What do you think of Independents

[Mr. Harris]

[Do your homework, find the receipts and outlays, look for waste not only in the school budget but everywhere your town spends money. That should be job number one, eliminate any waste or redundancy in the system before you even consider raising taxes.
/QUOTE]

Yes but I believe when it comes to taxes, we should tax those who can afford it, not those who cannot.

Perhaps I wasn't clear... If you have students that cause trouble, are disrupting class etc. expel them. Adding security and police is an attempt to deal with the symptoms of your problem, the cure lies in eliminating the problem.

Right but you did not quote the rest of what I said, it starts in the parents. I know many people whos parents never really cared or showed them right from wrong, most of them are not to high up in society.

And you really think that it is necessary to have one on one conversations to go over with students what they have to accomplish in order to graduate?

Thats what my school did. But I am not talking about what they need to accomplish in order to graduate, I am talking about that teachers need to get on students about it, make sure they students know what kind of effect grades can have down the road.

In what way? Give me specifics.

Ok, first, in order to supply enough officers, making sure equipment is up to date, ect, departments need to have a sufficient budget. Im not proposing that we give them millions apon millions, rather make sure each department has enough money.

Thanks

 

[GenSeneca]

If we cut the military by 75%....we'd save about $500 billion a year! ....pay off a good chunk of debt with that kind of cheddar.

That would bring down our yearly deficit by 1/3, to 1 trillion dollars a year.

How much defense is enough Mr. Harris?

How much welfare state is enough?

Could you imagine the outcry if we spent as much as the rest of the world combined on welfare?

We'd collapse the country within 5 years.

But for some reason we don't question when that same kind of obscene overspending goes to the military.

Military spending is about 1/3 of what we spend on the welfare state.

But you don't have to listen to me.

Zen has me on ignore because he can't answer my questions, respond to my points, defend his positions or explain his many failures in logic.

I only respond because... "the uncontested absurdities of today become the accepted slogan of tomorrow."

 

[GenSeneca]

Yes but I believe when it comes to taxes, we should tax those who can afford it, not those who cannot.

Why do you think the rich can afford it? If they leave your town, or cut back their spending, or knock off a few employees as a result of you increasing their taxes, you've lost far more than you've gained. I really don't know where this "common sense" idea that Higher Taxes always results in More Revenue but if you don't look at the situation dynamically, you are setting yourself up for a potential disaster.

Michigan, Detroit specifically, raised taxes on the wealthy and the business in their area. They began to leave, the revenue dropped. So they raised taxes again to make up for the losses, more left and the revenue dropped again. This cycle has continued and now, decades later, Detroit is a shell of the booming industrial city it once was but nobody seems to learn from history.

Right but you did not quote the rest of what I said, it starts in the parents. I know many people whos parents never really cared or showed them right from wrong, most of them are not to high up in society.

Doesn't matter. If a student is disruptive, dangerous, or in any other way causing you to need security and police, you need to get rid of that student. Coddling them will only make the problems worse because other kids see them getting away with it.

Thats what my school did. But I am not talking about what they need to accomplish in order to graduate, I am talking about that teachers need to get on students about it, make sure they students know what kind of effect grades can have down the road.

That's not the job of teachers, that's the job of parents. Crappy parents tend to have crappy kids and I don't see how any one on one time is going to convince a kid that he needs grades, to get into college, to earn a living. If anything, take them on a school trip downtown and have them talk to the homeless bums, ask the bums where they went to college and see what impact that has on the kids interest in making sure they get into college.

Ok, first, in order to supply enough officers, making sure equipment is up to date, ect, departments need to have a sufficient budget. Im not proposing that we give them millions apon millions, rather make sure each department has enough money.

You said you wanted to increase their budget. I asked for specifics but you don't seem to have any. Perhaps you should speak with them and find out what they need, if anything, to improve the situation before you make a blanket promise to increase their budget.

 

[citizenzen]

Yes I think we need to cut back our spending but still need to spend more than others if we are to stay the superpower.

A 75% cut still gives us over a 3 to 1 advantage. If we continue to neglect our infrastructure, our debt, and other needs, we won't be the superpower no matter how much we spend on the military.

 

[Mr. Harris]

A 75% cut still gives us over a 3 to 1 advantage. If we continue to neglect our infrastructure, our debt, and other needs, we won't be the superpower no matter how much we spend on the military.

True, infact I believe the president should introduce an infrastructure act, instead of spreading the wealth, we should take some of that money to improve our infrastructure and create jobs.

Why do you think the rich can afford it? If they leave your town, or cut back their spending, or knock off a few employees as a result of you increasing their taxes, you've lost far more than you've gained. I really don't know where this "common sense" idea that Higher Taxes always results in More Revenue but if you don't look at the situation dynamically, you are setting yourself up for a potential disaster.

Michigan, Detroit specifically, raised taxes on the wealthy and the business in their area. They began to leave, the revenue dropped. So they raised taxes again to make up for the losses, more left and the revenue dropped again. This cycle has continued and now, decades later, Detroit is a shell of the booming industrial city it once was but nobody seems to learn from history.

Yes local taxes shouldn't do that, fed would work better for that. As for Detroit, I know, I live in Michigan.

Doesn't matter. If a student is disruptive, dangerous, or in any other way causing you to need security and police, you need to get rid of that student. Coddling them will only make the problems worse because other kids see them getting away with it.

Increasing strictness could work.

That's not the job of teachers, that's the job of parents. Crappy parents tend to have crappy kids and I don't see how any one on one time is going to convince a kid that he needs grades, to get into college, to earn a living. If anything, take them on a school trip downtown and have them talk to the homeless bums, ask the bums where they went to college and see what impact that has on the kids interest in making sure they get into college.

Well the problem is that we cannot enforce parents to do so, teachers we can.

You said you wanted to increase their budget. I asked for specifics but you don't seem to have any. Perhaps you should speak with them and find out what they need, if anything, to improve the situation before you make a blanket promise to increase their budget.

Yes thanks for the input.

 

[dogtowner]

And dogtowner, as for the money problem, if politicians would handle money better, we all would have alot more of it. As for taxing the wealthy, we need to set better state and fed taxes to do so. And again, I am not trying to just throw money at these problems, it just seems like a step to take. The US needs to look at what needs to be spent on and what doesnt.

no doubt pols waste money, always have.

You say you seek local office so state and federal policy is out of your scope and does nothing to address your constituents.

what separates your ideas from others who have stated spending more ? I'm sure this has been proposed and done wherte you live and yet the results o not appear to have happend. this is quite normal, some of the highest per student spending is done at poorly perform9ng districts such as Atlanta and DC.

 

[Mr. Harris]

Okay well then increase in budget for those cities is not enough. What I mean when I say spend more is not just give money, I meant we need to look at what money we have available and make sure each district is getting enough.

 

[dogtowner]

Okay well then increase in budget for those cities is not enough. What I mean when I say spend more is not just give money, I meant we need to look at what money we have available and make sure each district is getting enough.

we already know whats available and in my county its 50 million short to pay for what we had last year. if you are a local pol, your district is the only one you have any control over. you could try going to the state but more than likely they are in the hole as well.

so if you want more money, how do you propose to get it specifically ? dont forget, rich people can easily move out of your district as can businesses. people may tolerate a tax increase but with rampant unemployment its a muc harder sell than usual.

 

[Mr. Harris]

we already know whats available and in my county its 50 million short to pay for what we had last year. if you are a local pol, your district is the only one you have any control over. you could try going to the state but more than likely they are in the hole as well.

so if you want more money, how do you propose to get it specifically ? dont forget, rich people can easily move out of your district as can businesses. people may tolerate a tax increase but with rampant unemployment its a muc harder sell than usual.

We could give tax breaks to companies willing to move into the area, creating more jobs and getting more business, also we could cut things in our budget that we did not really need.

 

[samsara15]

Independents are usually the politically ignorant, people who simply do not care about politics. Unfortunately, they often are the decisive factor in many many elections. Unfortunate, because they are often uniformed and defintely not interested.

 

[Gipper]

Independents are usually the politically ignorant, people who simply do not care about politics. Unfortunately, they often are the decisive factor in many many elections. Unfortunate, because they are often uniformed and defintely not interested.

So true. And, they often easily persuaded by the lib media.

 

[Mr. Harris]

Not really, we just are not part of a party and keep are minds open.

 

[ktucan1]

Independents aren't going anywhere and are here to stay. They are the driving force behind the political machine here in American and they decide who goes where. Democrats and Republicans may not like them but they can't do anything without them. That is a fact.

 

[dogtowner]

Independents are usually the politically ignorant, people who simply do not care about politics. Unfortunately, they often are the decisive factor in many many elections. Unfortunate, because they are often uniformed and defintely not interested.

they are always the deciding factor in elections, at least national ones. not enough of either party to elect anyone.

they are under informed and decidedly not inteested but sometimes thats a good thing as they are above (or is it below ?) the spin of political ads.

 

[Capitalist Pig]

I think independents are generally very full of themselves. I hear all of the time how standing on the principles I believe in makes me a tool of the establishment. Apparently true intellectualism is the pursuit of a mealy mouthed I'm for everything your for, and against everything your against brand of politics. I can't tell you how many hard left liberals I have heard explaining to me how "independent" they are. They seem to wear it as some kind of badge of honor. See you can't argue with what I'm saying because I take into account all positions and make the best judgments possible.

It is my position that there is nothing wrong with partisanship, except when it is partisanship just for the sake of partisanship. I don't believe I should have to screw up my good idea stew so that I can add in some rancid meat some liberal brought to the party just so that all will feel good about how everyone present contributed to the stew. I like how Gen said it in another thread. If I believe that 2 + 2 is four, I am right, that is reality. If you believe that 2 + 2 is 5, you are wrong, and the fact that it "feels right" to you is irrelevant. If in the interest of bipartisanship we settle on 2 + 2 being 4.5 we are now both wrong.

I get tired of hearing "independents" prattle about how they "vote for the person, not the party". "The person" wouldn't be a member of a particular party if they didn't have a lot in common with it. The parties aren't just teams that wear different colors, they have ideologically conflicting positions on every major issue, and the candidates the parties support reflect those positions to varying degrees. So when I hear people pompously tell me that they "vote for the person, not the party" what I hear them saying is "I vote for the guy who is the best looking on TV and gives the best sounding speeches with the most feel good plattitudes, I don't vote based on what they are saying".