APP - i wonder about the reps, are they prolife or antilife (fun)

[Don Quixote]

while most seem to care about 'life' in utero, however, once a child is born they lose interest and are first in line to cut funding for education, exercise the death penalty or restrict the use of recreational drugs at home or other non-threatening to society circumstances

oh well

 

[Truth Detector]

while most seem to care about 'life' in utero, however, once a child is born they lose interest and are first in line to cut funding for education, exercise the death penalty or restrict the use of recreational drugs at home or other non-threatening to society circumstances

oh well

How much education funding have Republicans cut? Are there any credible facts to support this?

How many children have been put to death under the death penalty? And if the Liberal left believe in murdering unborn children, why do they so desperately want to save murderers on death row?

How are recreational drugs good for children?

 

[Don Quixote]

How much education funding have Republicans cut? Are there any credible facts to support this?

look at funding the cal state and university of ca during the reagan time as governor or ca

How many children have been put to death under the death penalty? And if the Liberal left believe in murdering unborn children, why do they so desperately want to save murderers on death row? the abortion debate will never be settled, especially on this board, however, recent personal experience (near death) has convinced me that abortion and the death penalty should continue to permit abortions and life in prison

How are recreational drugs good for children?

recreational drugs will continue to be used whether legal or not, it just that they eat into family resources more while they are illegal and their very illegality put a huge strain on our criminal justice system that should be avoided if addiction is properly treated as a medical problem rather than a criminal problem, put i have posted my thoughts on this several times, elsewhere.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

while most seem to care about 'life' in utero, however, once a child is born they lose interest and are first in line to cut funding for education, exercise the death penalty or restrict the use of recreational drugs at home or other non-threatening to society circumstances

oh well

???....do you consider it to be hypocritical to be against killing unborn children and against people using drugs for recreational purposes?........I don't consider those polar issues......death penalty I will grant you, but then, I'm opposed to the death penalty......

 

[Truth Detector]

recreational drugs will continue to be used whether legal or not, it just that they eat into family resources more while they are illegal and their very illegality put a huge strain on our criminal justice system that should be avoided if addiction is properly treated as a medical problem rather than a criminal problem, put i have posted my thoughts on this several times, elsewhere.

Okay, let's try this again, Reagan hasn't been Governor for over 39 years:

How much education funding have Republicans cut? Are there any credible facts to support this?

How many children have been put to death under the death penalty? And if the Liberal left believe in murdering unborn children, why do they so desperately want to save murderers on death row?

How are recreational drugs good for children?

 

[Don Quixote]

Okay, let's try this again, Reagan hasn't been Governor for over 39 years:

How much education funding have Republicans cut? Are there any credible facts to support this?

How many children have been put to death under the death penalty? And if the Liberal left believe in murdering unborn children, why do they so desperately want to save murderers on death row?

How are recreational drugs good for children?

since i doubt that we have any chance of agreeing on the rest of the post, i will focus on the ca rep approach to educational funding in ca. it can only be described as it sucks. i can only cite as proof as being a california native.

but then i am a firm advocate of increased emphasis on education starting with opening schools at 5AM and keeping them open until 11PM with 90 minute classes, before and after main school classes activities with libraries open and rest/sleep areas and with meals and snacks provided for the students

 

[Truth Detector]

since i doubt that we have any chance of agreeing on the rest of the post, i will focus on the ca rep approach to educational funding in ca. it can only be described as it sucks. i can only cite as proof as being a california native.

but then i am a firm advocate of increased emphasis on education starting with opening schools at 5AM and keeping them open until 11PM with 90 minute classes, before and after main school classes activities with libraries open and rest/sleep areas and with meals and snacks provided for the students

So you don't have any facts; it is just an emotional feeling you had.

Well here is a fact for you; Federal spending on elementary, secondary and vocational education has increased by 11,948% since 1962. Hardly a cut wouldn't you say?

 

[Don Quixote]

So you don't have any facts; it is just an emotional feeling you had.

Well here is a fact for you; Federal spending on elementary, secondary and vocational education has increased by 11,948% since 1962. Hardly a cut wouldn't you say?

and your source?

i can only cite changes in the ca educational system from having lived through it.

if children and education are our future, then why do we spend more on sports and general entertainment than education?

imo, two words seem to have fallen into disrepute, sacrifice and responsibility

 

[Celticguy]

while most seem to care about 'life' in utero, however, once a child is born they lose interest and are first in line to cut funding for education, exercise the death penalty or restrict the use of recreational drugs at home or other non-threatening to society circumstances

oh well

thats quite a whirlwind of unrelated memes.
education is a local matter, if youre unhappy with it consider that there is no correlation in spending and success. Look at Atlanta, DC, any large city really and note this. drugs ? they are hardly good for you and paeticularly so for kids. are you ok withkids and drugs ? hope not.

 

[Don Quixote]

thats quite a whirlwind of unrelated memes.
education is a local matter, if youre unhappy with it consider that there is no correlation in spending and success. Look at Atlanta, DC, any large city really and note this. drugs ? they are hardly good for you and paeticularly so for kids. are you ok withkids and drugs ? hope not.

when i speak of recreational drugs, i speak in their favor for responsible adults, never children

 

[Truth Detector]

and your source?

The source is historical data from the US Government; anyone can assess it. 500 Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services:
1962 - $1.241 billion. 2014 - $129.041 billion. This represents a 103% increase. The 119.48% (I miss-typed in the original post) increase was only the elementary and secondary school increases.

i can only cite changes in the ca educational system from having lived through it.

if children and education are our future, then why do we spend more on sports and general entertainment than education?

imo, two words seem to have fallen into disrepute, sacrifice and responsibility

Well then please cite them; I cannot find anything that supports your claims.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

if children and education are our future, then why do we spend more on sports and general entertainment than education?

its unlikely that we do......unless you're comparing what the general public spends on sports and entertainment to what the federal government spends on education.....in which case you are wondering why your apples don't have orange peels.......

 

[Don Quixote]

The source is historical data from the US Government; anyone can assess it. 500 Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services:
1962 - $1.241 billion. 2014 - $129.041 billion. This represents a 103% increase. The 119.48% (I miss-typed in the original post) increase was only the elementary and secondary school increases.




Well then please cite them; I cannot find anything that supports your claims.

try looking at the huge increases in CA public universities fees over the last 10 years. i have a granddaughter in the UC system, class, lab and book costs have all escalated.

unfortunately, her parents income is just a little too high for her to qualify for cheaper student aid, also, she does not live at home which screws up the whole student aid picture. fortunately, she will only have one class to complete to graduate after the end of this semester.

 

[Don Quixote]

The source is historical data from the US Government; anyone can assess it. 500 Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services:
1962 - $1.241 billion. 2014 - $129.041 billion. This represents a 103% increase. The 119.48% (I miss-typed in the original post) increase was only the elementary and secondary school increases.



Well then please cite them; I cannot find anything that supports your claims.

was population change factored into your percentages?

what about pre-school changes.

i would rather see at least one parent as a stay at home parent but these days with a growing number of single parent households, having schools open longer hours, providing care and meals for children would be a good thing.

 

[Truth Detector]

try looking at the huge increases in CA public universities fees over the last 10 years. i have a granddaughter in the UC system, class, lab and book costs have all escalated.

unfortunately, her parents income is just a little too high for her to qualify for cheaper student aid, also, she does not live at home which screws up the whole student aid picture. fortunately, she will only have one class to complete to graduate after the end of this semester.

Yes fees have increased, and the Cal State system is still the cheapest education in the world for what you get; but funding has NOT been cut as you claimed.

Here are some facts that are missing in your dialogue:

K-12 and Higher Educational funding in 1976 was $4.739 billion. By 2014 that amount was $51.381 billion.

I can't seem to find these cuts you keep talking about; where do you think they are? As a matter of fact, the ONLY time funding dropped for education in California was in 2011-2012 by a mere $2.285 billion, with Democrats in control of everything, then rose back up to $52.524 billion the next year.

Where did you see these cuts again?

 

[Truth Detector]

was population change factored into your percentages?

No; they are the raw budget data. You’re the one claiming funds were cut. They were not. As for population growth, I would imagine that would be why the budget for education rose by 984% over the last 39 years.

what about pre-school changes.

California doesn’t budget for pre-school. It only covers K-12 and higher education.

Why are you asking me so many questions about funding? You’re the one claiming they have been cutting funding. Where are you getting your false information?

i would rather see at least one parent as a stay at home parent but these days with a growing number of single parent households, having schools open longer hours, providing care and meals for children would be a good thing.

What does this have to do with the false claim that California is cutting funding?

 

[Don Quixote]

Yes fees have increased, and the Cal State system is still the cheapest education in the world for what you get; but funding has NOT been cut as you claimed.

Here are some facts that are missing in your dialogue:

K-12 and Higher Educational funding in 1976 was $4.739 billion. By 2014 that amount was $51.381 billion.

I can't seem to find these cuts you keep talking about; where do you think they are? As a matter of fact, the ONLY time funding dropped for education in California was in 2011-2012 by a mere $2.285 billion, with Democrats in control of everything, then rose back up to $52.524 billion the next year.

Where did you see these cuts again?

an increase in 'fees' is a defacto cut in services

 

[Don Quixote]

No; they are the raw budget data. You’re the one claiming funds were cut. They were not. As for population growth, I would imagine that would be why the budget for education rose by 984% over the last 39 years.



California doesn’t budget for pre-school. It only covers K-12 and higher education.

Why are you asking me so many questions about funding? You’re the one claiming they have been cutting funding. Where are you getting your false information?



What does this have to do with the false claim that California is cutting funding?

until the ca legislature and gov went solidly democratic, the reps blocked increases in education. there is not much i can do about the rep 'social engineering' program in other states, but i am happy to solidly block it in ca.

perhaps the best example was when the ca lottery was passed and the legislature decided to deduct the amount due the schools from the lottery from what would otherwise have been normally budgeted for the school for a net change of 0$

so it is your claim that the reps have supported education.

 

[Celticguy]

an increase in 'fees' is a defacto cut in services

no it isnt. and the question was cuts in education aka $$$$$

 

[Don Quixote]

no it isnt. and the question was cuts in education aka $$$$$

i disagree. if you raise the cost of something, without paying for that increase, then you have essentially performed a cut in the things availability.