk away with tear filled eyes. Tears caused by the knowledge that they are heading back to the shit hole called the public school.

Let's set it up so that every child a chance and end the need for a lottery system.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

And they can remember who put them there and kept their foot on their necks and who are doing their utmost to keep them from voting. No one should own them anymore nor take them for granted nor piss on their boots and tell them it is raining.

I think you would get luke warm support for your assertions on their behalf but I certainly wouldn't presume to speak for them as an old white guy, nor as you have. They are citizens full and free. Anti corruption regulations may appeal to them in light of the settlement of charges that they were fraudulently steered into mortgages that were predatory with much worse terms than they were qualified for.

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

To me it seems that many what black folks want is out of step with the policies of the Democrat party. Most want school choice, school vouchers, better opportunities to start a business, less regulations, and less government borrowing and spending.

The guarantee that they will vote Democrat is fading. To the point of the original post, in my humble opinion, it was wise to Romney to speak at the NAACP event.

It will certainly take time, and I do not expect them all to become Libertarians overnight however the time when they blindly vote for someone just because they are a Democrat is coming to an end.

These folks are independent thinkers.

  1. http://nationalcenter.org/P21Index.html
  2. http://www.nbra.info/
  3. http://www.blackconservativecensus.com/
  4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWnPI3Yo2b0
  5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3raPyMzT_e0
  6. http://vablackconservatives.wordpress.com/.
[-] 3 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

They want decent schools, you want to pauperize the teachers and turn the schools into testing facilities- so the gov't can buy all this great standardized bubble multiple choice software. From your friends.

[-] -3 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

All I want is to allow poor folks to have the same opportunities that rich folks have.

Is that such a bad idea?

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

More likely you want to destroy dem leaning teachers unions and lift up repub leaning religious schools.

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

By the way, I am an atheist and an independent voter.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You are a partisan republican and a religious wacko?

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I actually have voted for both republicans and democrats but mostly independents. I actually helped with a write in campaign at the local level about seven years ago. We almost won.

I don't subscribe to "you are throwing away your vote" mantra that we are fed. I vote for the person that is aligned with my political beliefs and has a voting and policy record that proves it.

I also helped campaigning for a Democrat in one of our local elections a few years back. He was pro school improvement and the Republican wanted to slash the budget in the name of lowering property taxes. We won that election because we mobilized the parents with kids in school.

I will certainly not be voting from Mittens Romney or Obummer.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You sound like a republican. I don't buy your story.

[-] -3 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

How does one sound like a republican?

Because I want poor folks to have the same educations choices that rich people have?

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

The positions you take. Your tone. If you gotta ask I can't help you.

Good luck. Try having compassion for your fellow man. thats a good start.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Wanting poor kids to have the same choices as rich kids is having compassion. Rather than explaining why it is not you begin attacking my character.

You know nothing about me.

Volunteering for the school for children with special needs for more than 15 years is having compassion. http://www.matheny.org/

Bringing my kids every week to volunteer to a project to grow food for those in need is having compassion. http://americasgrowarow.org/ We gave grown over a million pounds of produce for food banks and shelters so far.

Being leader of my son's Cub Scout Pack for 5 years and teaching kids the virtue of volunteering is teaching compassion.

Seeing the same 30 or so parents and families at every other volunteering event leads me to believe that compassion is rare when it comes to actually taking action.

I don't want a medal for my deeds and I rarely mention them however if you are going to attack me and tell me I have no compassion well that is another thing.

Education is very important to me. I believe it is very important for poor kids to have the same opportunities that rich kids have. Year after year for more than 40 years I hear that the public schools in the inner cities will be fixed "Next Year". Well that line just does not cut the mustard.

I don't understand how that makes me "sound republican"

Why would no not want poor parents to have the same educational choices that rich parents have for their kids?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Charters are the republican stretegy to destroy free public education that helps the poor!!!!!

It is your republican plan to bust the teachers unions.

I won't explain it again.

Your story is unconvincing. I didn't say you don't have compassion only that you could start with it if you don't want to sound like a republican. Not an attack just a suggestion as to how to not sound like a republican. You did ask.

Peace

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

LOL,

Charters Schools are free, open to the public, and cost parents nothing.

As for private schools, vouchers are free and cost the parents nothing.

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Let me ask you this.

Why would you not want them to have.the same options that rich people have?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I want all kids to have an excellent education but this charter scam is not that.

Sorry. They don't seem any more successful than a good public school.

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

So you don't want them to have the option because you know better.

Someone should tell Jesse Jackson and the black caucus what you know. Montessori, KIPP, and the rest are all scam.

Someone should tell the kids that don"t get picked in the lottery to get in to stop crying St Michaels is just a scam. Sure 99 % graduate and 75 % are advanced proficient and 93% go on to college but it is really a scam.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I don't believe your numbers!

What about those left behind.? Charters ain't better then good public schools. It's a sham, a scam. its an attempt to privatize public education and bust unions.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

The numbers do not matter.

Poor people should have the same options that rich people have.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Lets not perpetrate another fraud on them with these charter scams that will destroy free public schools instead of improve them and bust teacher unions because they don't vote for your repubs.

[-] -2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

They could not come close to Newark and Camden NJ public schools on the graduation rate or proficiency ratings.

One good thing is that bad Charter schools are easy to shut down. They just shut one down in Texas because of bad performance.

Newark and Camden have sucked since the 1970s and they get more and more money. They more they suck the more money they get.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Your suggestions that we should use charter schools is an attack on the educational opportunities of poor people.

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Charter schools cost poor people absolutely noting to attend.

Suggesting we abolish them is an attack on the educational opportunities of poor people. A single public school based on zip code is not an opportunity. For the poor it makes the crap hole public school in their neighborhood a monopoly.

I am fortunate that I can afford to live in a town where the public school is one of the top 98% in the country. The poor folks in Newark, Camden, Asbury... do not have that. There is more need for private and charter schools in those areas because the public schools there suck. The administrators make absurd salaries and the classes are ill equipped. There is no accountability. The more they suck the more money they get.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I think they get less and less money 'cause your repubs are always cuttin poor peoples services.

And whatever money they do get is syphoned off by corrupt non minorities who think of poor people as animals not deserving of good schools.

Theres a problem you could focus on. fix that.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

They have been dumping money into the abbot districts for more than 20 years and all we got was corrupt administrators. Many making more than $150,000 and some more than $200,000 plus bonus, expenses... http://tinyurl.com/7az8vtp

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

the charters have longer school days, longer school weeks, and a longer school year. More time to teach, more time to get ready for state tests. Public schools can do that too, unless those pesky unions insist on being paid more for working longer hours. Seventh, charters keep their costs low by encouraging or tolerating or not minding constant turnover among the teachers. That way, the bulk of teachers are in year one or two, at the bottom of the salary scale, and they are more malleable. Senior teachers cost more, and have ideas of their own. But public schools will have a hard time learning this lesson because senior teachers have job rights. Of course, with the current move on to eliminate seniority and tenure, even public schools will soon be dealing mainly with inexperienced and malleable teachers in their first year. Who will train the new teachers if the senior teachers have left? Well, that’a a problem we will deal with some other time. No one has time to think about that now.

But one thing seems clear: If public schools get more money; if they can be freed of regulations, if they can exclude the most challenging students, if they have longer hours, if they have constant teacher turnover to save money, if they can keep out or push out the students who don’t obey or who can’t pass the tests, then they too will get fabulous results.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 1 year ago

Wise, perhaps in the larger context of holding his base. But wise with the expectation that he would gain votes from NAACP members or followers, time will tell, but interviews suggest not.

I think few Democrats would claim to have a lock on the black vote. I don't think they ever got more than 70%? If they did, that still leaves 30%.

That said, when did the GOP ever pick up a black issue and champion it against a Jim Crow leaning base?

Dems haven't always delivered either, but I recall them supporting voting rights, anti poll tax, affirmative action and some other things like opposition to mortgage red lining .

Rather than time, I think reversing decades of anti black policies will be required. How wise was it not to even mention voter suppression in the speech?

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

"To me it seems that many what black folks want is out of step with the policies of the Democrat party." Odd then:

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryus2012/2012/03/2012324134332948326.html

http://www.thenation.com/blog/166751/african-american-vote-gop-race-falls-below-measurable-levels#

African-American Vote in GOP Race Falls Below Measurable Levels John Nichols on March 13, 2012 - 1:26 AM ET In Georgia, where African-Americans make up 31 percent of the electorate, the African-American turnout in this year’s Republican primary was—according to exit polls—barely 3 percent of the total GOP vote on Super Tuesday.

So few African-Americans voted in the Republican primary that it was impossible for the exit pollsters to determine whether Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich or Ron Paul was the favorite. The numbers are so slight that they cannot be accurately assigned, so each candidate’s support level is simply identified as “N/A”—not available.

In Michigan, where African-American citizens make up almost 15 percent of the population, the African-American turnout in this year’s Republican primary was—according to the exit polls—barely 2 percent of the total GOP vote.

So few African-Americans voted in the Republican primary that it was impossible to ascertain whether Romney, Santorum, Gingrich or Paul was preferred.

In Florida, where African-American citizens make up 16 percent of the population, the African-American turnout in this year’s Republican primary was—according to the exit polls—barely 1 percent of the total GOP vote.

As in Georgia and Michigan, the African-American participation level in the GOP primary was so low that it was impossible to determine whether Romney, Santorum, Gingrich or Paul was favored.

In South Carolina, where African-American citizens make up 28 percent of the population, the African-American turnout in this year’s Republican primary was—according to exit polls—barely 1 percent of the total GOP vote.

And, once more, it was impossible to identify a preference for any of the Republican contenders.

(edit) I don't think the political situation and the Democrats serve the interests of the 99 % including most black people. Clearly though Black voters rtegard the dems as being less bad.

[-] -3 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I think as they are becoming less dependent they are moving to the right. That is why dems want to keep them dependent. Keep them uneducated in crappy inner city public schools. Give them just enough to get by without taking a job.

Fortunately many are waking up, demanding charter schools, demanding less regulations on small businesses. Finding ways to lift themselves up.

I see more and more blacks moving out to whitelandia each year.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Black people moe than anyone need to see the political system- Dems included- overthrown and replaced. But this year they are confronted with a campaign to further impoverish, further incarcerate, further brutalize them. And that's the campaign pushed by you, and your GOP friends.

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

On this we agree. I think I am more optimistic than most here. Perhaps to a fault.

I am an independent. I have voted for Dems, Reps, and mostly independents. I do not buy into the "you are throwing your vote away" rhetoric. I voted for RonPaul last election.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

http://stopronpaul.blogspot.com/2011/12/nazi-leader-says-paul-met-with-them.html

Nazi leader says Paul Met With Them

Unless this is a terrible hoax, then a major “white nationalist” has outed Ron Paul as one of them.

Bill White, “commander” of the American National Socialist Workers Party (Nazis) is pissed off that Ron Paul’s campaign has issued a press release denying Paul’s involvement with various racists and anti-Semites. Apparently Mr. White sees Paul throwing his old allies under the bus in his quest for the White House.

At a racist website, Vanguard News Forum, White issued this statement:

Comrades:

I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn't see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul's extensive involvement in white nationalism.

Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.

I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy. For his spokesman to call white racialism a "small ideology" and claim white activists are "wasting their money" trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.

I don't know that it is necessarily good for Paul to "expose" this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous -- and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.

Bill White, Commander

American National Socialist Workers Party

Members of the page responded in various ways. David Milano, who has Ron Paul’s website url in his post, wants to know what White is “trying to accomplish.”

Please remember that this is a site for racists. It is a forum where they scream about blacks and Jews and gays and so forth. The debate is not about racism, but whether it is good to let the world know that they believe Ron Paul is one of them.

“White Will” says that White’s exposes will mean that people will pick sides: “Some will land on Ron Paul’s side and the rest can run with Honest Bill White.” He sees this revelation as an attack because it will hurt Paul if it becomes public.

“McKinley” is furious saying that “this piece of shit” should be banned from the site “for the no outing rule.” His complaint isn’t that he thinks White lied, but that he thinks White told the truth and the site has a rule that no closeted racists will be outed there. For a taste of his charm one should note his slogan: “nothing says lovin’ like a jew in the oven.”

Mike Riggins writes, “I know a lot of white supremacist involved in the Ron Paul campaign. I wish he would not shun away from his true supporters. I will stick with him till the ened (sic) but he shouldn’t act like a typical politician.”

“Frank Toliver” says that this information will “poison the well” and wished White had done this for “someone other than Ron Paul.” “OTPTT” says this information “may hurt the white race.” While Darren said the information is fascinating he wants to know “how the fuck does this help Ron Paul or white nationalism?” He says: Ron Paul is the only candidate that comes close to matching our views in the mainstream political debate. I know you don't like people who only go half-way in their political views, however, half-way is better than nothing at all.

Ron Paul may say things to please the media regarding racism, but he is hardly a hardcore left-wing commie who wants to merge the races into a gray goo. Please get a sense of proportion here. If Ron Paul is hurt by this information, you have done those of us trying to effect meaningful political change a big disservice. I like the ANSWP and the leadership you have given it, but we have to be realistic when it comes to making big political changes. Ron Paul is our first step. Please don't ruin it!

Milano kicks back in saying that White’s comments will “run good White activists out of the Paul campaign so the jews can take it over and run it into the ground.” Milano then asked: “What are the chances of getting this thread deleted?” “Myles” thinks this outing was a bad thing: "Dr. Pierce [a white nationalist bigot] spoke regularly about having key people at key places inside the gates, ready to flip the switch at the right moment. With this revelation, you might very well have wrecked what little chance Dr. Paul had.” “Oy Ze Hate” urged moderators to “kill this threat” because “none of us would want to risk giving Ron Paul a ‘bad name’ as someone who ascribes to racial reality. We must not risk tarnishing his image.” “Mgbrashear3” is pissed off because:

...all sorts of feds, snitches, ect. (sic) monitor this site daily.” He said: “If Paul was throwing the nigger word around, and calling illegals nasty greasy spics as we all do, he would not of climbed to where he is today. He can’t come right out and admit that he believes in our cause, he has to play the equel (sic) shit mind games to passify (sic) the higher ups… not a good threat to post Bill…but I am sure you already know that by now. He didn’t need any more negative mountains to climb during his run…way to go. “Christopher Drake” says “I’ all for Ron Paul. Nothing he can do short of adopting a negro and kissing Abe Foxman can do anything but help our cause.” It should be noted that the names mentioned by White—Buchanan, Sobran, Francis—were all associates of Ron Paul. Sobran and Francis, both wrote shockingly bigoted material and were regular contributors to LewRockwell.com, the website run by Ron Paul's friend, business partner, adviser, and ghost-writer. Paul continues to write material, or have it written for him, that appears at Rockwell's site. And Rockwell continued to work with vicious racists long after the Ron Paul newsletters met their well-deserved demise.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

"The real question should be why did Obama NOT did speak to them last election or this time."

Obama fears being tagged as president of and for Black people. Not rocket science this.

THE NAACP audience was polite. They even booed on cue. There was no "standing ovation" but polite applause.

[-] 0 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

@ 'JtF' : The answer to your "real question" re. 'Obomber NOT @ The NAACP' - is self evident on a moment's reflection. The 'Obamachine' clearly made a calculation that "the black vote is historically taken for granted" and that there was nothing to be electorally gained from speaking to the NAACP and in 'PR terms' with the 'average American voter' via the Corporate MSM (FUX-SNEWzzz et al) - much to lose !

multum in parvo ...

[-] 2 points by MoodDaddy (25) 1 year ago

Which is why Obama has ignored them both in person and in policy.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 1 year ago

It does seem pretty foolish to me. Getting 85% of the black vote instead of 95% is still easily winning the black vote but it can make a big difference in a critical battleground state like VA. He is also assuming that blacks will turn out to vote in the numbers they did in 2008, which is doubtful.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Romney went there to insult and disrespect African Americans in order to solidify his support amongst the racist base of the republican party.

All republicans aren't racist. But all racists are republican.

So that should be enough truth anyone needs to decide which "Party" should be supported.

End 2 party monopoly! Elect progressives!

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

"All republicans aren't racist. But all racists are republican." That statement shows how narrow minded you are.

"in order to solidify his support amongst the racist base of the republican party."

If that is true, why did he spend 5 minutes talking about why he joined with the black legislative caucus in MA against others when it came to charter schools. Why did he end with a statement on how much his fathers work during the civil rights movement as a leader shaped his vision of what is right and decent. Why did he speak of how his father helped draft the civil rights provisions for Michigan constitution. Why did he mention how he was inspired by his farther marching in Detroit during the civil rights movement. Why did he speak of how his father helped create the Michigan's first civil rights commission. Why would he end with all of that if his goal was to appeal to white racists that are "always republican"?

By the way, when you look at policy and the decisions they have made, Romney is more progressive than Obama.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

LMFAO.

I guess the schoolyard bully Romney talke about daddies efforts because he doesn't have any himself. Romany still hasn't gone on the record saying his churchs racism 30 years ago was wrong. Thats kinda telling.

Sure he supports school charters. That has been the rightwings prime strategy to hurt poor peoples (black, white, and hispanic) education opportunity. since the cost is too great, vouchers inadequate, and public schools (where the poorest areleft) have fewer resources as a result.

Romney is a tax dodging, greedy, selfish, plutocratic, homophobic, schoolyard bully who represents the worst of our country. He is the problem. He would give his 1% plutocrat friends more of the 99%'s tax dollars. He would gut the services for the poor. sick, and elderly to give another tax cut for millionaires.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

"I guess the schoolyard bully Romney talke about daddies efforts because he doesn't have any himself."

The point was about your assumption that he was there to appease his racist republican following which is absurd.

Mitt was just a boy in the 1960s so I am not surprised he did not march with his dad. That said, both Mitt and his wife Ann worked for years helping at risk youth and children with special needs. They practice what they believe which is that community organizations can reach some members of our community better than government can. Over the years they worked with Partners for Youth with Disabilities, the American Red Cross, Best Friends, and the Perkins School for the Blind.

Add to that the fact that he signed into law the Massachusetts health care reform legislation providing healthcare for every citizen in MA. He did it without all of the crony capitalism that is included in the AHCA (Obamacare).

When you look at actions rather than talk, Romney is far more progressive than Obama ever was.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Homophobic, plutocratic, tax dodging, schoolyard bully?

Yes?

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Ignore what I posted, and divert from the topic.

Yes?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

He is what he is! He has not criticized his churchs racist beliefs from 30 years ago.

Sorry the topic is his naacp speech. He played to the racist base of your republican party.

If the hood fits. You gotta wear it.

Peace

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

"Sorry the topic is his naacp speech. He played to the racist base of your republican party."

If that is true, why did he spend 5 minutes talking about why he joined with the black legislative caucus in MA against others when it came to charter schools. Why did he end with a statement on how much his fathers work during the civil rights movement as a leader shaped his vision of what is right and decent. Why did he speak of how his father helped draft the civil rights provisions for Michigan constitution. Why did he mention how he was inspired by his farther marching in Detroit during the civil rights movement. Why did he speak of how his father helped create the Michigan's first civil rights commission. Why would he end with all of that if his goal was to appeal to white racists that are "always republican"?

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

He spoke of his fathers accomplishments because he has none. It was just a smokescreen, a cheap effort to get applause. He knew his racist base wouldn't hold it against him because they weren't his actions, they were his fathers.

Thats why.

Seems like a racist to me. I've met plenty.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

You repeat yourself when you have nothing to add.

I already mentioned his accomplishments and will not do it again.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You repeated his accomplishments. I repeated my response. Thats how it works cowboy.

I have deemed them lacking. Romney is just a tax dodging, homophobic, greedy, selfish, plutocratic, schoolyard bully.

Peace

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

The times they are a changing!

Black folks are waking up and pretty much done living on the Democrat Plantation.

They are tired of being given enough to get by.

That are tired of being forced to go to the public school monopoly with tenured union teachers where only 50% graduate and many of those who do have graduate with a second grade reading level. They want school choice. They want charter schools. Many want to go to private Catholic schools with vouchers.

They are tired of having the entrepreneurial ambitions blocked by regulations that require you to have a lawyer, an accountant, and a compliance officer to open a lemon aide stand or sell cookies.

They are tired of being blocked by Democrap policies like Dodd-Frank that make it impossible for a bank to give them a loan because their credit risk is too high even though their idea for a business is sound.

Many of them are moving out of the ghetto and becoming successful capitalists. The days of following a party like sheep because they might get a hand out are over. They can see beyond the plantation fence. They are movin on up to the East side and telling the Democrats and their big government way "No thank you, I don't need you to run (and control) my life because you suck at it."

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

They have and will vote 95 % for the democrats because they know that republicans are ruled by racist tendencies.

It's simple. You are right about African Americans being disgusted, and they should be disgusted with Dems. But they cannot vote repub because there too many racists in charge of that party.

Peace

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Mitt's better contemporaries were Freedom Riding, were at the March on Washington, picketed chain stores like Woolworth that segregated lunch counters in the South, and opposed the Vietnam War too. Many were imprisoned, many were injured and some killed in those struggles. Mitt certainly was not in diapers and his peers made their stands and were counted one way or the other. He chose to vociferously support a war that he got a pass from fighting in based on his dad's clout with the Mormon Church (religious exemption) (he was old enough and draft-able.) Cheyney Schwerner and Goodman were his age peers. He was not protesting his own church's racism nor questioning it in public. (His dad didn't do that either.) And of course true to the mormon doctrine called "Lying For The Lord" Mitt lied when he said he saw his father march with Martin Luther King. That never happened.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I am in the Romney fan club. Never said I was. He is a bit too progressive for me and I do not like idea that he had a mandate to buy insurance in MA

My posts here were about the reason he went to speak at the NAACP event. I do not believe he is a racist as some were implying. I believe he feels that his policies are more in line the needs and will help in the advancement of colored people.

I do not think there was a secret agenda to gain support from white supremacists as others here are saying.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

It's all about what you think what you say you see, etc. Try facts.

http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/curseofcain_part1.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/romney-says-he-expected-to-be-booed-at-naacp/story?id=16753886

By MATT NEGRIN (@MattNegrin) July 11, 2012 Mitt Romney said after being booed at the NAACP today that he "expected" the strong objection in response to his pledge to repeal President Obama's health care law.

The black audience members rained boos on Romney three times during his speech -- first when he said he'd repeal the health law, once when he said Obama's record proves he hasn't done enough on the economy and other matters, and once when he told them that he would be a president who makes the lives of African-Americans better.

In a friendly-territory interview on Fox Business Network, Romney told the Republican-fond host Neil Cavuto, "I think we expected that, of course."

"I am going to give the same message to the NAACP that I give across the country, which is that Obamacare is killing jobs, and if jobs is the priority, then we're going to have to replace it with something that actually holds down healthcare costs, as opposed to causing more spending for the government and more spending for American families," Romney said.

Avis Jones-DeWeever, the executive director of the National Council of Negro Women, said Romney had accomplished a "calculated political ploy" by signaling to conservatives that he's willing to tell backers of the health law that he wants to cut it.

"That was like a victory lap on Fox News," she said. "That was exactly what he went there intending to do."

Critics in Obama's camp charged immediately after the speech that Romney planned to be booed in an effort to charge up Republican voters.

"I believe he included that part of the speech intentionally," Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed said. "And I think the audience responded appropriately."

Reed, on a conference call organized by the Democratic National Committee after Romney's speech, accused Romney of staging a "political stunt" that was aimed more at Republicans who weren't in the room.

"He wasn't speaking to the NAACP audience at all," Reed said. "To his base it will make him look strong, but he never stands up to anybody else."

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter added that "black folks are not going to sit there and listen to some of that nonsense" and said that the episode was comparable to the optics of a video showing Romney speaking to black schoolchildren in Philadelphia.

Evan Vucci/AP Photo Republican presidential candidate and former... View Full Size

Mitt Romney Booed at NAACP Event Watch Video

Mitt Romney Heckled, Called 'Racist' in NYC Watch Video

Obama Needles Boston Supporters Over Red Sox Trade Watch Video "He's going through the motions. He's doing the things he thinks he needs to do. He's in a campaign. He's doing all kinds of stuff. You can't take any of this stuff seriously," Nutter said. "The guy is a joke. He's not for real. He's a character playing a role and virtually perpetrating fraud on the American public with a lot of this stuff."

Romney's speech was characterized by light applause throughout. The first and loudest objection erupted as Romney told the two-thirds-full room that he would cut spending by cutting "nonessential programs," and he said "that includes Obamacare."

Boos rang out for several seconds and echoed in the large ballroom in Houston. Romney paused and then cited a Chamber of Commerce study that said most people surveyed said the health law makes them less likely to hire people. He awkwardly continued to talk about Medicare and Social Security, and eventually earned minimal applause by talking about benefits for poor people.

Romney was booed again as he derided Obama on energy, trade, the size of government, education and the economy. "The president will say he will do those things, but he will not, he cannot, and his record of the last four years proves it," Romney said as the crowd jeered.

And Romney told the NAACP, "If you want a president who will make things better in the African-American community, you are looking at him." Some people clapped and some objected verbally. "You take a look," he added.

Tara Wall, a policy adviser to Romney, argued to reporters after the speech that Romney "received more applause than boos," including a standing ovation when the speech ended.

"If you want to count the handful of boos there were, I think we saw much more acceptance and applause of his speech a number of times," she said. "There was much more agreement over all from what I saw and heard."

The main message from Romney, a white Mormon whose father ran for president when blacks weren't even allowed to join the Mormon priesthood, was that black voters have been let down by the country's first black president....

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Blah diddy blah blah blah

I think it was a great idea for him to speak at the NAACP. I also believe his policies are more in line with the needs of and will do more for the advancement of colored people than those of Obama.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/romney-says-he-expected-to-be-booed-at-naacp/story?id=16753886 By MATT NEGRIN (@MattNegrin) July 11, 2012 Mitt Romney said after being booed at the NAACP today that he "expected" the strong objection in response to his pledge to repeal President Obama's health care law. The black audience members rained boos on Romney three times during his speech --

I know, for you guys facts suck. Have a nice day.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Why would he not expect boos? He knows that there would be many Obama supporters there. That does not mean he should not present his case. That did not stop him from explaining why he wanted to repeal it. The reasons make sense. It is not a good piece of legislation and it is full of crony capitalism.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

It was political theater. It was a win-win set up for Romney no matter what happened. LIke a good Mormon and a better politician Romney could pose as all things to all people. The NAACP was a prop as were the blacks he flew in to the convention.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

He's neither a republican, or a racist that I know of. He is a religious man who has put himself in harms way repeatedly in support of justice for the oppressed.

A good soldier in the war against right wing wacko racism.

No Justice, No peace.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/sharpton-calls-new-york-city-police-commissioner-raymond-kelly-hold-a-summit-gun-violence-article-1.1114729

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1611118/ti-al-sharpton-speak-out-against-gun-violence.jhtml

T.I. And Al Sharpton Speak Out Against Gun Violence

'These kids know I lived the life ... They know I've seen the likely outcome of their mistakes,' MC says to the crowd. By Shaheem Reid and Rahman Dukes

T.I. recently had time to chop it up with friends Young Jeezy and Nelly as they took in the Atlanta Hawks playoff game versus the Cleveland Cavaliers at Atlanta's Philips Arena. Soon after, the King of the South made his way from his hometown up to Harlem, New York, to join forces with the Reverend Al Sharpton and his National Action Network to speak out against gun violence following the tragic the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Corey Squire.

Just days away from beginning his jail sentence for felony weapons charges, a relaxed Tip addressed the many onlookers who came out to show their support for the "Bury Da Beef" campaign.

"First of all, I want to apologize to everyone," T.I. said, referring to his own publicized weapons case. He also talked about the mistakes he's made and explained why he's the perfect person to speak to the youth today.

"I know what it's like," he continued. "I've come into Harlem, I've spoken at schools before. These kids know I lived the life I'm now living. They know I've seen the likely outcome of their mistakes. I've caught cases, I've been to jail, I've had attempts on my life and I'm still standing. I've learned from it. I have the experience that living this life of crime — I know where they're headed."

Tip also expounded on the ramifications of gun violence.

"We don't understand the pain that goes on with mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers," he said about the victims of gun violence. "There are households being destroyed. You're not just killing a man, you're killing a family. But just like we can destroy, we can rebuild, and that's what we're here to do."

Immediately following the rally, T.I. — flanked by his Warner Music Group boss Kevin Liles, fellow MC and possible future labelmate Ja Rule and members of his K.I.N.G. Foundation — participated in a peace walk, visiting the site where Squire's life was cut short by a hail of bullets. Before his exit, a confident T.I. assured the audience he'd emerge from his prison sentence stronger than ever.

"When I get back — 'cause I will be back — you'll see me standing stronger, wiser and richer."

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

That there are black people who are angry over the situation of their people and who have gut emotional feelings against white people and immigrant groups who have displaced African Americans from low tier employment and communities is not in my mind in any way equivalent to what has been dished out to Black people these many decades and centuries and I refuse to call those emotional responses anything like "racism". I pretty much don't even use the word any more because whites have managed to turn the word "racism" completely on its head to a point where perhaps most who hear it envision angry black people.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I'll say it again:

That there are black people who are angry over the situation of their people and who have gut emotional feelings against white people and immigrant groups who have displaced African Americans from low tier employment and communities is not in my mind in any way equivalent to what has been dished out to Black people these many decades and centuries and I refuse to call those emotional responses anything like "racism". I pretty much don't even use the word any more because whites have managed to turn the word "racism" completely on its head to a point where perhaps most who hear it envision angry black people.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I don't wanna play your game. I disagree with the premise of your accusations.

We disagree. Thats all. The Rev Sharpton has been attacked by racists on numerous occasions. He's been hospitalised more than once as a result. He has always supported non violent protest and he is a great soldier for the 99%. All colors.

Peace

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

yes sir!

Are you a racist? Do you hate the Rev Sharpton and Pres Obama because they are black?

Peace

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

They used to say the same shit about Martin Luther King.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

"Move on" implies a problem that's been solved. Surely you jest...

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Why?

I think racism has it's most damaging effects when the people in control oppress another group based on race.

Of course the victims of racism may be bigoted against the group that has oppressed them but I think there is a real difference when you have no power over the other race.

Mostly I find the African victims more willing to accept the white oppressor race in America. Its the white racist who defines non whites (not just African Americans) as inferior, as lazy, as less intelligent, the White racist demonizes non whites in order to justify fewer services ("they don't deserve good things!"). It's the white racist in power who inevitably "blame the victim" whever non whites are preyed upon and victimized. ("they deserved it, they are animals").

If Non whites mention these realities that doesn't make us race baiters. We need to call a cracker a cracker. But to twist the situation by calling the victim of racism a racist is just a transparent attempt by racists (your are not a racist?) to deflect from the reality of who is responsible for these racist crimes. the white racists in power.

Peace.

Racist? If the hood fits, you gotta wear it.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

The word "racism" has been so turned upside down as to have no meaning. I prefer to use terms like "white supremacy" or "anti Black hatred." The worst anti Black haters are those who assert that there is no racism. They lie about people like Sharpton too.

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1611118/ti-al-sharpton-speak-out-against-gun-violence.jhtml

T.I. And Al Sharpton Speak Out Against Gun Violence 'These kids know I lived the life ... They know I've seen the likely outcome of their mistakes,' MC says to the crowd. By Shaheem Reid and Rahman Dukes

Email More» T.I. recently had time to chop it up with friends Young Jeezy and Nelly as they took in the Atlanta Hawks playoff game versus the Cleveland Cavaliers at Atlanta's Philips Arena. Soon after, the King of the South made his way from his hometown up to Harlem, New York, to join forces with the Reverend Al Sharpton and his National Action Network to speak out against gun violence following the tragic the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Corey Squire.

Just days away from beginning his jail sentence for felony weapons charges, a relaxed Tip addressed the many onlookers who came out to show their support for the "Bury Da Beef" campaign.

"First of all, I want to apologize to everyone," T.I. said, referring to his own publicized weapons case. He also talked about the mistakes he's made and explained why he's the perfect person to speak to the youth today.

"I know what it's like," he continued. "I've come into Harlem, I've spoken at schools before. These kids know I lived the life I'm now living. They know I've seen the likely outcome of their mistakes. I've caught cases, I've been to jail, I've had attempts on my life and I'm still standing. I've learned from it. I have the experience that living this life of crime — I know where they're headed."

Tip also expounded on the ramifications of gun violence.

"We don't understand the pain that goes on with mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers," he said about the victims of gun violence. "There are households being destroyed. You're not just killing a man, you're killing a family. But just like we can destroy, we can rebuild, and that's what we're here to do."

Immediately following the rally, T.I. — flanked by his Warner Music Group boss Kevin Liles, fellow MC and possible future labelmate Ja Rule and members of his K.I.N.G. Foundation — participated in a peace walk, visiting the site where Squire's life was cut short by a hail of bullets. Before his exit, a confident T.I. assured the audience he'd emerge from his prison sentence stronger than ever.

"When I get back — 'cause I will be back — you'll see me standing stronger, wiser and richer."

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

It'd deep stuff.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

you suond european. Jews are mainly european. Sicilian are italian and european. So no your kids will not look african.

In any event I have marched against racism when required for 35 years. I can't march against racism by non whites because they have no power. get it. Crimes by non whites are rarely race based. More likely poverty related. What race based crimes by non whites are you talkin about.?

Peace

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Fuck you, you racist piece of shit!

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

It's true that many Jews and Sicilians have African features and among those people you find some of the most virulent white supremacists- really upset when they look in the mirror.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Please don't respond. I have no interest conversing with racists.

Peace

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Oh so you don't think white racists have power.?

And you think there is racism against white people. Is that what they call reverse discrimination.

Sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

If the hood fits....

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

When the white racists with power allow non whites to have some equality and financial equity.

You gotta ask?

Peace

[-] -1 points by salta (-1104) 1 year ago

sharpton is a race baiter, so is jesse jackson. tawana brawley, crown heights riots, freddies fashion mart, al sharptons " causes"

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

You've never met any racist Dems before?

You really need to get out more often.

Did you know that Romney got a standing ovation at the end of his speech, and many more applause. You are insulting the crowd if you think they are not capable of cheering and booing depending on the topic.

Looks like you may be the racist one after all.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Riiiight! That crowd got his number. he spoke of his fathers work. that was the applause. he couldn't get applause for his efforts 'cause he ain't got any.

Romney is a tax dodging, greedy, selfish. plutocratic, homophobic, schoolyard bully playing to the racists in his base.

And there you go again defending your repubs.

[-] -2 points by salta (-1104) 1 year ago

democrats started the KKK

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

150 years ago when they were the racist pro slavery party. That has since changed to the repubs starting in the 1940's.

Do you know history? It's something else huh?

Peace

[-] -1 points by salta (-1104) 1 year ago

now dead robert byrd, senator form west virginian,life long kKKK member, personally filibustered the civil rights act of 1964 for 14 hours to keep it from becoming law. republican enacted civil right laws ( in the 1950's and 60's) over the objection of the democrats. it goes on and on and on and on.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Racist dems from the south hung on into the 60's it's true. Byrd was not life long KKK and did renounce and apologize that part of his life.

but since the 70's and your boy Nixons silent majority southern strategy the lines have been drwn pretty clearly. If you are a racist. You want to be with the anti immigrant, anti gay, anti minority repubs.

there it is. Maybe we disagree on these facts too.

Oh well.

Are you a racist? Do you hate Pres Obama because he is black.

Peace

[-] -1 points by salta (-1104) 1 year ago

my dislike for obama is based on his ideology , not his race.

[-] -1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

did you miss the main point of the article or just don't want to go there since you have no good response - here it is again, say something smart to expain where matt is off base about mitt - "Surely he didn’t think he was going to be getting converts by promising to repeal “Obamacare,” crush teachers’ unions, and “help those who need help.”

No, he delivered those lines like a man expecting, maybe even wanting to get booed. And sure enough, after the event, it was hard not to notice how gleefully Fox and Hannity and the like played and replayed the video of the Mittster gamely dying on the cross of racial outreach. The rhetorical theme on those outlets was something like, “This is what happens when you promote the cause of free enterprise and self-sufficiency in front of the N.A.A.C.P.!” As Charles Blow in the New York Times put it:

The speech sounded like it was designed not for the audience in the room, but for those in Republican living rooms.

It sounded as though he wanted to show force and fearlessness: “Look folks, I walked into hostile territory unafraid and unbowed.” This was his version of a Daniel in the lions’ den speech.

Talk tough. Get heckled and booed for telling the truth to those who don’t want to hear it. Take the president down a couple of pegs in front of the most loyal segment of his supporters…

So Romney did that, and then the next night he went to Montana and he discussed the experience in front of a friendlier audience. And this is what he said:

When I mentioned I am going to get rid of Obamacare they weren’t happy, I didn’t get the same response. That’s O.K, I want people to know what I stand for and if I don’t stand for what they want, go vote for someone else, that’s just fine…

But I hope people understand this, your friends who like Obamacare, you remind them of this, if they want more stuff from government tell them to go vote for the other guy — more free stuff.

So now this is the message: I tried to reason with the blacks, I really did, but it turns out they just want a free lunch.

How’s that for bridging the racial divide? Time to wake up the Nobel committee in Oslo!

As far as free lunches go, we of course just witnessed the biggest government handout in history, one that Romney himself endorsed. Four and a half trillion dollars in bailout money already disbursed, trillions more still at risk in guarantees and loans, sixteen trillion dollars in emergency lending from the Federal Reserve, two trillion in quantitative easing, etc. etc. All of this money went to Romney’s pals in the Wall Street banks that for years helped Romney take over companies with mountains of borrowed cash. Now, after these banks crashed, executives at those same firms used those public funds to pay themselves massive salaries, which is exactly the opposite of “helping those who need help,” if you’re keeping score.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

Did you miss the part where I said many blacks would vote against teachers unions and for school vouchers. Why do you assume the are pro teacher union. Studies show most blacks want charter schools and vouchers.

Also, as far a free lunches go, white folks are the biggest recipients of welfare, food stamps and other free lunches. So to say that being against free lunches is anti black is ridiculous.

He did not tell the NAACP folks the he was pro Obamacare he said that it is bad for America and he is right about that. The legislation is full of crony capitalism.

You say it was not for the people in the room then why did he spend 5 minutes talking about why he joined with the black legislative caucus in MA against others when it came to charter schools. Why did he end with a statement on how much his fathers work during the civil rights movement as a leader shaped his vision of what is right and decent. Why did he speak of how his father helped draft the civil rights provisions for Michigan constitution. Why did he mention how he was inspired by his farther marching in Detroit during the civil rights movement. Why did he speak of how his father helped create the Michigan's first civil rights commission.

What started out with boos when he mentioned "Obamacare", which I believe were planned, ended with applause and a standing ovation at the end.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Clearly a higher proportion of Blacks depend on programs like food stamps and public housing than do whites. Why?

http://www.nyc.gov/html/cchr/pdf/race_report_web.pdf

New York's own government admits that it doesn't effectively enforce anti job discrimination laws and anti Black job discrimination there is by the ton in Bloombergville.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I do not think you can fix racism on the workplace by giving people food stamps and welfare.

I do think you can fix the call backs on job interviews by eliminating the inequality in education. I think you can do that by allowing more charter schools and implementing a school voucher system.

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." -- Chinese proverb

I also think you can eliminate workplace inequality by eliminating the barriers for minorities who want to go into business for themselves.

There are two distinctly different approaches and I believe educating and enabling is the better approach.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

you are trying my patience and I'm tempted to call you names. The study shows that blacks with the same credentials as whites and hispanics do worse in the job search than whites and even than hispnics. Got that bozo?????

[-] 0 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

not sure why you are telling me this - did you miss this part or do you just like talking about welfare and food stamps since they are such a drain on the economy! - "As far as free lunches go, we of course just witnessed the biggest government handout in history, one that Romney himself endorsed. Four and a half trillion dollars in bailout money already disbursed, trillions more still at risk in guarantees and loans, sixteen trillion dollars in emergency lending from the Federal Reserve, two trillion in quantitative easing, etc. etc. All of this money went to Romney’s pals in the Wall Street banks that for years helped Romney take over companies with mountains of borrowed cash. Now, after these banks crashed, executives at those same firms used those public funds to pay themselves massive salaries, which is exactly the opposite of “helping those who need help,” if you’re keeping score.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

The times they are a changing!

Black folks are waking up and pretty much done living on the Democrat Plantation.

They are tired of being given enough to get by.

That are tired of being forced to go to the public school monopoly with tenured union teachers where only 50% graduate and many of those who do have graduate with a second grade reading level. They want school choice. They want charter schools. Many want to go to private Catholic schools with vouchers.

They are tired of having the entrepreneurial ambitions blocked by regulations that require you to have a lawyer, an accountant, and a compliance officer to open a lemon aide stand or sell cookies.

They are tired of being blocked by Democrap policies like Dodd-Frank that make it impossible for a bank to give them a loan because their credit risk is too high even though their idea for a business is sound.

Many of them are moving out of the ghetto and becoming successful capitalists. The days of following a party like sheep because they might get a hand out are over. They can see beyond the plantation fence. They are movin on up to the East side and telling the Democrats and their big government ways "No thank you, I don't need you to run (and control) my life because you suck at it."

[-] 2 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

you are dreaming - "Obama, overall, got nearly 95 percent of the black vote. These nearly 8 million votes provided nearly the full total of Obama’s winning margin over McCain in the popular vote column." - if you thinkit will be different this time you are not dreaming but dumb

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

It was a novelty thing.

To be honest, if I were black I would probably have voted based on race as well. Even if Obama's ideology was not in line with mine I would have voted for him. What an achievement for the black community. Now there is something my children can now aspire to.

Add to that John McCain, who seems to be an honest man with integrity and virtue does not appear to be all that bright.

Add to that McCain chose Sara Palin as his running mate. I don't think I need to explain why that was a bad move.

Taking the black vote for granted is a big mistake given that many blacks are moving to the right. The novelty of a black man in the white house is behind us. A large percentage of blacks want a government that is fiscally responsible, less of a nanny, and more of an enabler. Many are further to the right than me an atheist that has no problem with same sex marriage. They are devout Christians and many are homophobic. They have an entrepreneurial spirit that is moving them from the take care of me mentality to the leave me alone and let me do it myself ideal.

The irony is that Obama getting into the white house may be the reason blacks are moving to the right and away from the social "nanny state". They see that the doors are now open. I can do anything. I (or my children) can even become the President of the United States.

[-] 3 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

moving to the right - first of all obama is already on the right - ike was to the left of him - as to black voters "Polls have Obama winning more than 90 percent of the black vote against Mitt Romney, but there are signs that the high African-American turnout that fueled his 2008 victories in North Carolina and Virginia could dissipate after the hard realities of the president’s first term." - you like you ideology and have little regard for the facts - that is called religion!

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

"first of all obama is already on the right" ROFLMAO

Yes it is a fact that a high percentage of blacks will vote for Obama I did not intend to imply otherwise. When you put it in the context of the original post of this thread however, I do not think it was unwise of Romney to speak to the NAACP.

It is not religion it is a fact. Their vote is not locked in and guaranteed. The combination of facts you mentioned lower turnout and less novelty will make them important. They will be more focused on policy and less on race. At least I hope that is the case.

Another non religious fact is that a larger percentage of the people that took the time to show up at a NAACP event are likely to show up at the polls.

So in the end, in my humble opinion, the decision to speak at the NAACP event was a good one and not some "show for racist right wingers".

He did connect when it cane to educaiton http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAhJh0ADd9k&t=15m15s

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Re. "first of all obama is already on the right - "ROFLMAO" : Forum-poster, flip's point was fundamental and 'The Rest Of The World' would get it in a heartbeat and simultaneously LOL At You ... and shake heads wearily at you 'rolling on the floor' whilst you separate from your (x) !!!

You seem well mired in the minutiae of The US Binary Politics of 'Demoblican & Republocrat' and seem unable or unwilling to see the bigger picture of Unending Rolling Empire Abroad and a corroded Social Fabric & crumbling Physical Societal Infrastructure, at home with a cruel, coarsened culture of 'most to those who need it least (1%) and least to those who need it most (The 99%)' !!

Of Course Obummer / Obomber / Oblah-blah is "already to the right" and a 'Creature of the Corporations and US-MIC & Political Establishment' and absolutely "Ike was to the left of him". Very, very few of 'The Rest of The Planet' who have time and energy to think about it would disagree !

As an aside 'blacks' / black folks" are 'Afro-American / Black' - "People" and refer to themselves as such. They are of many hues and of many political shades too - from aloof & 'Bat Shit Crazy' (cf Judge Clarence Thomas) through to socially engaged progressives (cf Prof. Cornel West) and most points in between and some beyond.

Finally, I agree with you that it was a good that 'Mittens Romulan' went to The NAACP, so that we could again see him for who and what he is - but rest assured - the cold calculation was made that doing so would NOT hurt him with 'The Republican Base' ... folk like you perhaps ?!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I suppose everyone is to the right of something.

Most black people in America are entirely American and not Afro-Americans. Technically they are of the race negroid but that just does not sound nice. In the context of Mitts appearance at the NAACP I would call the audience black people. Actually NAACP stands for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People but calling them colored people sounds a bit dated.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Ok and at least you are using "black people" now ! Thanx for that !!

Perhaps pedantically - I had meant to say "African American" above.

pax et lux ...

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

I call people "folks" all the time. I consider it more endearing than people.

There are white people that move here from Africa. Are they African Americans? I would say yes. More so than someone who's family has been here for 10 generations or a black person that moved here from Australia.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

I appreciate your good grace at my oblique provocations and we probably agree that it is a shame that mere 'colour' can define anyone and as they say around my part of the world :

  • "eeeh lad, there's nowt t'queer as folk" = 'there's nothing as strange as people !!!

pax ...

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist. The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims."

--RonPaul

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Since I'm not African-American, and have no close relationship to one, I don't feel qualified to speak for them.

I'll let people of African heritage speak and act for themselves, anything else is racism disguised, perhaps, as carrying the white-man's burden, when in fact Caucasians have by and large been nothing but a burden to other races and ethnic groups of slightly different skin colors.

That said, Mitt Romney's speaking at the NAACP, especially what he said, dripped with American racism; with the notion that he knows best. His own words glaringly reveal that attitude: "I believe that if you understood who I truly am in my heart, and if it were possible to fully communicate what I believe is in the real, enduring best interest of African American families, you would vote for me for president."

I personally don't believe Barack Obama will deliver any more than Mitt Romney to the struggling African-Americans. My own opinions, I'm sure, may not reflect the average African-American's, but President Obama still receives a 90% approval rating from black Americans, and Mitt Romney's speech, I feel fairly sure, didn't win any new converts for the Republican hopeful.

[-] 3 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

Man shadz, you really do find excellent articles. I am ashamed to admit my naivete, but I am only now just waking up to the depth and breadth of R bigotry, hate, and fear. This white bhf makes me actually ashamed that I belong to the same race as them. Ignorance and stupidity does no one honor, but they wear this shit like a badge.

[-] -2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Thanx for your kind words 'Ud' and you aren't naive and it's never to late to wake up to the reality of the 'demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy' prevalent in The U$A !!! Education, Agitation & Organisation will serve The 99% very well !! The consequences of the lack thereof, really doesn't bear thinking about !

multum in parvo ...

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Matt Taibbi for president

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

Romney winning the repub primary was a new low for America.

Actually the entire repub primary was much more pathetic than usual. It was like a bunch of cartoon characters on Saturday's TV Fun House. And then democrats just got fucked because Obama ran unopposed in a majority of the nation.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

"Did Romney Make a False Statement on His Financial Disclosure ? - The candidate certified that after February 1999 he was not involved with Bain Capital operations "in any way." But he signed documents for the firm's big deals.", by David Corn :

We, The Sheep are are now so thoroughly anaesthetised and propagandised that not only will we not even bleat in protest and self preservation on the way to the slaughterhouse - but we are now actually considering nominating a 0.01%er, Private Equity Slaughterman as 'The Designated Shepherd' & El Presidente !!! You couldn't make this shit up, I kid you not !!

Resistance Is Fertile and anyway ... what's the option ?!

respice, adspice, prospice ...

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

It really does sound like a bad movie when you word it like that.

People really need to focus on congress too. It'd be nice to have a congress willing to impeach presidents for war crimes. Back when Nixon was president all you had to do was break into an office and spy on some people and try and cover it up to get impeached. And even then they resigned. These recent presidents passed a bill to spy on the american population and have committed war crimes. Or when Bush testified not under oath and off the record. What the fuck was that?

I still plan to vote my conscience and vote for someone that wants to stop bombing countries and doesn't want to fulfill the 7 countries list Wesley Clark talked about in 2007. I hope one day a majority of people will do the same.

[-] -2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Mate ... It Is A Bad Movie !!! & It's a hearbreaker !! <Deep Sigh> !

Frankly as November looms voting as per one's conscience is like wiping one's butt ... NOT a subject for pleasant conversation in polite company ... but what's the option ?!

Finally, re. Gen. Wesley Clark's unusual candour re. "7 Countries", I append :

cave - bellum se ipsum alet ...

(beware - the war that feeds itself !)

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Romney is the poster boy for the plutocrats. It's obscene.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

The republican primaries were a bigger joke than normal this year. It really showed how big a factor money in politics plays.

Romney - Hundred millionaire bain capitalist

Herman Cain - CEO Godfather's Pizza

Newt Gingrich - multi millionaire and public liar

And of course the bigot Santorum who literally ran on a gay hate platform.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Santorum was definately most offensive, Cain most comical, And Romney most dangerous.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

All of them major league - socially dysfunctional.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

My fav was Bachman

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

She has those scary runaway bride eyes. A little bit of the insanity peeping out through the windows.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

yes yes!. LOL Scary

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

You know?

You can see that insanity ( special to each ) if you watch what they say and then look for the telltale on their face for their belief or disbelief in what they just spewed.

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

VQ, I totally agree with your comment - "Romney is the poster boy for the plutocrats. It's obscene" AND concur with 'TM' re. "Romney winning the repub primary was a new low for America." above.

pax et lux ...

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 1 year ago

Stewart blast Romney on his free stuff.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

Surely he didn’t think he was going to be getting converts by promising to repeal “Obamacare,” crush teachers’ unions, and “help those who need help.”

lol

I'm always getting kicked out of parties

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

LOL 'MLH' !!! That's very candid of you !! Now why is that d'you think ?!

omnia causa fiunt ...

[-] 1 points by nazihunter (667) 1 year ago

was this in RS? Our poor USPS is NOT delivering my mail.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

It was definitely on Taibbi's Online 'RS' Blog but I'm not sure about 'the printed version', I'm sorry to say & ... 'Good Hunting' !!

pax ...

[-] 1 points by nazihunter (667) 1 year ago

thanks. there isn't anything he writes that doesn't make me more and more disgusted.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Viva Los Indignados !!! + One to bookmark :

multum in parvo ...

[-] 1 points by nazihunter (667) 1 year ago

muchos gracias muchacho! (Sorry, don't know Spanish too well. I admit, I always smoked a joint or two before going in). Hoowever, I do know how to sing La Cuca Racha. (Real fun when you're high!)

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 1 year ago

Love this article.

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Cool. Please also try to see the articles below.

pax ...

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 1 year ago

Maybe he should have talked up his opposition to same sex marriage instead. They would have gone crazy for him.

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

"Ten Top Romney Donors Hold Billions Offshore" : http://www.thenation.com/blog/168854/george-zornick-ten-top-romney-donors-hold-billions-offshore# .

fiat lux ...

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

"Mitt Romney's offer of government of billionaires, for billionaires, by billionaires - In the Romney candidacy, the Republican party has found the apotheosis of the fact that it now represents solely the super-rich" : http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/mitt-romney-offer-government-billionaires .

multum in parvo ...

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by henyslick (-18) 1 year ago

Prominent business groups are joining conservatives and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in calling out President Obama for his recent comments about the relationship between government and business.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/17/business-groups-criticize-obama-over-remarks-about-government-role-in-success/#ixzz20tjY6S2C

[-] 2 points by shooz (26733) 1 year ago

FLAKESnews!!

Giggle....snort!!!

Such an impeccable source. Are you sure you couldn't find something on Brietbart or Drudge?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

FLAKESspews!!! No news ( real ) involved in the process other then as spin material.

[-] -2 points by henyslick (-18) 1 year ago

another source!!!!!!! http://usbacklash.org/

[-] 2 points by shooz (26733) 1 year ago

Ah yes. One even less reliable than FLAKESnews.

Are you sure you can't find a tie-in with Bigfoot?

[-] -2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Pretty funny, actually.

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Hmmm ... but will the American Electorate see and appreciate the humour ?! My personal best guess is that Mittens Romulan went before The NAACP precisely to go to annoy them and actually to get booed as he knows damn well that that will appeal to and consolidate 'his base'.

ad iudicium ...

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Oh. Very good point! Let's hope it puts a fire under the left as well.

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Re. your "hope" above, ditto ! Further, I append for consideration :

dum spiro, spero ...

[-] -3 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 1 year ago

Your personal best guess that you heard on MSNBC or did you come up with it all on your own?

And I guess nobody cares about that 14.4% unemployment stat. Four more years!

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

The tax rate on the wealthy, the so-called job creators, has not been increased, in fact it's at a historic low, so where are the jobs, huh? Demand creates jobs, not tax cuts. Romney is a job killer.

[-] 1 points by Justoneof99 (80) 1 year ago

Check the numbers, fact is that 10% of highest income households now pay MORE THAN HALF of federal income tax. I would be careful about demanding more than that.

[-] 5 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Ok. Checked the numbers. Here are some facts you neglected to include. There are more taxes than just on income. Total tax rate for all Americans is 28%. This includes state, local, excise, sales, property, and other taxes.

The wealthiest 20% pay about a 29-30% tax rate.

Those making just $26,000 a year pay a 25% tax rate.

The poor pay about 17%. Try deducting that from $7.25 an hour and manage to pay your bills.

The share of taxes that both the the rich and poor pay is actually fairly close to their share of income. The top 1% earn a 21% share of the income and pay a 21.6% share of the taxes. The poor earn a 3.4% share of the income and pay a 2.1% share of the taxes.

One more big difference. The rich pay taxes from their surplus. The poor pay taxes from their necessity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-taxes-americans-really-pay-in-two-graphs/2012/04/16/gIQA6o4yLT_blog.html

[-] 3 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

Taking your numbers as correct it points out a serious problem. Not enough tax is collected from anyone in the US. Nations that do a better job of taking care of the needs of their citizens have tax rates for all citizens approaching 45%. We certainly need to tax the rich more, but should also recognize there simply aren't enough rich people to get the funding needed to properly run this country.

You could talk about eliminating the military or something else, but if all you wish to do is pay for what we have now you need to increase taxes for all. Taxing only the rich is inadequate.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Before you raise taxes there is another number to consider. The average compensation per worker in the U.S. is $100-$120K a year. Even a person with a masters degree, who on average earns just 60K a year, usually does not even make the average.

Wages have been stagnant for the last 40 years. They seem like they have gone up, but that was just the result of inflation, which is a tax in itself. A dollar in 1968 is now worth about 15 cents.

How can the people take care of their own needs if they don't get paid a reasonable wage for the labor they provide? The remedy for low wages is not higher taxes. The remedy is higher wages so they won't need the safety net of government services.

In order to raise wages, people will need to organize unions again as they did in the 40's, 50's, and 60's. When unions are strong, the wealthy are not nearly so wealthy. Don't like corrupt unions, start clean ones.

Sports figures use agents to negotiate their contracts. Without an agent, the sports figure would make a fraction of what he can make with a negotiated contract. Workers also need someone to stand up for them and negotiate their contracts as well. Collective bargaining needs to become common once again.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

If you think Im ever giving these war mongering maniacs half my paycheck, you are out of your mind....

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

I'm not evaluating what the money is spent on, cut the military budget if you can get the support for it. I'm just looking at the budget as a whole, if you want to spend as much as we do we need to certainly tax the rich, but we also have to face the reality that taxes may need to be raised on everyone.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Are you aware that the top 10% of Americans control over 70% of the wealth? So, if anyone is going to be pissed methinks it's the little guys and perhaps the wealthy should be careful about demanding more of the tax handouts/entitlements they've been receiving of late. They highest tax rate used to be 90%, I say we go back to that.

http://holtz.org/Library/Social%20Science/Economics/Economic%20Inequality%20in%20the%20United%20States.htm

Also, poor people pay much more in total tax as a percent of their income than wealthy people.

Oh, and if the wealthy and corporations wizened up and starting sharing the profits a little more with the workers perhaps none of this would be an issue. I, personally, would much rather see everyone earning a fair wage.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

"Mitt Romney : Richer Means Superior", by Cenk Uygur

You gorra read to believe it !!! + Thanx for that excellent link above btw, which I've bookmarked !!

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Wow. Sad. You really do have to read it to believe it.

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

It is certainly more than taxes that are involved in stimulating job growth however they play a role.

Currently you need an lawyer, accountant, and compliance officer to open a lemonade stand or sell cookies. Then you need to file so much paperwork, follow so many rules, and pay so many fees that many just give up.

Politicians say, "We support entrepreneurs," but the bureaucrats make it hard. The Feds alone add 80,000 pages of new rules every year. Local governments add more. There are so many incomprehensible rules that even the bureaucrats can't tell you what's legal. In the name of public safety, politicians strangle opportunity. All these rules protect the established big companies by creating barriers to entrance. It is like towns that only give out a handful of liquor licenses to protect the current businesses at the expense of the new guy.

The hottest career right now is compliance regulator. It takes at least 65 days to open a lemonade stand in NYC and 45 minutes in Singapore, South Korea, New Zealand or Honk Kong.

Add to that Dodd-Frank which now prevents banks from taking risks lending to someone without a high credit rating even though they have a great business idea.

Meanwhile politicians hand out money to their friends to start green energy companies, construction projects, defense companies... Seven of the ten richest counties in the US surround Washington DC.

In my humble opinion we need to lower taxes. We need to stop giving money to politicians who cannot be trusted. At the same time we need to lower the barriers to entrepreneurs and end crony capitalism.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

I disagree. I think the most important thing we need to do is get these corporations to start sharing the profits with employees in a more fair manner. Wages to profits as a ratio has plummeted in the last 30 years. If people made enough money to live decently they'd purchase your lemonade more and your costs for regulation and such would seem minimal, although I agree that the red tape should be eliminated as much as possible. And, I get your point re: cronyism.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 1 year ago

That sounds nice however I disagree that that is the first thing we need to do.

Small enterprises account for 52 percent of all U.S. workers. They produced three-fourths of the economy's new jobs over the past few years. We need to set up an environment where people can more easily go into business for themselves and stop working for the big corporations.We need to set up a system where these businesses can compete globally.

To me it is encouraging that the impact of legislation on small businesses has become central to the debate on where we need to focus.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

I don't disagree with you that things should be easier for small businesses. Yes. True.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Great links! Thanks.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

You're welcome and 'Co-ops' have much to offer workers everywhere and are again resurgent in Europe as people re-investigate new commercial paradigms. 'The John Lewis Partnership' in The UK is one the most well known and liked retail chains and it is run on 'Co-Operative Principles'.

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I agree that the inequity between the obscenely large salaries/bonuses of executives compared to the people who do the work hurts the middle class. And minimizes consumer demand! That should be addressed ASAP. Even the profits that go to dividents/stock buybacks should find there way to the workers, whatever. The workers need to be lifted up already.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Fairness in wages. Big issue.

[-] 2 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

in 2010 the top ten hedge fund managers made on average 900k per hour - no that is not a typo - per hour!

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

What is the source for that figure?

[-] 1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

don't remember - i imagine i could find it - but why do you want it. here is paulson's income - do the math - According to The Wall Street Journal, “Hedge-fund manager John Paulson personally netted more than $5 billion in profits in 2010—likely the largest one-year haul in investing history, trumping the nearly $4 billion he made with his ‘short’ bets against subprime mortgages in 2007.” Someone buy this man a drink!

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

It's not that I don't believe the figure, but what is the point in making a claim, even if you know it's true, if you can't support your argument with evidence? Even the signs I carry are going to have the sources included on them as well as a QR code.

If someone doesn't believe the facts that support your argument at a protest, just have him look up the website on his own phone with the QR code. End of debate.

Now I have to go look it up.

He made $4.9 billion in 2010. Not an average yearly income though. $2,355,769 an hour based on a 40 hour work week. Truly amazing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paulson

[-] 1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

glad you are so well prepared - the numbers are correct

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Unreal ! And, by the way, thanks for the reply re: education in NJ. You said it all there. Great job!

[-] 0 points by salta (-1104) 1 year ago

slightly more than my plumber.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

The middle class consumer is the real job creator.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Exactly.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

All consumers - even the poor ones support the economy. Just think how awesome the economy would be if everyone made a living wage.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You areright. Poor people spend every penny they get on consumption. And yes the solution is raising all workers up.

Support Living wage.

Peace

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Support Health and Prosperity for ALL.

Strength in unity.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Yes.

Solidarity.

Peace

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

PEACE.

[-] -1 points by flip (5043) 1 year ago

.............Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of Federal Revenue 1955 . . . 27.3% 2010 . . . 8.9%

Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of GDP 1955 . . . 4.3% 2010 . . . 1.3%

Individual Income/Payrolls as a Percentage of Federal Revenue 1955 . . . 58.0% 2010 . . . 81.5% Finally, for those in the top 0.01 percent of the income distribution, the effective tax rate was 71.4 percent in 1960, 74.6 percent in 1970, 59.3 percent in 1980, 35.4 percent in 1990, 40.8 percent in 2000 and 34.7 percent in 2004......................

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Startling. Hard to argue against those numbers. I'm sure plutocrat shills would (if they don't ignore them)

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Great stats, flip!!! Hmmm. Voted down for telling it like it is. Pretty funny. Seems some people like keeping the masses in economic shackles.

[-] -2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

In corroboration of your fundamental point :

  • Too Hot for TED - 'Middle Class CONSUMERS are the ‘Job Creators’ (Must Watch 6 Minute Video) "Who is Nick Hanauer? Nick Hanauer is a venture capitalist from Seattle, whose speech at the TED University conference was deemed "too politically controversial to post on their web site." Here it is : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31848.htm .

fiat lux ...

[-] -2 points by beautifulworld (20506) 1 year ago

Thanks! He makes so many good points!

From Hanauer: "...if no one could have afforded to buy what we had to sell, my businesses would all have failed and all those jobs would have evaporated."

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Can't help noticing and laughing at the mass 'vote downs' going on here ! I love it !!

per aspera ad astra ...

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

We have a shill sock-puppet doing the silent vote down?

I love it.

A nasty cheerleader - demonstrating anti-social behavior.

They do make for nice interactive examples of the sickness we are fighting.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

More than one "nasty chearleader" me thinx & we will see this silent and somewhat cowardly opposition increase as November approaches and things 'hot up' re the next POTUS.

'verb. sat. sap.' ...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Gives me such a warm feeling to know that they care. {:-])

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Lol & consider : "They" care alright ... the question remains .. can we help wake enough of The 99% to care enough too and 'Wake 'TF' Up' ?!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Here is a help in that direction. You may have already seen this.

Avaaz - Put bankers behind bars

We need to keep supporting and circulating good issues.

Everyone to use their own presentation of the same information - as sometimes it is presentation that gets someones attention rather than the content. Information the same presentation different.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

per ardua ad astra = 'by hard work to the stars' !!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Through hardships to the stars

I like that.

Aim for the stars - you may only hit the moon the 1st time - but you will be headed in the right direction - continuous process improvement.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Another variation on the theme = per aspera ad astra ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Russian translation = Through the Thorns to the Stars

I do like this interpretation much better : through hardships to the stars

Russians can be so visceral. Relating to deep inward feelings rather than to the intellect.


[-] 1 points by shadz66 (5242) 1 minute ago

Another variation on the theme = per aspera ad astra ... ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] -1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

Nope. I've never watched "MSNBC". It is - as I said, my 'personal best guess' and intuition based upon reading The Romulan's smug, self-satisfied face as he delivered his pre-scripted speech. IF you have heard a similar analysis on 'MSNBC' then that's well and good & frankly a moment's reflection really makes what I said, fairly obvious. Further, please consider :

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago