Just out of Curiousity

[Si modo]

Public schools.

A violation of the Constitution. It goes without saying that there is no Constitutional Authority for the Department of Education.

However, it can be said that the DoE does not directly compete with private schools. That is done on a State level and can be considered permissible if the people vote to amend their State Constitution.

Right. Public education, in principle (and that's a principle worth keeping...good God, is it), is not a constitutional given. But, states can do pretty much what they want to do in that area. That's wonderfully constitutional.

There are two fundamental concepts associated with this issue that irk me:


(damn, forgot...)

(oh yeah...LOL)

1. The existence of the Department of Education: It's not required. It's a violation of states' rights. It's an unconstitutional entity. Not only that, it's a fucking waste of money for something that the Constitution doesn't mandate. And, to add salt to that wound, it's so very ineffective.

2. Before the economy went belly-up under GWB and exacerbated under BHO (exacerbation is an understatement), there was a hopeful buzz around town that the Dep't of Ed. was going to be phased out. Now? Pffffft. It's also on the Obama WPA.

 

[Luissa]

you might want to read up on cooperative federalism and the tenth amendment.

 

[Si modo]

you might want to read up on cooperative federalism and the tenth amendment.

No need to. It doesn't apply, if one is a dual federalist. You are not. I am.

Now try to convince me that dual federalism is wrong. Really. I love opposing viewpoints when presented rationally. It helps me think and analyze.

 

[Luissa]

I think it does apply just in the way it applies to other programs, if you don't meet their quidelines they will not provide federal funding and right now my state's education program would be screwed if it wasn't for federal funding.
And as for dual federalism, you can't have four assistant managers who have the same power as the manager. It doesn't work in private business, why would you think it would work for the government.
Also are current constitution is a prime example of why dual federalism does not work.
If we had kept the Articles of Confederation we would not have had a federally funded army and we would have lost the war of 1812 for starters.

 

[Si modo]

I think it does apply just in the way it applies to other programs, if you don't meet their quidelines they will not provide federal funding and right now my state's education program would be screwed if it wasn't for federal funding. ...

(Sunnava fucking bitch! That makes two times that I have spent typing out a detailed response to you and Vista has decided to update me.)

Let's try again: It will be short and sweet at this point...frustrated.

K...

I see two possibilities here (maybe there are more...just let me know):

1. Even with fed funding, you are still fucked. But, you are not alone. So are those schools in other states. All states are on an equal fucked-upedness playing field with fed funds right now.

2. We cut you off and you're even more fucked. But you are not alone - we cut off all states. All states are more fucked up.

So, either with (1) or (2), you are still fucked.

I choose (1). It's the better deal for me.

.... And as for dual federalism, you can't have four assistant managers who have the same power as the manager. It doesn't work in private business, why would you think it would work for the government.
Also are current constitution is a prime example of why dual federalism does not work.
If we had kept the Articles of Confederation we would not have had a federally funded army and we would have lost the war of 1812 for starters.

Interesting points. I would like to hear more and tell more. Now that I think of it, this could get verbose, so maybe a separate thread? Don't want to distract from this one.

 

[Luissa]

just say stimilus dollars are saving are ass right now.
we also pay our teacher's well along with providing good benefits which is why it is almost impossible to find a permnant teaching job in the state right now and is difficult during good economic times.

 

[KittenKoder]

just say stimilus dollars are saving are ass right now.
we also pay our teacher's well along with providing good benefits which is why it is almost impossible to find a permnant teaching job in the state right now and is difficult during good economic times.

Teachers over here haven't gotten the memo that Western Washington is broke ... they're striking still.

 

[Luissa]

and that western washington gets more funds and better pay then eastern washington.
At least gates donated computers to the whole states recognizing washington extends passed the cascades.

 

[Luissa]

and I think it is pretty stupid for them to be striking at a time like this, shit I hate my job but I know I am lucky to have it.

 

[DiveCon]

and that western washington gets more funds and better pay then eastern washington.
At least gates donated computers to the whole states recognizing washington extends passed the cascades.

gates is the Antichrist
just as KK

 

[Luissa]

and that western washington gets more funds and better pay then eastern washington.
At least gates donated computers to the whole states recognizing washington extends passed the cascades.

gates is the Antichrist
just as KK

I have a few cousins that work for microsoft, just say it has given both a very comfortable life.

 

[Luissa]

I think it does apply just in the way it applies to other programs, if you don't meet their quidelines they will not provide federal funding and right now my state's education program would be screwed if it wasn't for federal funding. ...

(Sunnava fucking bitch! That makes two times that I have spent typing out a detailed response to you and Vista has decided to update me.)

Let's try again: It will be short and sweet at this point...frustrated.

K...

I see two possibilities here (maybe there are more...just let me know):

1. Even with fed funding, you are still fucked. But, you are not alone. So are those schools in other states. All states are on an equal fucked-upedness playing field with fed funds right now.

2. We cut you off and you're even more fucked. But you are not alone - we cut off all states. All states are more fucked up.

So, either with (1) or (2), you are still fucked.

I choose (1). It's the better deal for me.

.... And as for dual federalism, you can't have four assistant managers who have the same power as the manager. It doesn't work in private business, why would you think it would work for the government.
Also are current constitution is a prime example of why dual federalism does not work.
If we had kept the Articles of Confederation we would not have had a federally funded army and we would have lost the war of 1812 for starters.

Interesting points. I would like to hear more and tell more. Now that I think of it, this could get verbose, so maybe a separate thread? Don't want to distract from this one.

and I wouldn't worry about derailing his thread, we have already proven that the government competes with private business all the time.

 

[KittenKoder]

and that western washington gets more funds and better pay then eastern washington.
At least gates donated computers to the whole states recognizing washington extends passed the cascades.

gates is the Antichrist
just as KK

No, not really, it's the idiot he put in charge of Microsucks that is.

Gates just got senile.

 

[Darkwind]

Public schools.

A violation of the Constitution. It goes without saying that there is no Constitutional Authority for the Department of Education.

However, it can be said that the DoE does not directly compete with private schools. That is done on a State level and can be considered permissible if the people vote to amend their State Constitution.

Public schools are unconstitutional? What does that even mean? The Department of Education is unconstitutional? When was that decision rendered?

Show Me the language in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to run public schools.

 

[Darkwind]

That one flew over your head huh Dark?

Brush up on your history:

United States Postal Service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No, It did not. The Postal Service does not compete with private industry. No other corporation provides letter service in this country AND the Postal Service is no longer a government agency.

Why do you have to be contrary when someone proves you wrong?

Since when does the Postal Service not compete with UPS or FedEx?

As for letter service...

These things came about AFTER th Postal Service went private.

So, lets get back on topic, shall we.

Where does the authority come from that gives the Feds the justification for competing with the private sector.


But more important. Can you even list a reason for why it is morally wrong for the Federal Government to compete with the private sector?

 

[Darkwind]

Exactly when did it become legal or even moral for government to compete with private business?

From where does the legal authority come that allows the government to compete with private business?

Does anything actually become legal?

If something has never been done before, is it by default illegal?

Yes. With government, they have to have a guiding authority in order to do anything. They MUST have a basis in law to do anything, otherwise, they are just a tyrannical power with no checks upon them at all.

 

[Darkwind]

I think it does apply just in the way it applies to other programs, if you don't meet their quidelines they will not provide federal funding and right now my state's education program would be screwed if it wasn't for federal funding.

I would suggest looking into replacing your government with people who are much more competent.

And as for dual federalism, you can't have four assistant managers who have the same power as the manager. It doesn't work in private business, why would you think it would work for the government.
Also are current constitution is a prime example of why dual federalism does not work.
If we had kept the Articles of Confederation we would not have had a federally funded army and we would have lost the war of 1812 for starters.

A simple answer is to return to the original intent of the Founders which is to say that the States (which can provide schools) take the responsibility for it.

But this is completely off topic.

 

[paperview]

No, It did not. The Postal Service does not compete with private industry. No other corporation provides letter service in this country AND the Postal Service is no longer a government agency.

Why do you have to be contrary when someone proves you wrong?

Since when does the Postal Service not compete with UPS or FedEx?

As for letter service...

These things came about AFTER th Postal Service went private.

So, lets get back on topic, shall we.

Where does the authority come from that gives the Feds the justification for competing with the private sector.


But more important. Can you even list a reason for why it is morally wrong for the Federal Government to compete with the private sector?

I suggest you look into your history books...recall The Pony Express and Wells Fargo.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A violation of the Constitution. It goes without saying that there is no Constitutional Authority for the Department of Education.

However, it can be said that the DoE does not directly compete with private schools. That is done on a State level and can be considered permissible if the people vote to amend their State Constitution.

Public schools are unconstitutional? What does that even mean? The Department of Education is unconstitutional? When was that decision rendered?

Show Me the language in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to run public schools.

That's begging the question. You're asking people to answer a question within which is the concession that you are right, i.e., that in order for anything to be Constitutional it has to be stated in the Constitution, complete with all details, that this or that is constitutional. That is a false premise.

The federal government directly runs schools for military dependents overseas. Where does it say THAT in the Constitution? Are they thus unconstitutional?

The military has all sorts of government employees (including the troops themselves) doing jobs that the private sector could do. Are they all unconstitutional? Is the soldier who's a truck mechanic in the battalion motor pool in an unconstitutional job because the Army could contract that work out to a private sector civilian mechanic?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yeah we need more private contractors doing military jobs, like those party animal embassy security guys. Certainly wouldn't want to take the risk of letting MP's from the military handle that kind of work when you can hire top notch private sector guys like that.