Miscellaneous news items that don't warrant their own thread

[BDKJMU]

No Trump is bad for business.

https://variety.com/vip/cable-news-rati ... 234926617/

[89Hen]

No Trump is bad for business.

The Daily Show may as well just pull the plug.

[Skjellyfetti]

It's certainly nice to have a boring administration as opposed to the shitshow soap opera that preceded it.

Also makes this forum less fun, but I'll take it.

[kalm]

No Trump is bad for business.

The Daily Show may as well just pull the plug.

People still watch the Daily Show?

[89Hen]

The Daily Show may as well just pull the plug.

People still watch the Daily Show?

They constantly run the promos for them. Maybe not.

[89Hen]

It's certainly nice to have a boring administration as opposed to the shitshow soap opera that preceded it.

Also makes this forum less fun, but I'll take it.

You better start posting a little more vociferously. Your one year break is right around the corner.

[Ibanez]

Legislators in 27 states have introduced bills to enact or expand programs that would fund K-12 students as opposed to institutions. As of this writing, seven of these states—Iowa, Arizona, Missouri, Indiana, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia—have already passed school choice legislation out of a chamber, and five others—Florida, Georgia, Montana, Idaho, and Oklahoma—have passed bills out of at least one committee.

https://reason.org/commentary/the-covid ... t-systems/


Interesting idea - fund the student vs the obviously failing, school system. Granted - there will be plenty of children that will continue to fall behind and fail to become academically proficient in basic math, grammar, etc... but giving the power (and money) to the individual to decide what is best for their family is interesting.
Of course, this opens up tax dollars being used for religious education(unless specifically restricted and we all know that the Red states doing this won't place those restrictions) and people will have qualms with that.

We already fund students directly when it comes to Pell Grants and the GI Bill for higher education. The same goes for taxpayer-funded pre-K programs such as Head Start. Food stamps and Medicaid funding similarly go to families who have a choice of where they want to spend their grocery and health care budgets.

We should apply the same logic to K-12 education and fund students, not systems.

I do find it difficult to argue against that logic.

https://reason.org/data-visualization/s ... d-funding/

[Gil Dobie]

They are removing a body from an RV at my local Walmart. Wonder how long it was there?

[CID1990]

Legislators in 27 states have introduced bills to enact or expand programs that would fund K-12 students as opposed to institutions. As of this writing, seven of these states—Iowa, Arizona, Missouri, Indiana, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia—have already passed school choice legislation out of a chamber, and five others—Florida, Georgia, Montana, Idaho, and Oklahoma—have passed bills out of at least one committee.

https://reason.org/commentary/the-covid ... t-systems/


Interesting idea - fund the student vs the obviously failing, school system. Granted - there will be plenty of children that will continue to fall behind and fail to become academically proficient in basic math, grammar, etc... but giving the power (and money) to the individual to decide what is best for their family is interesting.
Of course, this opens up tax dollars being used for religious education(unless specifically restricted and we all know that the Red states doing this won't place those restrictions) and people will have qualms with that.

We already fund students directly when it comes to Pell Grants and the GI Bill for higher education. The same goes for taxpayer-funded pre-K programs such as Head Start. Food stamps and Medicaid funding similarly go to families who have a choice of where they want to spend their grocery and health care budgets.

We should apply the same logic to K-12 education and fund students, not systems.

I do find it difficult to argue against that logic.

https://reason.org/data-visualization/s ... d-funding/

The pushback against this is going to have a racialist bent. I’m not sure what the claim will actually be, but in this day and age if you want to derail debate, figure out how something can disadvantage minorities

^^^^^ that will be an invention of northern cities as well as states where there are powerful teachers’ unions (usually the same thing)

It is notable that the states in your quote above are largely red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SDHornet]

https://reason.org/commentary/the-covid ... t-systems/


Interesting idea - fund the student vs the obviously failing, school system. Granted - there will be plenty of children that will continue to fall behind and fail to become academically proficient in basic math, grammar, etc... but giving the power (and money) to the individual to decide what is best for their family is interesting.
Of course, this opens up tax dollars being used for religious education(unless specifically restricted and we all know that the Red states doing this won't place those restrictions) and people will have qualms with that.


I do find it difficult to argue against that logic.

https://reason.org/data-visualization/s ... d-funding/

The pushback against this is going to have a racialist bent. I’m not sure what the claim will actually be, but in this day and age if you want to derail debate, figure out how something can disadvantage minorities

^^^^^ that will be an invention of northern cities as well as states where there are powerful teachers’ unions (usually the same thing)

It is notable that the states in your quote above are largely red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt. The pushback will be monumental. Going to love watching the teachers unions squeal and throw every last dollar they have fighting these bills.

[kalm]

The pushback against this is going to have a racialist bent. I’m not sure what the claim will actually be, but in this day and age if you want to derail debate, figure out how something can disadvantage minorities

^^^^^ that will be an invention of northern cities as well as states where there are powerful teachers’ unions (usually the same thing)

It is notable that the states in your quote above are largely red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt. The pushback will be monumental. Going to love watching the teachers unions squeal and throw every last dollar they have fighting these bills.

I’m open to all of these ideas. My pushback is for-profit education/cronyism/loss of local control.

I’m neutral on unions, but if anything, they’re needed more right now for the sake of balance. It’s odd that with a system based in corruption and well healed special interest. unions are the devil when they’re basically doing the same.

[UNI88]

No doubt. The pushback will be monumental. Going to love watching the teachers unions squeal and throw every last dollar they have fighting these bills.

I’m open to all of these ideas. My pushback is for-profit education/cronyism/loss of local control.

I’m neutral on unions, but if anything, they’re needed more right now for the sake of balance. It’s odd that with a system based in corruption and well healed special interest. unions are the devil when they’re basically doing the same.

To me, the key is to not gut the public education system so that kids of parents who can't afford to send their kids to another school despite whatever financial flexibility this provides can still get a quality education.

Private sector unions do have a place, the key is that they need think of themselves as partners in the company/industry's success. Public sector unions are the devil.

[kalm]

I’m open to all of these ideas. My pushback is for-profit education/cronyism/loss of local control.

I’m neutral on unions, but if anything, they’re needed more right now for the sake of balance. It’s odd that with a system based in corruption and well healed special interest. unions are the devil when they’re basically doing the same.

To me, the key is to not gut the public education system so that kids of parents who can't afford to send their kids to another school despite whatever financial flexibility this provides can still get a quality education.

Private sector unions do have a place, the key is that they need think of themselves as partners in the company/industry's success. Public sector unions are the devil.

Are they as big of a devil as think tanks and business lobbies?

[UNI88]

To me, the key is to not gut the public education system so that kids of parents who can't afford to send their kids to another school despite whatever financial flexibility this provides can still get a quality education.

Private sector unions do have a place, the key is that they need think of themselves as partners in the company/industry's success. Public sector unions are the devil.

Are they as big of a devil as think tanks and business lobbies?

Yes. Their influence on the Democratic Party is just as insidious as business lobbies' influence on the Republican Party.

We have a problem when public-sector employment is more appealing financially and stability-wise than private-sector employment.

[kalm]

Are they as big of a devil as think tanks and business lobbies?

Yes. Their influence on the Democratic Party is just as insidious as business lobbies' influence on the Republican Party.

We have a problem when public-sector employment is more appealing financially and stability-wise than private-sector employment.

Yes we do. And you blame the unions?

[UNI88]

Yes. Their influence on the Democratic Party is just as insidious as business lobbies' influence on the Republican Party.

We have a problem when public-sector employment is more appealing financially and stability-wise than private-sector employment.

Yes we do. And you blame the unions?

Yes, public sector unions have played a major role. Politicians reward unions for campaign contributions and getting out armies of "volunteers" to support their causes and reelections. Their very participation in politics is a conflict of interest.

[SDHornet]

I’m open to all of these ideas. My pushback is for-profit education/cronyism/loss of local control.

I’m neutral on unions, but if anything, they’re needed more right now for the sake of balance. It’s odd that with a system based in corruption and well healed special interest. unions are the devil when they’re basically doing the same.

To me, the key is to not gut the public education system so that kids of parents who can't afford to send their kids to another school despite whatever financial flexibility this provides can still get a quality education.

Private sector unions do have a place, the key is that they need think of themselves as partners in the company/industry's success. Public sector unions are the devil.

Spot on.

[kalm]

Yes we do. And you blame the unions?

Yes, public sector unions have played a major role. Politicians reward unions for campaign contributions and getting out armies of "volunteers" to support their causes and reelections. Their very participation in politics is a conflict of interest.

You feel the same about private sector management?

[UNI88]

Yes, public sector unions have played a major role. Politicians reward unions for campaign contributions and getting out armies of "volunteers" to support their causes and reelections. Their very participation in politics is a conflict of interest.

You feel the same about private sector management?

Have you read my posts criticizing the compensation system for managers of publicly traded companies? Bonuses incentivize them to chase short-term stock gains instead of building great companies.

[kalm]

You feel the same about private sector management?

Have you read my posts criticizing the compensation system for managers of publicly traded companies? Bonuses incentivize them to chase short-term stock gains instead of building great companies.

Would you agree “their very participation in politics is a conflict of interest”?

[Ibanez]

https://reason.org/commentary/the-covid ... t-systems/


Interesting idea - fund the student vs the obviously failing, school system. Granted - there will be plenty of children that will continue to fall behind and fail to become academically proficient in basic math, grammar, etc... but giving the power (and money) to the individual to decide what is best for their family is interesting.
Of course, this opens up tax dollars being used for religious education(unless specifically restricted and we all know that the Red states doing this won't place those restrictions) and people will have qualms with that.


I do find it difficult to argue against that logic.

https://reason.org/data-visualization/s ... d-funding/

The pushback against this is going to have a racialist bent. I’m not sure what the claim will actually be, but in this day and age if you want to derail debate, figure out how something can disadvantage minorities

^^^^^ that will be an invention of northern cities as well as states where there are powerful teachers’ unions (usually the same thing)

It is notable that the states in your quote above are largely red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I came to the same conclusion. Something like this will not pass in a Democrat state. Giving families the power to determine for themselves how to best educate their children is too much for a nanny state.

[UNI88]

Have you read my posts criticizing the compensation system for managers of publicly traded companies? Bonuses incentivize them to chase short-term stock gains instead of building great companies.

Would you agree “their very participation in politics is a conflict of interest”?

For all publicly traded companies? No. Just like I haven't said that private sector unions shouldn't participate in politics.

For companies that do a lot of business with the government? Yes. For example, there is a potential conflict of interest for a defense contractor lobbying for more government spending. Ibanez is more knowledgeable in this arena, I would be interested in his perspective.

[kalm]

Would you agree “their very participation in politics is a conflict of interest”?

For all publicly traded companies? No. Just like I haven't said that private sector unions shouldn't participate in politics.

For companies that do a lot of business with the government? Yes. For example, there is a potential conflict of interest for a defense contractor lobbying for more government spending. Ibanez is more knowledgeable in this arena, I would be interested in his perspective.

Fair. Define “a lot”. And about companies that win favorable legislation at the expense of other companies. Doesn’t that skew the market?

[UNI88]

For all publicly traded companies? No. Just like I haven't said that private sector unions shouldn't participate in politics.

For companies that do a lot of business with the government? Yes. For example, there is a potential conflict of interest for a defense contractor lobbying for more government spending. Ibanez is more knowledgeable in this arena, I would be interested in his perspective.

Fair. Define “a lot”. And about companies that win favorable legislation at the expense of other companies. Doesn’t that skew the market?

Like Solyndra?

Careful, you're entering libertarian thoughts here ... I would prefer that government stay out of helping make winners and losers but how do you differentiate between helping make winners and losers through:
- regulation (a necessary evil that should be practiced in moderation)
- legislation
- financial incentives to spur innovation (one person's investment in the future is another's pork)

[kalm]

Fair. Define “a lot”. And about companies that win favorable legislation at the expense of other companies. Doesn’t that skew the market?

Like Solyndra?

Careful, you're entering libertarian thoughts here ... I would prefer that government stay out of helping make winners and losers but how do you differentiate between helping make winners and losers through:
- regulation (a necessary evil that should be practiced in moderation)
- legislation
- financial incentives to spur innovation (one person's investment in the future is another's pork)

Yep. I was thinking both green energy and fossil fuel companies.

I have WAY more libertarian thoughts than you think.

May have stolen some of your ideas in an email I sent our county commissioners today.