End government schools

[Pandora]

Can you imagine what a circus that would be? Every issue decided by a vote of the people. We'd have elections every day practically, and the ads to sway public opinion would take up every channel 24-7.


I'm afraid a direct democracy isn't practical on a large scale.

It would cut down on the tons of useless laws they pass just to look busy.


stuff like health care that directly effects us all should be voted by us not by idiots in congress.

Even if we only nationally voted on a few key issues

gun control, abortion, health care, the border and immigration, higher taxes it would be helpful.

It could be done at the same time we voted for president. Every 4 years put those major issues on the ballot.

It would at least keep taxes from going up every year, at best they would be able to raise it every 4 years.

 

[PLC1]

It would cut down on the tons of useless laws they pass just to look busy.


stuff like health care that directly effects us all should be voted by us not by idiots in congress.

Even if we only nationally voted on a few key issues

gun control, abortion, health care, the border and immigration, higher taxes it would be helpful.

It could be done at the same time we voted for president. Every 4 years put those major issues on the ballot.

It would at least keep taxes from going up every year, at best they would be able to raise it every 4 years.

Well, that might work, maybe.


California has something like that now, in the form of statewide propositions that the people vote on directly. The results are quite a mixed bag. We get a lot of bond measures, for example, all promoted as a way to raise money without raising taxes. The sheeple of this late great golden state seem to swallow that one every time. On the other hand, there are some issues that are settled that way far better than the legislature could do it.

There are pros and cons to direct votes of the people.

 

[Dante the Marxist]

Can you imagine what a circus that would be? Every issue decided by a vote of the people. We'd have elections every day practically, and the ads to sway public opinion would take up every channel 24-7.


I'm afraid a direct democracy isn't practical on a large scale.

I am sure there will not be a new law every day, or even every week. It does not take more than one channel for political ads. Plus, we would have much more time to fit in the political ads if we outlawed commercials.

 

[PLC1]

I am sure there will not be a new law every day, or even every week. It does not take more than one channel for political ads. Plus, we would have much more time to fit in the political ads if we outlawed commercials.

There are a lot of laws under consideration, but I'm not sure just how many.

Now, if regular commercials are outlawed, and only political commercials are allowed, then I'll value my TIVO even more than I do now. Can you imagine the hype, half truths, and outright lies that would be spread in an attempt to sway voters one way or another? We've already seen some of that in California, with the statewide propositions. Not only that, but imagine the money that would be spent trying to pass one special interest law or another. We would wind up with even more of an oligarchy than we have now, if that's possible.

Spending money on politicians to get votes is bad enough. Directly spending millions to fool voters would be even worse.

 

[dahermit]

Can you imagine what a circus that would be? Every issue decided by a vote of the people. We'd have elections every day practically, and the ads to sway public opinion would take up every channel 24-7.
I'm afraid a direct democracy isn't practical on a large scale.

One obvious problem with the process is that it would have to be done by mail inasmuch as people could not travel to a central point to vote, leading to voter fraud by mail.

 

[Dante the Marxist]

There are a lot of laws under consideration, but I'm not sure just how many.

Now, if regular commercials are outlawed, and only political commercials are allowed, then I'll value my TIVO even more than I do now. Can you imagine the hype, half truths, and outright lies that would be spread in an attempt to sway voters one way or another? We've already seen some of that in California, with the statewide propositions. Not only that, but imagine the money that would be spent trying to pass one special interest law or another. We would wind up with even more of an oligarchy than we have now, if that's possible.

Spending money on politicians to get votes is bad enough. Directly spending millions to fool voters would be even worse.

Outlaw political advertizements. Thats a no brainer.

 

[PLC1]

Outlaw political advertizements. Thats a no brainer.

That should be done, no question. It's not possible to win an election without collecting big bucks for commercials. The donors of those big bucks then expect the recipient to listen to them. It's a lot like buying legislation, but it's legal.

 

[Dante the Marxist]

That should be done, no question. It's not possible to win an election without collecting big bucks for commercials. The donors of those big bucks then expect the recipient to listen to them. It's a lot like buying legislation, but it's legal.

Illegalise it. If that means overturning the constitution, then so be it.

 

[PLC1]

Illegalise it. If that means overturning the constitution, then so be it.

Well, we outlawed cigarette ads on TV without amending the Constitution. I suppose it could be done.

 

[Dante the Marxist]

Well, we outlawed cigarette ads on TV without amending the Constitution. I suppose it could be done.

Of course, if any of these things actually happened, the US government would have to be gone

 

[Sam Dodd]

That is correct. By taking government money, parents make a pact with the devil, and their children pay dearly for the "free education".



That's baloney - few conservatives call for the overthrow of the failed government schools - it's mostly a libertarian idea.



Not a problem at all - conservatives advocate taxes to provide for poor children's vouchers. You sound like you're taking all the standard propaganda distortions from the teachers union playbook.

.

Nonsense, and what government schools with their lib teachers do is exactly that - brainwash them in the liberal-left world view, with their PC, anti-americanism, anti-religion, and all their other assorted crap.

No, public education monies for public schools are deleted from their funds to provide for corporate and religious education. There are no new taxes. It;s the systematic destruction of public schools where the poor and minority go, that the republcians are after. Public education teach critical reasoning and thinking skills; something the rich don't want in the masses and religious cults like the born again evangelicals fear the most.

 

[invest07]

I live in a high growth state (FL). A ton of our education dollars go into new school construction. The school boards are funded per student and by attendance. But is still takes the local board many, many years to recoup the total cost of a new school. That means selling bonds and the cost of the school is inflated dramatically to pay the interest.

I propose a possible solution would be "Growth Vouchers":

1. Let the local school board immediately halt any plans for new construction
2. Finish any construction in process but build no new schools.
3. Give parents the option to attend a public or private school.
4. Divert 90% of the state's per student reimbursement to pay for private school students.
5. Keep the remaining 10% to augment the local board's budget.
6. Let developers and the private sector finance schools for new population growth.
7. Parents would receive credit for the state's 90% and would be required to make up any difference themselves.

The local board's student population would be effectively fixed and would not grow.
Funding to the public school would rise by 10%.
The headache of building new schools would no longer exist for the public sector.

The biggest problem with this idea is that it makes way too much sense for any government to grasp.

 

[Cruella]

My kids were educated for half of what the public schools get.

The more money we throw at schools, the worse they get.

 

[PLC1]

The best fix for the public schools would be decentralization and competition. Let local school officials set standards for their schools, instead of the state and federal bureaucracies doing it. Let the parents choose the school they want to send their kids to, as long as the kids can meet the standards of that school. Schools would have to compete for students. Students/parents would have to meet the standards of the best schools, or settle for something less. Everyone would be accountable in one way or another, and schools that couldn't attract students would go out of business.

 

[Walter]

Let local school officials set standards for their schools

While I agree with most of what you wrote, one question: no nation wide minimum standards?