100,000 New Math and Science Teachers

[bigmack]

Originally Posted by maddog42

"Mitt Romney is unusually prone to 180-degree reversals of policy for naked political reasons, but it's hard to think of a chutzpah moment in his campaign more striking than his assertion last night

Careful when you post blogs that begin with silly statements. Hey, I know what, we should have a contest. Who can find more flip-flops.

- Voted against increasing the debt limit; then supported raising it.
- Campaigned against the Bush tax cuts; then extended all of them.
- Promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term; then proposed trillion dollar deficits.
- Vowed the unemployment rate would be below 8% if his stimulus was passed; but then it broke 10%.
- Promised shovel ready jobs; then admitted they weren’t shovel ready.
- Said if you like your health plan you can keep it; but then threw seniors off Medicare Plus and employers are now saying they’ll dump people onto the public exchange.
- Promised to have health care negotiations on live TV, but then reversed himself.
- Indicated Bush violated the Constitution; then carried out warrantless wiretaps, indefinite detentions, secret renditions, quadrupled drone attacks, and kept G uantanamo Bay open. Voted against the Patriot Act, but then supported its extension.
- Said lobbyists wouldn’t work in the White House; then gave them waivers to work there.
- Vowed to take public financing for his 2008 campaign; then refused public financing when he realized he would receive more money without it.
- Was against gay marriage then was for it

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by maddog42

... Romney responded by saying, "I want to make sure we keep our Pell Grant program growing."


...

Putting aside whether or not Romney says what needs to be said, which he does, and if the Student Loan program itself is a headache with unintended consequences, which it is...

This sentence is phrased in such a way that it can be interpreted many ways. Sort of like a speech in which the words "acts of terror" are uttered with no real context, allowing them to be utilized as needed. Keeping the Pell Grant program growing doesn't necessarily imply giving it more and more funding. It is the intuitive interpretation for some, but its phrased the way a politician would phrase it - so that some will hear the simple side of it, and yet, when challenged, he can justify "growth" as meaning long-term sustainability by making sure that outright slashing of the program years down the road doesn't dismantle the program if we don't take small steps now to rein in the programs that we need to as a remedy for the threat of long-term insolvency. It's political speak, not outright lying or whatever, just covering all the bases in one sentence. Both men excel at following orders on how to work this magic over the masses.

[acorn54]

i dont see anything wrong with grants for education. that is not the problem.
the problem is that the people that provide guidance to the youth don't put them on a realistic path of adulthood with a marketable skill set.
the for-profit schools are just taking advantage of the youth that are not college material, and abuse the educational loan programs.
i remember in the movie "judgement at nuremburg", burt lancaster says to spencer tracy "i didn't think it would come to this". to which tracy replied,"it came to this the first time you knew you weren't doing the right thing, and you did it anyway".

[rastajenk]

That's nice.

What's the point?

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by bigmack

Careful when you post blogs that begin with silly statements. Hey, I know what, we should have a contest. Who can find more flip-flops.

I think this would be fun. You would have to furnish 2 links for each flip-flop
one with an original statement or vote.
And then a link showing showing that Obama/Romney actually had carnal knowledge of a Goat or partied with Vietnamese Hookers. This sounds like a lot of fun and a lot of work and I'm not sure I have the time. Hit me up in a week and I might go for it. Although I was thinking of entering the Breeders
Cup contest next week which requires almost 3 (4)(5?) days of continuous work.
So many Republicans to embarrass, so little time.
I really do appreciate the offer.

PS I am not so naive to think that Obama hasn't made false/misleading statements, just fewer.

[JustRalph]

100,000 x. 35k entry level salary

3500000000

Who gets to pay for that

On the flip side Dems see union dues and whatever their cut will be

100,000. X 2 bucks a week x 52 weeks = 10.4 mil a year in e xtra cash for Dem causes

[acorn54]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

That's nice.

What's the point?

i was just referring to trying to make romney look bad because he may or may not have intended to mean to increase the pell grant program.
in general i also wanted to bring to light that government money expenditure for education can be a good thing if managed properly and responsibly, and i just though it would be good to bring that up here.

[Greyfox]

Obama's idea of 100,000 teachers for Math and Science is all about votes.
Simply stated he wants the backing of Teacher's Unions.

Secondly, the question that Romney raised, as to how far the Federal Government should get involved in Education deserves a lot more discussion.
Yes, on International tests American students do only average when compared with other countries, in spite of the fact that more money per student
($ per student) is higher than most nations.

The solution may not be more teachers.
Oh, I know that good teachers are important in a child's development.
So I won't knock them, except to say that hiring 100,000 more Science and Math teachers offers no assurance that they would all be "good teachers."

Without opening a can of worms here, let me just say that I don't think that hiring 100,000 more teachers will move the students' performances up much higher than are already being recorded.

For the sake of being a "Devil's Advocate" here, let me say that perhaps the way monies are currently distributed in Education need to be re-examined.
For starters, most school systems spend more money on "Special Needs"
children than they do on "Gifted" children.
To a point that is understandable. Some "Special Needs" children are extremely difficult to handle and God Bless those teachers that day in and day out work with them year after year.
Also, "Gifted " children can learn more independently and in general need less of emotional and mental energy from the teachers who work with them.

Having said that, the answer to the mediocre performances on the International tests, will not be solved by adding more teachers (except those teachers proved to be top students themselves once upon a time.)
Perhaps school systems have to look at enhancing the experiences of "Gifted" children, even if it means some reduction in the funding for "Special Needs" children.

For those of you on this board who have "Special Needs" children, I know that sounds heartless. Trust me, I'm not a heartless guy.
But by the same token, perhaps it's time to look at what the schools are investing and doing for "Gifted" kids - Is it enough?

I'd rather see the money that Obama intends to spend on 100,000 more teachers, go directly (in trust) to "Gifted" students for their college education.

[Robert Fischer]

this is stupid. we could build missiles with that money.


Who cares if class sizes are too big

[JustRalph]

Don't forget. Pell grants are welfare.

[bigmack]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Don't forget. Pell grants are welfare.

I don't know what to believe anymo'. jognlope said pell grants are stimoolating the economackie.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

this is stupid. we could build missiles with that money.


Who cares if class sizes are too big

That's right.

And why make such a big deal of educating the youth in the first place?

It's not like we have jobs waiting for them when they get out of school...

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

...

It's not like we have jobs waiting for them when they get out of school...

Excellent point.

Well, unless they want to be teachers.

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by johnhannibalsmith

Excellent point.

Well, unless they want to be teachers.

Is that kind of like machines building more machines? (That's a line I remember from some movie but damn if the title won't come to me at the moment.)

[jognlope]

He and Ryan also want to get rid of the student loan bill that makes loan payments 5-10% of one's monthly income, no matter what school or what cost you incurred.