Saturday, August 11, 2007
This Sad Day in the History of Poor American Government
On this day in 1964, a Democrat dominated Congress approved the enabeling bill for President Johnson's "War on Poverty" (the Economic Opportunity Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 2701 et seq.). Since then, the federal government has spent nearly 7 trillion (with a 't') dollars on anti-poverty programs and the percentage of the life's lottery losers living in poverty has risen (although the rest of the World's poor would kill to live in a state of American poverty). Any government program that has the word 'war' in it, but does not involve bombs and troops, is a very, very bad idea, indeed.
Did no Democrat read Matthew 26:11?
Did no Democrat read Matthew 26:11?
Labels: American Politics
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 7:46 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Your next step to at least understanding conservative thought (even if you don't buy it) is realizing that spending money (beyond a basic minimum) on education means nothing to the quality of the education produced therewith.
Rog,
I keep tellling you the key to reforming the American educational system is to compensate teachers as well as lawyers are compensated.
T
I keep tellling you the key to reforming the American educational system is to compensate teachers as well as lawyers are compensated.
T
# posted by 
: 11:01 AM
: 11:01 AM
And I reject that notion. No one gets into teaching for the salary. You get into teaching for the retirement benefits.
Rog,
The retirement benefits for CO public school teacher are not that great. The health insurance benefits may be. The real issue is why people either opt out of teaching or never go into it. Given where we are now economically and where we have been for thirty years, choosing public school teaching as a profession is taking a vow of poverty.
T
The retirement benefits for CO public school teacher are not that great. The health insurance benefits may be. The real issue is why people either opt out of teaching or never go into it. Given where we are now economically and where we have been for thirty years, choosing public school teaching as a profession is taking a vow of poverty.
T
# posted by : 1:51 PM
: 1:51 PM
Relative poverty, I agree; few if any of the teachers I know are underfed or in want of even what we call the necessaries.
To the extent that there is any correlation between education outcomes and cost of education, that correlation is slightly negative. (As prices rise, education decreases.) The coefficient is so low, though, that we're mostly looking at noise.
But the problem is certainly not money; try taking a look at what you can get for $7500+ (sometimes ++) per student in a 22-student classroom. $115,000 in salary and benefits and $50,000 in infrastructure costs is quite competitive with industry, even without considering the 15 weeks of vacation/year.
Next, take a look at the differential outcomes between private schools and public schools, controlling for student SES. The private schools are often less expensive and nearly always get better outcomes.
And I assure you that private schools pay lower mean and median salaries than public schools.
Post a Comment
But the problem is certainly not money; try taking a look at what you can get for $7500+ (sometimes ++) per student in a 22-student classroom. $115,000 in salary and benefits and $50,000 in infrastructure costs is quite competitive with industry, even without considering the 15 weeks of vacation/year.
Next, take a look at the differential outcomes between private schools and public schools, controlling for student SES. The private schools are often less expensive and nearly always get better outcomes.
And I assure you that private schools pay lower mean and median salaries than public schools.
<< Home
