DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump Cutting Education Bigly!

Is this the nightly hysterical liberals thread spamming?

Whatever you feel good calling it Eve. I call it sharing information.

So heavily biased Young Turds videos is spreading "information" ok......

Show me where you get your 'unbiased' news... I won't be holding my breath.

Let me know when the democrats come up with a plan to cut spending on ... well on anything, something? Isn't there something they can cut?

Democrats are about as fiscally responsible as an NBA Black Card wife.

Well of course if you want to cut spending you should start with the healthcare and education of our children. Of course in this case, he isn't going to cut spending. He's going to turn around and spend that money in tax breaks and an increase in military spending. So actually he's reallocating the money, not reducing the deficit with it.

We would like to cut defense spending. Or at least stop increasing it.

Wow,, how quickly we forget that W put us in a whole and then left us with a completely screwed up economy to boot. but Obama got all that blame LOL funny how that works. Reagan did the same thing, so did Bush Sr.

It's just not as simple as saying Liberals aren't fiscally responsible and dropping it there.

What's an NBA Black Card Wife?

U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, however, said in a statement that the plan “reflects a series of tough choices we have had to make when assessing the best use of taxpayer money.”

“It ensures funding for programs with proven results for students while taking a hard look at programs that sound nice but simply haven’t yielded the desired outcomes,” she said.

The proposal eliminates a number of programs with the rationale that the programs have been proven to be either ineffective or are duplicated in other areas.

The plan calls for a $1 billion increase for Title 1 for new Furthering Options for Children to Unlock Success (FOCUS) grants that would be awarded to school districts that enhance school choice opportunities.

The budget also seeks a $167 million increase for the Charter Schools Grants program to allow states to launch new charter schools or expand current ones.

I didn't know she was secretary of private education.

So you are in favor of weakening our national defense and putting our own solders into unnecessary danger?

Well, of course not. We all know the military spends a ridiculous amount of money on things that don't contribute anything towards national security or the safety of our men and women. Could it be possible that the money spent on Education could be as equally bloated? Do we always have to act like cutting anything means we're trying to downgrade ourselves into a 3rd world country?

So would I.

maybe we do need cuts to education.

the problem is that i don't trust the current people in office to make those decisions.

and that's the whole problem. you guys put way too much emphasis on us complaining about cuts, but not enough acknowledging our concern on WHO is doing the cutting, and who will be affected by such cuts.

let's be real here, what population gets affected by cuts the most in this country? it certainly isn't upper-middle/upper class.

it's always the middle class and lower that gets hammered by these cuts. and that tends to be the people who need that funding the most. and yet the people who propose said cuts never seem to be affected by it. that's a red flag.

So the budget could very well be bloated. But until you can tell me WHY i should trust these guys in office to make those decisions (especially from a department head who literally bought her way into that position, combined with the other republicans who themselves and their big donors won't be affected by this), as well as WHO and HOW the people will be affected by it, then giving me a vague answer of the budget being bloated isn't gonna fly.

conservatives seem to always cut from people who need it the most, and give to the people who need it less.

maybe we should start the cuts from bloated defense contractors, or government subsidies, or tax reform that makes corporations who can AFFORD it pay their fair share.

but when you guys immediately go to education, assistance, and other social services, all it tells me is that you guys don't give a damn about the middle class and poor, and are yet once again proposing nonsense that only benefits the wealthy.

that's a fundamental difference between us, and as such, until i see proposed spending cuts from republicans to over bloated defense spending and fix the tax rates/laws these billionaires and corporations take advantage of, then i will always oppose this.

I blamed Obama for a number of things but I never blamed Obama for the economy he inherited... I'm also not so naive that I blame it on George Bush either.


Reagan did what same things? Screwed up the economy?


Things are rarely as simple as the talking points that are repeated ad nauseam on this board or everywhere else that politics are discussed but hey, it makes the electorate feel involved to throw around meaningless bumper sticker sayings, so who am I to try to stop it.


It's a woman who marries an NBA player and doesn't care if he cheats or how he acts as long as her Amex Black Card is always good when she wants to shop and indulge herself.

Nah.

Everyone agrees our fed. gov't. spending needs to be cut.

The PROBLEM with cuts comes because each and every group that is seeing a cut gripes and bitches about it, AND, you then have the opposite political party of whoever proposed the cuts griping and bitching and saying "Won't work, millions will lose food, and health care..etc"

Cut defense spending? Great.

Let's lop off 5 million or so gov't. employees as well. Let's cut the retirement benefits. Let's lop off military spending and v.a. care. Let's reduce infrastructure spending, lets cut nasa spending, let's cut the entire gov't. by 20%.

That way, EVERYONE will bitch and say "we just can't make it".

Nah, everyone agrees fed. gov't. spending needs to be cut - the problem is everyone thinks the stuff that affects them shouldn't be cut.

Seems anymore about 50-70% of the population is in some what sucking off the teat of the federal gov't.

And sadly, we can't raise taxes enough to keep up with the spending, let alone pay off debt.

In this thread: no conservative that understands the science of education.

The flip side to that is democrats just want to increase spending on education, social programs, and other things that are not getting better and have not proven to be effective... so I would offer the same challenge, I'd be willing to increase or at least maintain spending on education IF I was seeing some results. If we were improving education compared to other nations, but we are not.

So in short, I don't trust who is doing the spending... and that goes for this administration and the last one and the one before that......


I completely understand. I absolutely hate that this is treated as so simple. Dems are always portrayed as "higher taxes, greater spending" Repubs are "lower taxes, reduced spending".. (at least those are the theories) While both of them make sure that their favored groups are protected from harm....

I don't get why it has to be so black and white... I don't know why we can't SLOW spending increases.. while inching up the top rate (or at least get rid of the tax breaks the wealthy use to just hide money that have no other economic benefit)... But in the world we live in, the democratic base will not allow slowing or cutting spending on anything (except maybe the military) and republicans won't hear of tax increases, especially on the wealthy... So two polar opposite bases keep us locked in this downward spiral... We aren't going to get out of debt in a year (or 10) and we aren't going to end poverty in a year (or 10) but we need more common sense to begin accomplishing either.

nah, i don't agree with that at all.

and all that, you didn't even address anything i posted. i asked you WHY i should trust anybody proposing the cuts, and WHY i should tolerate who will be the most affected by it?

you just gave me another vague ass answer with no substance, further proving my point that when i ask you conservatives why, who, where, and how, you guys don't give me any real answer.

We rank in the 30's on education globally. Maybe we should fix it before we make cuts to it?

So do you honestly feel cutting money from education and healthcare is the best way to hand out tax cuts and increase military spending?

What I see here is that you seem to say cutting education is fine because there's waste in education. On the other hand you promte taking that money in giving it out in the form of increased military spending where we all know huge wastes exist. Hmmm....

School choice leads to increased school segregation, an exponential increase in the achievement gap, and lines the coffers of rich business people.

99% of Americans lose under school choice.

Which further validates my thought that "you lib's" don't understand the money tree is over, and was long ago.

Tell ME why fed. gov't spending should NOT be cut.

And, remember, fed. gov't. spending on education per student is minimal as educational spending is primarily state funded.

You tell me: Would you support the federal gov't. cutting spending? Yes, or no?

Then tell me, if yes, what YOU think should be cut.

We both know they have no concern for the 99%.

Yet we rank 3rd in per pupil spending.. Maybe we should figure out what we are wasting all of that money on before we keep increasing it.

You don't follow along real well.

I want the federal gov't. to get spending under control. Be that military, education......ALL of the spending the fed. gov't. does.



It's crap like that, where you twist words, sentences, and even paragraphs into some little sound bite (or on here, word/sentence byte) that make you come across as irrational.

It's NOT being cut. It's being reapropriated into tax cuts and military spending. You make it sound like they're cutting the deficit when in fact it has nothing to do with it.

I see you have been watching Spicers press conferences.

A world where asking someone a question is a terrible thing. lmao

come on bro. you and everybody else knows exactly why spending hasn't slowed down. it's obvious as all hell. our GDP keep growing, corporations keep making record profits, yet the people who make up the majority of the country (middle/poor class) see virtually none of it.

cost of living in a lot of places has skyrocketed, and yet wages hasn't?

you realize that in certain states, the average income of americans has dropped?

take a look a freaking Kansas and Oklahoma. a lot of their school districts have to operate on a 4 day school week because of cuts to education, while they continue slashing taxes for those who can more than afford it.

and those sort of policies is what are being proposed at a national level by this current group of politicians.

and yet you, Arch, Excel and others are trying to me that i should be ok with education cuts and other social programs of this magnitude so that fat billionaires and corporations can make more money?

F that. seriously bro, screw that. you haven't given me one reason to EVER think that should be ok, for ANY kids.

we have a guy right here on the board in GM who is on SSDI, who because of this current group is potentially gonna cut money from his pockets that he needs the most.

and i wonder how many other posters we have who are on SSDI, or some form of SS.

Trump literally wants to pull money from the disabled, poor, and struggling middle class in order to pay for his increase in defense spending.

the message that YOU and others are telling the rest of us is that we should be ok with GM and others like him dying, kids going hungry, and education being devalued in our society, that why we can go kill some arabs in the middle east.

when the first things to get ever get proposed cuts are programs that benefit the classes that need it the most, you conservatives come off as war hungry, insensitive, and just straight up cold hearted.

policies like this is why you conservatives should NEVER use the term pro-life. cause it's inaccurate as all hell.

You obviously don't follow along well. 1 track mind much??

I want federal spending cut. CUT! All of it. Not education (again, fed. spending for education isn't necessarily money going to schools, by the way).

I want EVERY aspect of gov't. cut. (reduced)

Look at the big picture instead of attacking me because of my name.

Federal spending can, and should be cut, across the board.

The problem comes when a cut/reduction is proposed, those that would be affected fly off the handle and say "people will die. Military will be ineffective, kids won't eat, roads won't be built, etc etc etc.

I'm apolitical on this issue, spending.






And then in the next thread, some people are saying trump ticked off Germany and Merkel is saying that Europe needs to rely on themselves......and those people are painting it as a bad thing?

Let Europe rely on themselves. The way I took Merkel's statement was "good. About damn time."

Try hard to understand where I'm coming from.

You didn't ask a question, you stated a false accusation in the form of a question.

A false accusation, pit. Deal with it.

No, Im asking a question in regards to what will actually happen if the Trump budget as proposed passes.

The amount they will cut education and medicaid is almost the exact same amount they are going to use when they combine the tax cuts and increased military spending. They're just moving the money around, not cutting the deficit.

So let's try this again shall we?

So do you honestly feel cutting money from education and healthcare is the best way to hand out tax cuts and increase military spending?

Because that IS what they're doing.

I'm simply asking if you agree with that. If the answer is no, why not just say it? If the answer is yes, why not just say it?

I can't speak for the "others" but my message isn't nearly that simple.

I have been, for a long time, in favor of transitioning to a private social security system.. but never at the expense of those who have paid into it. Those who paid in, deserve their money in retirement, no question.

If I was ok with kids going hungry I wouldn't regularly contribute to my church's food pantry that provides food for those very kids. What I am not in favor of is continuing to expand a social welfare system that is designed to trap people into it and create dependence. I was very much in favor of something like Bill Clinton's "Welfare to Work" program from the 90s.. and it worked great too. (granted in large part because the tech bubble was creating a ton of money). I happen to agree with Ben Carson's statement from HUD, It's not the government's job to get more people into federally funded housing, it's the government's job to get more people out of it.

I'm not for devalued education, in fact, I'm for much greater value in education. You know what would create more value in education? Train kids in areas where they can actually get a job. Not every kid needs to, or should, go to a 4-year college. In North Carolina alone, we could employ 2,000 trained plumbers and electricians TODAY if they were coming out of trade schools.. don't know how many more art history majors we need though, guessing it's not as many. I'm not for devaluing education but we have so devalued blue collar jobs that nobody, and I mean NOBODY, sees that as a legitimate "goal" for their kids any more. And what I think we should do to fix that would probably surprise you, and it's a lengthy answer, so let me know if you want to hear it.

As a side note, I already stated that I am 100% in favor of increasing taxes (slightly) on the wealthy even if it is just in the form of removing tax breaks they take advantage of that provide no significant benefit to the overall economy. This becomes complicated when you start mingling individual income tax with folks who are self-employed/sole proprietors of business.. and I don't profess to have all the answers but I'm sure there are smart people out there who can figure out how to do it without really harming folks who are busting their butts trying to grow small businesses.

As for killing Arabs.. kill all you want as long as they are the bad ones... and I don't think we need to increase military spending to do it. I won't pretend to know the nuances of a military budget but I would think that we need increased spending in the area of intelligence gathering and decreased in the area of new weapons systems that generals say they don't want or need.

One more thing...

I am very much aware of that... refer back to my comment about devaluing blue collar jobs. I fully understand why people don't push their kids in the direction of blue collar jobs when your entry pay is about $25K... but damn near any college degree will allow you to start at least in the mid $30Ks.. we start entry level engineering grads close to $50K.. and that's in Raleigh, our offices near DC, Philly, and NY start them significantly higher.

You can carve out a decent career in the trades but it's a hard climb from the beginning.. working out in the heat and the cold, the rain and snow, getting banged up and dirty. Having to move around from job site to job site even being sent away from home for long periods of time.... Yea, I get why nobody wants to do that for $25K a year when they have other options....

Again, I have theories on how it got like this and how to fix it, if you are interested, let me know.

Again, you're not following along. I guess that's my fault for not spelling it out slowly for you.

I want the federal gov't. to make cuts in spending in each and every area they spend.

And it could be done, with no harm to anyone - just with more efficiency.

i'd love to know.

because from my perspective, it seems like the idea of going to school was a generational/learned trait. the generation that was use to getting vocational training for the "dirty" jobs made sure to raise their kids (my generation) to go to school and get a job working in the office.

that was further enforced since that generation grew up in the early stages of jobs with lower skillsets being shipped off shore.

it's hard for me to agree with this idea that not everybody should get a degree, or at least try, especially when the labor markets virtually requires it for the jobs we were raised to compete for.

Problem with that is, if everyone has a degree and expects to work 8-5 in an office...........nothing will get done.


We need blue collar jobs in this country. And you know what? We have them. Yes, some require sweating. Some even require being away from home for a few days, or even 5 days.

Uncle - owns a trucking business. 19 trucks on the road. He struggles to find new drivers, even though the business could be there. Why? Because some weeks you leave on Sunday evening and don't get home til Tuesday, go out again Wednesday, and not home til friday afternoon.

Friend of mine, CEO of a road construction company - and he struggles to find qualified workers - you know, the guys that can use a shovel, hold a traffic sign, or run an excavator. Why? Because some jobs involve spending a week away from home, some involve leaving the house at 5 or 6 a.m., and not getting home until 6 pm, maybe later. $25 an hour starting off. Plus benefits.

Jobs are out there, it's just that people have this conditioning that "I'm working 8-5, M-F. And I'm not sweating. I'm not 'working', I'm sitting at a computer 'working' "

JMO.

well then the expectation shouldn't have been placed there, or enforced throughout someones young life.

if a generation as a whole is enforcing the idea that their kids should go get a 9-5 office job, then don't get upset when kids go to school to do exactly that.



everyone knows that.


and yet the same people who live in those bulk areas where a lot of sweating is involved won't take those jobs, they will then turn around and complain that illegals are doing it. funny how that works.



i know all about the convoy life. that's what i did in the Army deployed. and it sucked every damn day. i understand completely why people ignore those jobs. especially if you have a family, it isn't worth it.



it sucks, but again, an entire generation told kids they raised to not do those jobs.

so guess what the kids are doing? not those jobs.



i really don't know what to think about your post, as you really didn't - yet again - address any of the issues.

education is required because the bulk labor force requires it. these manual labor jobs are fine, but now you have to go and convince all these kids coming up NOW that those jobs are great to have. because the millennials grew up with their parents saying not to do those.

sorry but i didn't grow up being told how awesome it be to work at a garbage truck company.

my dad specifically said he didn't want to see me working construction cause the pay sucks and the injury rate is ridiculous. i got raised with my parents telling me the importance of education, business skills, and being involved with the the new industries coming up (IE: tech, medical, international business).

and guess what? a lot of those jobs require that. and right now we are competing with an international labor force. people from western europe and southeast asia are dominating the work force, and sorry, but the answer isn't working as construction worker for minimal wage. those jobs aren't gonna pay for the lifestyles people want. but that IT degree sure will.

I agree that it is previous generations who have pushed this "you have to go to college" narrative... and I get it, I just don't like it.


I think I worded that poorly. I think kids should try to get the education because that is where the decent paying jobs are. I'm not saying kids (or the parents who advise them) should tell their kids to settle for less. I'm more upset with a system that is so out of whack that kids who are not as academically inclined but might make tremendous craft people, are not really encouraged to pursue their gifts because they will be so limited in their potential earnings... so instead they go to college even though they don't want to in order to get a degree they don't want so they can get a job they won't like just because it pays them enough to live.

Here is the short(er) version. The biggest construction owners are always the government, federal, state, local and all of the entities that covers which is roads, higher education, K-12, municipal, military, etc. They have always done things on a low bid basis.. they have also always allowed LESS money in the budget than is required to complete the project.... low bid means that to get the work, you have to keep costs as low as possible, so contractors cut wages to the bare minimum from the general contractor to the subs, all the way down the pipeline. Now the federal government often uses Davis-Bacon wages, which requires the contractor to pay a "minimum wage" to the trades people, which makes it better but not good enough. Most state and local governments don't use Davis-Bacon and are free to pay as little as possible down to the prevailing minimum wage for the area. 20 years ago if you had latinos (or illegals) on the job, they were doing drywall. That's what 90% of them did and that's all they did. As the government continued to force low bid on contractors and it kept getting more and more competitive, the latinos (illegals) began to spread into all other trades, eating up jobs and willing to work for less thus driving down hourly rates for everybody.

Honestly, I'm not a big advocate of unions in theory but when I did construction in DC, a lot of it was union and those guys/gals weren't lazy, they weren't clock watchers who exploited loopholes in union agreements to get out of work... they just wanted to work and be paid fairly for it. And for the most part, they were.

Now these government entities have their own issues... first is they are terrible at forecasting. They will say, we need a new 200,000 square-foot classroom building on campus. Well we built the last one for $225/sf so use that as a budget. Well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the one they built in 2013 for $225/sf is going to be more when they try to build another on in 2017 but they don't think like that. Now they need to cut costs and drive down wages to get even close to what they want to build...

Considering that construction and everything that goes into it is 10% of our nations entire GDP, if we could fix construction, it would go a long way to forcing other industries into fixing themselves.. so my plan to fix construction...

1. Owners need to be realistic about how much building they can get for the money they have so they don't have to keep beating people down on their price, which the subsequently take out on labor.
2. Establish and conform to some kind of Davis-Bacon wage scale where contractors and subs are accountable for the wages and benefits they give their employees.
3. Use qualifications based/negotiated contract mechanisms where contractors get selected because they are the most qualified instead of low bid, where they are just the cheapest.

and 4. The big GCs and major subcontractors are the ones constantly complaining that they can't find decent qualified labor... these companies make millions. Have them help fund/support the vocational education to grow the folks needed to fill these positions. I don't know know exactly how, maybe some kind of incentive to make large donations to trade schools and community colleges or some kind of program where they pay for a kids trade school education and in return that kid owes them 4 years of work or something like that.. As I've said, don't know all the details but these contractors are griping about not having enough qualified people yet they are expecting the state to pay to educate and train them..

I wish people could wrap around the amount of wealth this country has and the fiat currency. The deficit numbers are mostly fictitious and used by both parties in power to impose continuous austerity measures that benefit the rich.

If you would like to understand more about this (which I doubt most will make the effort) start here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascalemman...t-now-not-ever/

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-04-18/america-is-nowhere-close-to-having-a-debt-crisis

i'm glad you gave context into what you are schooling me on. i freely admit that the construction aspect is something i have little experience or understanding in.

but one of the things you pointed out is interesting; how you were discussing the fact that contractors have to keep the wages low because the the Feds are only handing out contracts to the lowest bidder.

that, to me, provides a HUGE perspective as to why companies use illegals sometimes.

also, if what you're proposing does indeed help.....well then we're right back to square one with regards to WHO should get increases and cuts, and WHY or HOW will this affects others.

cause if getting companies to stop essentially low balling themselves would help, then all you did was give us a solid reason as to why federal spending SHOULD increase, at least based on this issue's own merits.

the problem, however, is that you can see why this particular set of contractors need more spending, but then we see the opposite of military contractors bloating their bids, and overpricing the Feds.

LOL, every thread... just more of the same vapid rhetoric and injudicious idealism. Political discourse in such an absurd environment is exhausting and pointless. But here we are, every day, attempting to enlighten our inane counterparts; so maybe it's us who don't understand the science of education as it seems to be failing us miserably.