Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

[danielpalos]

Vouchers; good enough for public education, good enough for public defense.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

given that Charter schools have worse record than public schools, and that's before all the protections to keep the scams out are eliminated, um, yeah, that would be a bad thing.

The thing about it is, no one wants to set up Charter Schools in the Cleetus states. There's no money to be made there. They want to get into LA and NY and Chicago, where there are big old pots of money to be had.

Umm. There are TONS of Charter Schools here.
The unions just took it in the shorts in Massachusetts. The State legislature is about to pass a law which raises the cap on the number of Charter Schools. There was a referendum on the statewide ballot which was in effect a question to allow the local boards have authority to expand Charters. That failed 2-1. The main reason is voters were concerned such a law would give local school districts too much power.
I have no idea other than to protect the unions, why left wingers are so fearful of parents having choices as to where their kids go to school.
As long as the kids are getting a good education in an environment that is conducive to same, who cares. I don;'t understand the mentality of a captive marketplace.

It goes back to what Rush says all the time. Unions are a way of getting tax money from the taxpayers to the Democrat party. We pay taxes for these schools--some of which ends up in the hands of the unions. Election time comes, and unions heavily support the Democrat party. So of course they are going to protect that money as much as possible.

Ah...and you buy what Rushbo says, don't you?

You listen to Rush?

About a third of Limbaugh's audience are flaming liberals or at least left leaning.
Limbaugh will put liberal callers to the head of the queue.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Found this on my local news station site and decided to throw it out there. The meat of the article says this:

"As President-elect Donald Trump leads an attempted makeover in Washington, Republican governors and state lawmakers will be simultaneously pushing an aggressive agenda that limits abortion, lawsuits and unions, cuts business taxes and regulations, and expands gun rights and school choice.

Republicans will hold 33 governors' offices, have majorities in 33 legislatures and control both the governor's office and legislature in 25 states - their most since 1952. Democrats will control both the governor's office and legislature in only about a half-dozen states; the rest will have politically divided governments."

Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

The states with strong teachers' unions have the best educational records in the country.

Why fuck with that?

Horse shit. Take a look at New York City. Washington DC, Newark,.....Kansas City. Cleveland.
All have unionized teachers with tenure after three years, all spend more money per student than 99% of other districts, yet their graduation rates pale in comparison to areas where per student expenditure is less than HALF.....
So here we go. Another selfish greedy lib spouts off his belief that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Why should teacher be able to use their union status to tell the taxpayers whom they serve "screw you. If you don;t pay us what we want, your kids aren't going to school"....
The existence of these labor collectives has turned things upside down. Teachers are public servants. They work for the PUBLIC. Not the other way around.
No one saying teachers need a beat down. Not at all. Teachers get the short end of the stick in that even where they are unionized, they get no support from the administration nor the parents. I have friends who are teachers. In the public school system of a nearby city, this one friend of mine who by the way has a law degree, loves teaching but has a I' don't give a shit if I rock the boat" attitude tells me that the teachers for the most part have to walk on egg shells. And they are unionized here as well. State law bars them from collective bargaining rights.
The idea is to strike a balance between the professionals and the taxpayers. Get rid of the "us vs them" mentality which is perpetuated by the union leaderships.

It's obvious that libturds like bad education and poor educated kids! They hate that children actually learn who they really are! It's all about libturdism

Nut they persist in demanding more money "for the chil-ren".....Throwing money at a problem is the liberal's way of saying "we care"...yeah as long as that "we care" money comes from someone else..

 

[thereisnospoon]

given that Charter schools have worse record than public schools, and that's before all the protections to keep the scams out are eliminated, um, yeah, that would be a bad thing.

The thing about it is, no one wants to set up Charter Schools in the Cleetus states. There's no money to be made there. They want to get into LA and NY and Chicago, where there are big old pots of money to be had.

Umm. There are TONS of Charter Schools here.
The unions just took it in the shorts in Massachusetts. The State legislature is about to pass a law which raises the cap on the number of Charter Schools. There was a referendum on the statewide ballot which was in effect a question to allow the local boards have authority to expand Charters. That failed 2-1. The main reason is voters were concerned such a law would give local school districts too much power.
I have no idea other than to protect the unions, why left wingers are so fearful of parents having choices as to where their kids go to school.
As long as the kids are getting a good education in an environment that is conducive to same, who cares. I don;'t understand the mentality of a captive marketplace.

It goes back to what Rush says all the time. Unions are a way of getting tax money from the taxpayers to the Democrat party. We pay taxes for these schools--some of which ends up in the hands of the unions. Election time comes, and unions heavily support the Democrat party. So of course they are going to protect that money as much as possible.

Ah...and you buy what Rushbo says, don't you?

Yes I do..........that is unless you can show me where he's wrong.

Ah...a Rushbo worshipper........he's right about you suckers.....

Oj please. You would not recognize common sense if it crawled up your nose and screamed in your face

 

[thereisnospoon]

Found this on my local news station site and decided to throw it out there. The meat of the article says this:

"As President-elect Donald Trump leads an attempted makeover in Washington, Republican governors and state lawmakers will be simultaneously pushing an aggressive agenda that limits abortion, lawsuits and unions, cuts business taxes and regulations, and expands gun rights and school choice.

Republicans will hold 33 governors' offices, have majorities in 33 legislatures and control both the governor's office and legislature in 25 states - their most since 1952. Democrats will control both the governor's office and legislature in only about a half-dozen states; the rest will have politically divided governments."

Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

The states with strong teachers' unions have the best educational records in the country.

Why fuck with that?

Horse shit. Take a look at New York City. Washington DC, Newark,.....Kansas City. Cleveland.
All have unionized teachers with tenure after three years, all spend more money per student than 99% of other districts, yet their graduation rates pale in comparison to areas where per student expenditure is less than HALF.....
So here we go. Another selfish greedy lib spouts off his belief that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Why should teacher be able to use their union status to tell the taxpayers whom they serve "screw you. If you don;t pay us what we want, your kids aren't going to school"....
The existence of these labor collectives has turned things upside down. Teachers are public servants. They work for the PUBLIC. Not the other way around.
No one saying teachers need a beat down. Not at all. Teachers get the short end of the stick in that even where they are unionized, they get no support from the administration nor the parents. I have friends who are teachers. In the public school system of a nearby city, this one friend of mine who by the way has a law degree, loves teaching but has a I' don't give a shit if I rock the boat" attitude tells me that the teachers for the most part have to walk on egg shells. And they are unionized here as well. State law bars them from collective bargaining rights.
The idea is to strike a balance between the professionals and the taxpayers. Get rid of the "us vs them" mentality which is perpetuated by the union leaderships.

It's obvious that libturds like bad education and poor educated kids! They hate that children actually learn who they really are! It's all about libturdism

^ Thus sayeth someone who cannot even manage correct English grammar......

THAT is your comeback?.....FAILURE

 

[NYcarbineer]

Found this on my local news station site and decided to throw it out there. The meat of the article says this:

"As President-elect Donald Trump leads an attempted makeover in Washington, Republican governors and state lawmakers will be simultaneously pushing an aggressive agenda that limits abortion, lawsuits and unions, cuts business taxes and regulations, and expands gun rights and school choice.

Republicans will hold 33 governors' offices, have majorities in 33 legislatures and control both the governor's office and legislature in 25 states - their most since 1952. Democrats will control both the governor's office and legislature in only about a half-dozen states; the rest will have politically divided governments."

Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

The states with strong teachers' unions have the best educational records in the country.

Why fuck with that?

Horse shit. Take a look at New York City. Washington DC, Newark,.....Kansas City. Cleveland.
All have unionized teachers with tenure after three years, all spend more money per student than 99% of other districts, yet their graduation rates pale in comparison to areas where per student expenditure is less than HALF.....
So here we go. Another selfish greedy lib spouts off his belief that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Why should teacher be able to use their union status to tell the taxpayers whom they serve "screw you. If you don;t pay us what we want, your kids aren't going to school"....
The existence of these labor collectives has turned things upside down. Teachers are public servants. They work for the PUBLIC. Not the other way around.
No one saying teachers need a beat down. Not at all. Teachers get the short end of the stick in that even where they are unionized, they get no support from the administration nor the parents. I have friends who are teachers. In the public school system of a nearby city, this one friend of mine who by the way has a law degree, loves teaching but has a I' don't give a shit if I rock the boat" attitude tells me that the teachers for the most part have to walk on egg shells. And they are unionized here as well. State law bars them from collective bargaining rights.
The idea is to strike a balance between the professionals and the taxpayers. Get rid of the "us vs them" mentality which is perpetuated by the union leaderships.

It's obvious that libturds like bad education and poor educated kids! They hate that children actually learn who they really are! It's all about libturdism

Nut they persist in demanding more money "for the chil-ren".....Throwing money at a problem is the liberal's way of saying "we care"...yeah as long as that "we care" money comes from someone else..

The people who want vouchers are demanding money for their children.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why don't we let Trump University educate our children?

I mean, what better example of the merits of private for profit education do we need than the PRESIDENT-ELECT'S own signature institution?

lol

What the heck NY have you been hitting the Egg nogg the entire day I was at work?


Why would trump U teach little kids about real estate?


Since when do they have money to invest?


.

I see. Here's a better idea. Let's teach students about con artists and the scams they pull.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Who are Republicans fighting for, when they go after unions and union busting? Are they in bed with the Corporations? Certainly not in bed with the citizens who work in Union jobs that pay well....

Republicans are fighting for choice.

I remember years ago when I was out looking for jobs, I'd apply to someplace that had a union. I would be up front and tell them I had no interest in joining a union. They told me either I join the union or they can't hire me.

Do you think that's fair?

That's illegal. A violation of federal law. Closed shop has been illegal since the 1930's Taft-Hartley Act.
But, unfortunately, many unions get away with closed shop because the federal and state enforcement is non -existent. Especially in union heavy states such as IL, NJ, NY, CA and others.
MO is going to become the 27th or 28th state to pass right to work law.
These unions have be reined in wherever possible.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, good for them......if they turned out so wonderful, why are you whining about it?

Because tax money only goes to public schools. At the very least, parents that send their kids to private school should not be funding the public school since their kids don't attend. Then they can use that money to help pay for their own children's education.

Then you need to complain to those who pass the laws making property taxes pay for schools. Repeal the laws.

We just want vouchers

IOW you want a handout from the government.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The SAME parents who send their students to public school with no home-made lunch

You mean those same parents that when they do pack a sack lunch for their kids, to only have the cafeteria police go through it to decide what the kid can eat?

My kids went to a school that had a closed campus, and also didn't allow them to bring a lunch. We tried to protest to the school but was told that it was "policy to protect the students". They never did answer "from what". What other option is there?

Link to that happening all over the place, please.

Sure, right away. Post up that evidence of Russia hacking

It's been posted dozens of times. Learn to read.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Found this on my local news station site and decided to throw it out there. The meat of the article says this:

"As President-elect Donald Trump leads an attempted makeover in Washington, Republican governors and state lawmakers will be simultaneously pushing an aggressive agenda that limits abortion, lawsuits and unions, cuts business taxes and regulations, and expands gun rights and school choice.

Republicans will hold 33 governors' offices, have majorities in 33 legislatures and control both the governor's office and legislature in 25 states - their most since 1952. Democrats will control both the governor's office and legislature in only about a half-dozen states; the rest will have politically divided governments."

Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

The states with strong teachers' unions have the best educational records in the country.

Why fuck with that?

Horse shit. Take a look at New York City. Washington DC, Newark,.....Kansas City. Cleveland.
All have unionized teachers with tenure after three years, all spend more money per student than 99% of other districts, yet their graduation rates pale in comparison to areas where per student expenditure is less than HALF.....
So here we go. Another selfish greedy lib spouts off his belief that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Why should teacher be able to use their union status to tell the taxpayers whom they serve "screw you. If you don;t pay us what we want, your kids aren't going to school"....
The existence of these labor collectives has turned things upside down. Teachers are public servants. They work for the PUBLIC. Not the other way around.
No one saying teachers need a beat down. Not at all. Teachers get the short end of the stick in that even where they are unionized, they get no support from the administration nor the parents. I have friends who are teachers. In the public school system of a nearby city, this one friend of mine who by the way has a law degree, loves teaching but has a I' don't give a shit if I rock the boat" attitude tells me that the teachers for the most part have to walk on egg shells. And they are unionized here as well. State law bars them from collective bargaining rights.
The idea is to strike a balance between the professionals and the taxpayers. Get rid of the "us vs them" mentality which is perpetuated by the union leaderships.

It's obvious that libturds like bad education and poor educated kids! They hate that children actually learn who they really are! It's all about libturdism

Nut they persist in demanding more money "for the chil-ren".....Throwing money at a problem is the liberal's way of saying "we care"...yeah as long as that "we care" money comes from someone else..

The people who want vouchers are demanding money for their children.

No, they are not. The voucher system simply states the tax money follow the student.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Where are schools excellent, and teachers low paid?

Where I live the schools are not very good and the teachers are paid excellent. How do I know? My former tenant used to work as a teacher here.

That wasn't the question.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The states with strong teachers' unions have the best educational records in the country.

Why fuck with that?

Horse shit. Take a look at New York City. Washington DC, Newark,.....Kansas City. Cleveland.
All have unionized teachers with tenure after three years, all spend more money per student than 99% of other districts, yet their graduation rates pale in comparison to areas where per student expenditure is less than HALF.....
So here we go. Another selfish greedy lib spouts off his belief that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Why should teacher be able to use their union status to tell the taxpayers whom they serve "screw you. If you don;t pay us what we want, your kids aren't going to school"....
The existence of these labor collectives has turned things upside down. Teachers are public servants. They work for the PUBLIC. Not the other way around.
No one saying teachers need a beat down. Not at all. Teachers get the short end of the stick in that even where they are unionized, they get no support from the administration nor the parents. I have friends who are teachers. In the public school system of a nearby city, this one friend of mine who by the way has a law degree, loves teaching but has a I' don't give a shit if I rock the boat" attitude tells me that the teachers for the most part have to walk on egg shells. And they are unionized here as well. State law bars them from collective bargaining rights.
The idea is to strike a balance between the professionals and the taxpayers. Get rid of the "us vs them" mentality which is perpetuated by the union leaderships.

It's obvious that libturds like bad education and poor educated kids! They hate that children actually learn who they really are! It's all about libturdism

Nut they persist in demanding more money "for the chil-ren".....Throwing money at a problem is the liberal's way of saying "we care"...yeah as long as that "we care" money comes from someone else..

The people who want vouchers are demanding money for their children.

No, they are not. The voucher system simply states the tax money follow the student.

Not true. You get public schools paid for by the taxpayer. If you want to go to a private school, use your own money.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Who are Republicans fighting for, when they go after unions and union busting? Are they in bed with the Corporations? Certainly not in bed with the citizens who work in Union jobs that pay well....

Republicans are fighting for choice.

I remember years ago when I was out looking for jobs, I'd apply to someplace that had a union. I would be up front and tell them I had no interest in joining a union. They told me either I join the union or they can't hire me.

Do you think that's fair?

That's illegal. A violation of federal law. Closed shop has been illegal since the 1930's Taft-Hartley Act.
But, unfortunately, many unions get away with closed shop because the federal and state enforcement is non -existent. Especially in union heavy states such as IL, NJ, NY, CA and others.
MO is going to become the 27th or 28th state to pass right to work law.
These unions have be reined in wherever possible.

And lower pay for teachers will produce better teachers how?

 

[bodecea]

Umm. There are TONS of Charter Schools here.
The unions just took it in the shorts in Massachusetts. The State legislature is about to pass a law which raises the cap on the number of Charter Schools. There was a referendum on the statewide ballot which was in effect a question to allow the local boards have authority to expand Charters. That failed 2-1. The main reason is voters were concerned such a law would give local school districts too much power.
I have no idea other than to protect the unions, why left wingers are so fearful of parents having choices as to where their kids go to school.
As long as the kids are getting a good education in an environment that is conducive to same, who cares. I don;'t understand the mentality of a captive marketplace.

It goes back to what Rush says all the time. Unions are a way of getting tax money from the taxpayers to the Democrat party. We pay taxes for these schools--some of which ends up in the hands of the unions. Election time comes, and unions heavily support the Democrat party. So of course they are going to protect that money as much as possible.

Ah...and you buy what Rushbo says, don't you?

Yes I do..........that is unless you can show me where he's wrong.

Ah...a Rushbo worshipper........he's right about you suckers.....

Oj please. You would not recognize common sense if it crawled up your nose and screamed in your face

You an example? *snicker*

 

[NYcarbineer]

The states with strong teachers' unions have the best educational records in the country.

Why fuck with that?

You got to be drinking a lot of egg nogg today.




.

I'm right you're wrong.

Only in your liberal fantasy land a simple google search is enough remember... I am a graduate of the great Union Chicago schools..

And you know how well I use grammar and spell real sweal.



.

Do you believe that if we pay teachers less we will get better teachers?

Did I ever say that? This discussion we are having right now is your claim that Union teachers are better and we both know that to be false.


Everyone against charter schools is against competition... Wrapped up in the facade that they take money away from the public schools. If you bother to look up the stats something over 50% of teachers don't even send their own kids to public schools..


So a question, if teachers are paid so little how can they afford it?

And what do they really know?



.

You want to break the teachers' unions to drive good teachers out of the public school system.

 

[bodecea]

You got to be drinking a lot of egg nogg today.




.

I'm right you're wrong.

Only in your liberal fantasy land a simple google search is enough remember... I am a graduate of the great Union Chicago schools..

And you know how well I use grammar and spell real sweal.



.

Do you believe that if we pay teachers less we will get better teachers?

Did I ever say that? This discussion we are having right now is your claim that Union teachers are better and we both know that to be false.


Everyone against charter schools is against competition... Wrapped up in the facade that they take money away from the public schools. If you bother to look up the stats something over 50% of teachers don't even send their own kids to public schools..


So a question, if teachers are paid so little how can they afford it?

And what do they really know?



.

You want to break the teachers' unions to drive good teachers out of the public school system.

They want all public schools to be "as good" as Mississippi.....easier to control that way.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The "workers rights" thing. No.....Money does not protect the rights of workers. Legislation does that.

except how do you think legislation gets done?... hint.. why do you think the the Koch Brothers spend billions on politics?

The problem in states where public employees have many protections is two fold. One the workers soon realize they are unassailable in every way. They become complacent, Then instead of performing their jobs, they revert to "putting in their time". Complacency begets mediocrity. When merit is eliminated from the equation and the slackers are rewarded dime for dime as the best workers, the machine breaks down. Hence the reason why public school systems, especially in urban areas and some suburban areas are not performing as well as they once did.

Not really. if that were the case, you would not have so many teachers paying for teaching supplies out of their own pockets.

Why Teachers Are Going Broke Buying School Supplies

nobody becomes a teacher because they want to make a shitton of money.

Right to work....Its the best way to go. Workers MUST be given choices. It is their right to choose whether or not they wish to join a labor collective.

What that usually turn into is "no rights at work". Why would you pay for a union if you get the same benefits of having a union? The problem with "Right to work" is that you get too many free riders who benefit until the point where the union is no longer effective. THAT'S when the one percenters start rolling back salaries...


They should call it, "No rights at work."

Now, all that said, I wouldn't mind seeing us go from National Unions to Work Councils like they have in Germany and Japan, where unions are organized at the shop level and they are given a say in the management of the operation.

hey sunshine. Read THIS...........Koch Brothers Now Supporting Hillary Clinton.
The problem you have is nobody wants to belong to a labor collective anymore. Unions tried to organize the VW plant in TN, THREE times.. Even at the behest of VW itself. The vote went the other way each time.
Unions lobbied heavily for a federal "Card Check" law. Simply put, a worker's vote up or down on organization or decertification was to be public. A terrible idea in that if the worker's vote were unpopular with the hardest of hard core unionists, it could lead to harassment and violence.
Here in the US, national unions are unconstitutional under the commerce clause which among other items protects business and individuals from restraint of trade.
Right to work offers choice to those seeking work or engage in their employment. It shields workers from being forced to join a labor collective.
Right to work would be unnecessary if for example, unions eliminated "closed shop" hiring practices. Stopped without the consent of the members, taking rank and file dues payments an funneling the money to political candidates and PACs .
As far as the operations. Absolutely. The workers SHOULD be provided with an avenue of free of reprisal commentary and input into work conditions, equipment, assignment of jobs, etc. The problem with that is here in the US unlike the Japanese workers culture, unions have set up an adversarial system of "us vs them"...
Japanese workers are culturally different in that they have loyalties toward their employer. The employer/employee relationship in Japan is all are part of a team. Japanese place the needs of the individual last. The group comes first. In in Japan it is customary for a line worker to be side by side with management personnel in areas of problem solving and othr input. Here in the US, such interaction would be viewed as blasphemous. The union bosses would file a grievance against the person and the company as a whole. Fellow workers would shun this person, referring them to things such as an "ass kisser" or "sucking up to the bosses"....Total absolute garbage. .

 

[thereisnospoon]

You got to be drinking a lot of egg nogg today.




.

I'm right you're wrong.

Only in your liberal fantasy land a simple google search is enough remember... I am a graduate of the great Union Chicago schools..

And you know how well I use grammar and spell real sweal.



.

Do you believe that if we pay teachers less we will get better teachers?

Did I ever say that? This discussion we are having right now is your claim that Union teachers are better and we both know that to be false.


Everyone against charter schools is against competition... Wrapped up in the facade that they take money away from the public schools. If you bother to look up the stats something over 50% of teachers don't even send their own kids to public schools..


So a question, if teachers are paid so little how can they afford it?

And what do they really know?



.

You want to break the teachers' unions to drive good teachers out of the public school system.

Non sequitur

 

[thereisnospoon]

It goes back to what Rush says all the time. Unions are a way of getting tax money from the taxpayers to the Democrat party. We pay taxes for these schools--some of which ends up in the hands of the unions. Election time comes, and unions heavily support the Democrat party. So of course they are going to protect that money as much as possible.

Ah...and you buy what Rushbo says, don't you?

Yes I do..........that is unless you can show me where he's wrong.

Ah...a Rushbo worshipper........he's right about you suckers.....

Ahh the old rush line. You know 20 years and he's still there. You're still lost as to why.

Of course, Rushbo is still there. He knows his audience well.....just like P.T. Barnum did.

yes. all non libs are suckers. IN your tiny mind