Actually, your thoughts are not rational at all. Elimination of the property tax is not only in the best interest of liberty, but would force the "public" edumacation system into the private sector where it should be.

http://www.tx.lp.org/platform.shtml#II2

Cutting the overhead for all us McMansion owners --- what a great (Republican) idea. To hell with public education: our kids are in private schools, and isn't it time we got vouchers for them? After all, we're the ones paying all those property taxes!
... At least, til our man Rick does something about them. Who sez you cain't have yer cake and eat it, too?

Good my property taxes are f'n nuts.

Ever heard of homeschooling? Ever heard of personal responsibility?

I don't care, my kids are all grown up. And since I am a selfish homo, I say, "lower my property taxes now!!"

I liked Perry's last comment on the news. "We'll all live to fight another day" Sounds like someone running a little scared to me. Narrow the call, do what we have to do, and get out of town. After all, other candidates will be out there grabbing signatures and campaigning, This has NOTHING to do with public education and everything to do with keeping the power.

Speaking of vouchers and the "right to choice," I had a friend who tried to exercise personal responsiblity, but she wasn't allowed.

Apparently, she is not allowed to choose what to do with her body, or choose which doctor she can see, or choose her representative (there's a guy in San Antonio deciding that for her), or choose who to love (no homo).

Stupid girl, huh?

Mike N - That has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read. Seriously, people listen to you when you write crap like that?

Force schools into the public sector? Like all those great Charter schools that, much like the poorly educated children that come out of them, fail?

When the hell are morons like you going to get over over this private vs. public sector debate? MOST OF YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE REAL JOBS, you just suck on the tender teat offered by Leininger or Perry. Whick 'thinktank' do you work for?

SHOW me an organization, public or private, run by human beings and I'll show you waste and corruption. You seek perfection from people and as any rational person can tell you, it's just not possible.

Public education WORKS, even with the pittance of resources we've been putting into it, it's still doing (in most cases) an adequete job of educating our children. People like you think that's enough, which is why our economy has become so good at creating minimum wage jobs. You really want to make the work force in Texas truly world class? It's really simple... invest in public education and quit bitching.

Those homeschoolers are kept away from other kids so that they won't tell how they're being abused at home.
And Mike, it is my PERSONAL responsibility that public education is improved in Texas so that all kids have the opportunity to grow up and be a selfish ass like you.

^

Your're an elected offical?

If not lmao...that was f'n lame.

If we had first-rate public edumacation in this state, Texas schoolkids might stop growing up into the kind of voters who elect Perry and the rest of those clowns. On the surface, this sounds like a good thing, but then the pro-homosexual liberal blogosphere would wither away for lack of governmental stupidiy to snark about.

Yes, everyone should home school. Ward will go off to work in the morning and June will begin the lesson plan. They'll break for a wholesome lunch, maybe a little Bible study (New Testament), and then Ward will come home with a smile on his face, ready to prop up his feet and watch a little FOX News while June makes him a watery highball. Except that Ward didn't get home. He was carjacked on his way home by some poorly educated 15-year olds from a one parent household in which the mother works 3 jobs to pay the rent (landlord homeschools) and is never home.

Homeschooling denies those poor children their due access to the true Texas religion: High School Football.

You know I love it when conservatives try to change things, like making our public education system private. What does that make them? Active Conservatives? Progressive Conservatives? Oh wait, it makes them Compassionate Conservatives! If only education wasn't such a low margin business we'd have discovered the need to privatize it sooner!
As for quality of public/private education, I just have to say that our current President is a product of elite private education, and well we all know how smart he is.

lol...very true cynical optimist.

Wonk, you dumb queen, you don't have to be an elected to take interests in things that matter.

Please don't lump Wonk with us!

He/she/it is a product of the breeders - the Conservative, right-wing, Christian (not), mean, closed-minded, hypocritical, ready-to-close-box-cars-on-homosexuals type of hetro breeder guy. He certainly is no queen (unless closeted of course). If so, then I say;

Come out! Come out! Come out of the closet Wonk, Tom C. and all the rest!

^
Gayinmidland You always go for the uber nuclear option of name calling too quickly. Your more of a self righteous prick than I am. See at least I'll admit it and not get on my earth is against homo's soapbox like you constantly do. Dude we get it your gay....and hate R's and Christians.

Marie aww your my favorite assitant admin aide. Now go get me some cofee bitch....its your personal responsiblity!

Dork.

LOL

"Mom, Wonk and Tom Cruise are in the closet and they won't come out."

Wonk's a messenger.

From God.

YMP, wonk...YMP

Privatizing all education is not the answer. But neither is catering to those in the education lobby/bureaucracy who want, above all, to preserve the status quo and their place in it, just with more money. Can't we find some middle ground here?

One thing that has worked - and I don't know how it would work on a larger scale - to improve test scores and the learning environment is this thing John Edwards has tried in North Carolina. What he's doing is taking in kids with different and economic and ethnic backgrounds, and putting them all in a public school together. They're scoring way better than the public schools.

Now, how you implement that, f*** if I know. But it's something that's working...

In the mean time, we should stop coddling kids so damn much.

Yes, it's time to stop coddling kids so much. In may day, we walked ten miles through the snow uphill both ways. Perry should ditch his plans for property tax reform and call a Special to provide more hills and more snow.

Democrats have stood up and said they are committed to improving public schools. Problem is, their plan absolutely sucks. Their version of improving schools is raising teacher salaries and, oh wait there is no other component to the plan, except making sure any actual reform doesn't get passed. Kudos, that is quite a plan.

Honestly, folks, the education field is not full of people that want status quo. We just want what we need to teach the kids we have. Do you realize how much it costs to find trained, Spanish speaking teachers for all of the kids coming over the border? Then schools have just three years to get that student FLUENT in English in EVERY subject. Not only are they having to learn a new language and all of the stupid rules we have in the English language, but they have to pick up all of the science, American and Texas history, and math that they were never taught to begin with. And we are talking about children here!

I have plenty of wonderful ideas for change that I approach my legislators with regularly. They are the ones that do not want to hear it. They only want what they are told from the leadership. Leadership only wants what it is told from business. Business only wants lower taxes for them and a better workforce which works against each other from the onset of the idea.

Create a REAL committee to discuss changes needed in education and you will get REAL results. Educators are not afraid of change. They are afraid of the idiots who are not educators trying to make change that makes absolutely no sense.

I like the idea of charter schools if they are held to the same standards as public schools. Instead they avoid most mandates and accountability. They siphon a lot of money out of the schools that are working, and above all, they make the charter schools that are doing their jobs look bad.

Private schools work because they have students that are hand-picked and generally have highly educated parents. Any teacher can have great results with a class full of those kids. Most private schools do not accept kids with learning or behavior disabilities because they cannot afford the special personnel and equipment needed to teach those kids. Those are the kids in the public school classrooms that need the money. The federal government says that 98 percent of students must be reading on grade level by the end of third grade. Start adding up all of the limitations from disabilities with children these days and you will find that it is not even possible for that to occur. Mental retardation, dyslexia/dysgraphia, muscular diseases, blindness, autism, and the list goes on and on. These all require additional equipment and personnel that are not funded high enough to take care of the needs, yet the government just sees a number that didn’t pass a test. Forget the fact many of them are just hoping to wake up the next morning because the disease could take their lives any day.

Do the research of all the facts. Spend some time in a public school classroom. Look at the requirements placed on schools these days for every student. Then decide what will work.

cynical optimist,

I am not conservative or liberal... I am a Libertarian.

Public education is the equivalent of welfare. It is also a means to shape kids into good little 9-5ers that don't question anything. If you wish to be dumbed-down, then by all means support public eductation. If you do even a minimal amount of basic research you will discover that public education is a massive failure. It is PROVEN to not work. Why continue to support it?

Most importantly, why should I be forced to pay for your kids education?

Oops, meant Bacchus, not cynical optimist.

For those who are really interested in whether vouchers make good public policy:

http://www2.jsonline.com/news/choice/

"In 1990, Milwaukee began a revolutionary experiment in school choice for low-income students. How is it faring 15 years later? Over the past five months, Journal Sentinel reporters visited 106 schools to find out."

j,

Vouchers are not the solution as they still force me to pay for your kid's education - which is theft. Do you support theft?

Aboslutely.

Some further comments on vouchers:

1) Academic achievement of kids using vouchers and those in public schools isn't significantly different.
2) There aren't enough private schools to take in all those who might wish to flee their public school
3) There is no oversight over voucher schools; meaning there is no guarantee your kid will get a good education at your local Education 'R' Us outlet.
4) Publicly funded school value: Education. Privately funded school value: Profit. Which value do you think is better for your kids' education?

Another link for those who really want some information on vouchers (this time, Cleveland Oh.):

http://ceep.indiana.edu/projects/project.php4?id=37&category=3

And the incomparable Daily Howler has been commenting on the reporting on the Milwaukee program:

http://dailyhowler.com

From the research I've seen, the only thing that vouchers really accomplish is getting kids out of schools that might not be conducive to learning, and into schools were learning, I guess, takes place. But see point 1.

Long story short: Vouchers ain't the solution. Sorry Dr. Leininger.

A real solution starts with the parents taking an interest in their kids education.

Now. How are you going to legislate *that*?

j,

You are correct, vouchers (theft) are not the solution.

Wonk,

You absolutely support theft? Please provide me with your address so that I can see if there is anything in your home that I would like to take since you say it is okay to do so.

Mke N.

You're not just a libertarian. You are an anarcho-libertarian.

If only we could all stop paying for things that we thought were "theft." Taking my money to pay for Iraq is theft. Taking my money to pay for the roads you drive on is theft. Taking my money to pay for your business to relocate to Budda is theft. Pumping your toxic waste into my air is theft. Dumping your toxic waste into our rivers is theft. Unless you own the river. Then despoiling my waterfront property with your toxic waste is theft. Taking my money and using it to fund courts that I can't access is theft. And on and on it goes.

My take on hard core Libertarianism: We want the privilege of living in America...we just don't want to *pay* for the privilege of living in America.

j,

You do not understand libertarianism. You are describing an anarchist. They are not the same thing. I believe minimal (non-property and non-income taxes) taxes are necessary to fund minimal government (defense, roads etc). These taxes would come from constitutional sources such as corporation's income and tarrifs etc. To tax my income or property to pay for your kids to get an "education" is both immoral and outright evil.

j,

Everyone had the privilege of living in "America" long before there was public education and income/property taxes. Chaos did not ensue.

Mike, how's your health? How's your driving record? How's your weather? I've never had over $100 worth of medical bills in a year since 1985, but I have to pay premiums based on group risk. My car insurance isn't skyhigh because of MY driving record and my home insurance isn't high because of MY weather. If I, perhaps, as a citizen of this society am possibly contributing more than my risk share to insurance, than, by golly, you can pony up a share to help educate my teenager. There are financial positives and negatives in social pooled expenses. We could go on to social security but I've said enough. I do feel that the taxpayers in wealthy districts get screwed by Robin Hood funding. You'd think they'd give Perry and their "representatives" the boot.
Just don't raise my liquor taxes.

cynical optimist,

How's your mental health? And no, I do not think I should pay for it.

Do you need someone to help you get dressed in the morning too, or can you handle that on your own?

You do not have to pay premiums for group risk, you can still (thankfully) fund your own insurance. You pay those premiums by choic there buddy. I don't have choice as to whether or not I want to "educate" your snot-nosed brat.

Mike N.

I started a topic on PD's forums:

http://forum.pinkdome.com/viewtopic.php?pid=70#p70

Bring it.

Mike N.

Here's my address:

1234 Kiss My Ass Boulevard
You're a Moron, TX 78222

Aww, come on Wonk. You change your mind about being a criminal?

Mike,
Auto liability insurance is not a choice since I choose to drive. Insurance is a choice (not to the morgage company) but participating in a group mitigates the potential expense of catastrophy. I don't choose war on Iraq but I contribute to that by paying federal tax. Unfortunately we dont get to pick and choose how our government spends, only our representatives. We all pay as shareholders in society.
Your property has more value in an excellent school district than in a crappy one. Its in your interest. Buddy. Get yourself your own island and start your own government if you don't want to participate in this one.

sabestian:

you know what teacher unions oppose? paying teachers more if their subject of expertise is in demand. but you're right, when i call out the unions i also unfairly attribute all of their bullshit to individual teachers and i shouldn't. i did public and private and when i left private i wa slight years ahead on language and a year behind in math. luckily, i had a math teacher in public school who stayed with me late every day for a month in 7th grade.

mike, check out the state constitution.

cynical optimist,

Wow, that statement was so full of logical fallacies I can hardly count them all.

You said:

"Auto liability insurance is not a choice since I choose to drive."

LOL. Umm, you just contradictied yourself. You CHOOSE to drive. Hello?

You said:

"Insurance is a choice (not to the morgage company)"

Another contradication. And by the way, you aren't required to have mortgage insurance because you are not required to have a mortgage in the first place.

You said:

"Its in your interest."

What exactly is in my interest?

snrub,

I am fully aware that the state constitution is in direct conflict with the US constitution.

Mike N.: How? Sincere question.

Mike N:

I see how it is. You like to "log on" to your favorite liberal website, dump a bunch of rhetoric, and then "log off."

If someone wants to have a serious, protracted, issue oriented discussion with you, you're nowhere to be found.

What is it with conservatives that they don't/won't/can't have a real conversation about ideas and policies? If it can't fit on a bumpersticker, it's too complex?

Sheesh.

j,

You should really understand what you are talking about before you make such ridiculous acusations. It really makes you look like a moron.

Anyway, libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are also not liberals (in the modern sense). We are neither Democrat or Republican. We are Libertarians = socially liberal and economically conservative.

Your attempt to make this a 2 demensional debate is childish at best. Although I must say you were brainwashed well. That public education worked well on you.

See:

http://badnarik.org/libertarian.php