The Food Police Strike Again!

[Martok]

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

I'll stake my knowledge on how state education works against yours anytime. I simply don't see it through hate lenses that you wear.

Translation: I still don't have any idea what I am talking about, I am just going to try and sound all indignant and self righteous in hopes others won't notice.

I have worked in public education for a long time now, CE, and I know the dirty little secrets of how the system works. Funding for public education is distributed like funding for any other government funded organization, in that those for whom the money is meant to be for benefit from it last, after the unions and BOE's have taken all they can for themselves.

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

I'm glad you agree, it's voluntary. No state has to participate.

Translation: I am going to continue to be obtuse because as a liberal I know everything better than everyone else.

Lets try this. It is voluntary in the same sense someone taking money because someone else has a gun to their head. Sure, the first guy could refuse to take the money, but then he has to contend with the second guy pulling the trigger.

Let a city or state try to cut funding for education, and this is what you get:

Principals Join Teachers Union's Lawsuit To Prevent School Closures

Quote:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg suggested the unions are just out to protect their members' jobs.

"Suing to stop closing schools which are leaving our children without a future says that your agenda is not to help children, it is some other agenda," the mayor said.

The teacher's union was successful in suing to stop school closures two years ago, but last year the courts sided with the city over closures.

Source: http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stori...chool-closures

Schools Get Property Tax Referendum Exemptions for Pension Costs

Last year, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed, and Gov. Corbett signed, legislation reducing the number of exemptions to the school tax referendum requirement. But as noted this week, the Pa. Department of Education approved exemptions for nearly 200 districts, allowing them to increase taxes above the "index" without seeking voter approval.

Source: http://www.commonwealthfoundation.or...property-taxes

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

Just what kind of law suits would be filed? Please tell us.

Translation: As a liberal I know you as a Conservative are far too stupid to ever be able to answer one of my questions, so I will ask a really stupid one while holding my nose so far up in the air I can't even see the keyboard while I type.

1. Teachers union sues Florida over new pension law

Quote:

TALLAHASSEE — The 140,000-member statewide teachers union sued Gov. Rick Scott and other state officials on Monday to block a new law that requires state employees to begin contributing to their retirement plans.

The challenge, filed in Leon County circuit court, asserts that the law's required 3 percent contribution to the state's retirement fund amounts to a breach of contract with public employees, who accepted their positions with the promise of certain benefits. Those benefits included a pension plan that did not require contributions.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/201...-pat-santeramo

2. Raymond Dix: Teachers union lawsuit does not add up

Quote:

On Friday, the Indiana State Teachers Association filed a lawsuit in Marion County court to block implementation of the new school voucher law. According to an article in the Indianapolis Star, the suit argues that school vouchers, which redirect a portion of state aid from public school districts to private schools for some low- and middle-income parents, violate the state constitution. According to the suit, the state constitution forbids the use of tax dollars to support religious institutions and requires public education funds to be spent only on a “uniform system of common schools,” that are open to all. The suit argues that private schools do not qualify as part of that system.

It is interesting that the state teachers union would sue in order to prevent educational choice for taxpaying parents. If our system of education is really about the children, then why would teachers sue to prevent low-income and some middle-income families from choosing the best means to direct their tax dollars?

Source: http://posttrib.suntimes.com/news/di...ot-add-up.html

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

Local Boards of Education have members that are impacted by state funding? Interesting.

Translation: I am going to act like I didn't understand the point you were making so I can sound snide and superior.

Board of Education members may not be paid a direct salary, but they are allowed staff members and expense accounts fully funded by the taxpayer.

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

So, the GOP controls most state legislatures but they are scared of Teacher unions? Why?

Translation: Now I am going to stick my head in the sand and act like all that stuff in Wisconsin never happened.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Martok

Translation: I still don't have any idea what I am talking about, I am just going to try and sound all indignant and self righteous in hopes others won't notice.

I have worked in public education for a long time now, CE, and I know the dirty little secrets of how the system works. Funding for public education is distributed like funding for any other government funded organization, in that those for whom the money is meant to be for benefit from it last, after the unions and BOE's have taken all they can for themselves.

Snip for a piece by piece discussion.

My wife has been a teacher for 25 plus years, I've got just a little expose to it.

With your great amount of experience, you've failed to grasp that EVERY state is different when it comes to funding education, when it comes to education employees right to bargain and to strike.

You try to make a point about funding and taxes that seems to apply to the country. No validity to that point at all.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Martok

Translation: I am going to continue to be obtuse because as a liberal I know everything better than everyone else.

Lets try this. It is voluntary in the same sense someone taking money because someone else has a gun to their head. Sure, the first guy could refuse to take the money, but then he has to contend with the second guy pulling the trigger.

Let a city or state try to cut funding for education, and this is what you get:

Principals Join Teachers Union's Lawsuit To Prevent School Closures

Quote:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg suggested the unions are just out to protect their members' jobs.

"Suing to stop closing schools which are leaving our children without a future says that your agenda is not to help children, it is some other agenda," the mayor said.

The teacher's union was successful in suing to stop school closures two years ago, but last year the courts sided with the city over closures.

Source: http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stori...chool-closures

Schools Get Property Tax Referendum Exemptions for Pension Costs

Last year, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed, and Gov. Corbett signed, legislation reducing the number of exemptions to the school tax referendum requirement. But as noted this week, the Pa. Department of Education approved exemptions for nearly 200 districts, allowing them to increase taxes above the "index" without seeking voter approval.

Source: http://www.commonwealthfoundation.or...property-taxes

And New York State and City's teacher contract and bargaining system applies to about how many other states in the Union? Nice example. Pick one that is just a little more applicable. Want to compare there garbage collectors to the rest across the country next?

Pick the extreme and attack it like it is the norm. Sorry, doesn't work.

The Legislature, the elected body, passed and a elected governor signed a bill that allowed Elected School Boards to raise taxes easier. Nothing to do with this point what so ever. If the people object, they vote them out at any of the three levels. See how that works.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Martok

Translation: As a liberal I know you as a Conservative are far too stupid to ever be able to answer one of my questions, so I will ask a really stupid one while holding my nose so far up in the air I can't even see the keyboard while I type.

1. Teachers union sues Florida over new pension law

Quote:

TALLAHASSEE — The 140,000-member statewide teachers union sued Gov. Rick Scott and other state officials on Monday to block a new law that requires state employees to begin contributing to their retirement plans.

The challenge, filed in Leon County circuit court, asserts that the law's required 3 percent contribution to the state's retirement fund amounts to a breach of contract with public employees, who accepted their positions with the promise of certain benefits. Those benefits included a pension plan that did not require contributions.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/201...-pat-santeramo

Once again nothing to do with Dept of Education money being accepted or not accepted by a state.

Either the state violated it's contract or it did not. Yes, teachers, police and public employees have a right to have that heard in court.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Martok

2. Raymond Dix: Teachers union lawsuit does not add up

Quote:

On Friday, the Indiana State Teachers Association filed a lawsuit in Marion County court to block implementation of the new school voucher law. According to an article in the Indianapolis Star, the suit argues that school vouchers, which redirect a portion of state aid from public school districts to private schools for some low- and middle-income parents, violate the state constitution. According to the suit, the state constitution forbids the use of tax dollars to support religious institutions and requires public education funds to be spent only on a “uniform system of common schools,” that are open to all. The suit argues that private schools do not qualify as part of that system.

It is interesting that the state teachers union would sue in order to prevent educational choice for taxpaying parents. If our system of education is really about the children, then why would teachers sue to prevent low-income and some middle-income families from choosing the best means to direct their tax dollars?

Source: http://posttrib.suntimes.com/news/di...ot-add-up.html

Maybe they'd sue because it looks to them to be a violation of the States Constitution? I guess that would be OK as long as it's helping a private school.

And once again another point that has nothing to do with the DoE funding for States.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Martok

Translation: I am going to act like I didn't understand the point you were making so I can sound snide and superior.

Board of Education members may not be paid a direct salary, but they are allowed staff members and expense accounts fully funded by the taxpayer.


Translation: Now I am going to stick my head in the sand and act like all that stuff in Wisconsin never happened.

A Big So What? They are probably the most direct representative of a tax payer that we have in this country. I know of no other office where it is so easy to kick a 'politician' out of office and replace them. Paid district staffs have nothing to do with your point at all.

In the end, your point is " I hate Public Unions".

[Marty Ward]

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

State governments send no money to the Feds. Individual Tax payers do. Once again, who MADE the State accept any money?

So what you are saying is that the taxpayers of the State pay the feds and then the Feds send the money back therefore the State sends no money therefore can't say it is just taking back the money senty in in the first place? That's a pretty stupid thing to argue. But then you argue in support of Obama all the time so it doesn't suprise me.
If the money stayed in the State in the first place it would available for the State to collect in taxes IF needed.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Marty Ward

So what you are saying is that the taxpayers of the State pay the feds and then the Feds send the money back therefore the State sends no money therefore can't say it is just taking back the money senty in in the first place? That's a pretty stupid thing to argue. But then you argue in support of Obama all the time so it doesn't suprise me.
If the money stayed in the State in the first place it would available for the State to collect in taxes IF needed.

States set there own tax rates, nothing to do with Federal Rate. If a state does not want Federal Money for Education they can simply not take any. The fact that they do take is not the fault of the Fed, it's the fault of the State.

[Marty Ward]

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

States set there own tax rates, nothing to do with Federal Rate. If a state does not want Federal Money for Education they can simply not take any. The fact that they do take is not the fault of the Fed, it's the fault of the State.

The States send Federal tax money they collect to the Federal government. The Fedral government then sends money back to the States. If they just 'take' the amount they sent in then they aren't 'taking' anything from anyone. Of course then there wouldn't be any money to ship around for pet projects or to re-distribute so I can understand why you would continue with the stupid argument that the States don't send money to the Feds.

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by Marty Ward

The States send Federal tax money they collect to the Federal government. The Fedral government then sends money back to the States. If they just 'take' the amount they sent in then they aren't 'taking' anything from anyone. Of course then there wouldn't be any money to ship around for pet projects or to re-distribute so I can understand why you would continue with the stupid argument that the States don't send money to the Feds.

States do NOT collect Federal Tax money. They have NOTHING to do with collecting federal money.

[don744]

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

The school lunch program is not part of the Dept of Education, never has been. Dept of Agriculture program.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Lunch/Ab...mHistory_5.htm

As to other funding, how can it be a violation of the 10th amendment when NO state has to accept any Dept of Ed money? It's there, states freely choose it.

Bubba...it's federal funding. I did not say the dept of education funds the school lunch program. Department of agriculture, department of education, or deparment of health and human services. Federal money is federal money. Doesn't matter which Don is saying, "Either you do as I say or I have Freddy Fingers here break a body part of his choosing. Capice?" Regarding the choice to not take it...that horse left the barn a long time ago, which is the crux of my argument. When it was accepted, and programs developed that exceed the local schools ability to fund it on their own, then they are kinda "stuck like Greece". Knowwhatimean? No one wants to hear "austerity program" after living fat on the hog. Also, regarding the 10th amendment...I recognize how you form you argument. While "legally" and "factually" correct (I never said it wasn't), I said it was legal extortion.

[SRV Ron]

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

Sports are what? A private activity or supported with State money? Football games are what events, public school or private? Easy answer.

Join private clubs and sports teams. If you participate in a tax payer funded program, you go by the rules set by the taxpayer funding institution.

If the sports programs in the public school were totally taxpayer supported, there would be no need for booster clubs, fundraisers and athletic associations let alone them holding fundraisers involving bake sales, World's Finest Chocolate, awards dinners, and numerous other events involving food.

Reality, many of those sports programs in the schools are having their funding cut. Worse yet, schools are being told that they MUST hold boys and girls sports at the same time in the season thus putting a strain on gym time, etc... Results, many of the public schools are cutting back or eliminating competition sports at a time when Progressives are complaining about obesity and lack of exercise.

BTY, this was number one topic on Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannanty, and most likely tonight on Bill O-Reilly.

[T. A. Gardner]

Here's the LA Times article on what happened with "healthy" lunches there....

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec...lausd-20111218

[Combat Engineer]

Originally Posted by SRV Ron

If the sports programs in the public school were totally taxpayer supported, there would be no need for booster clubs, fundraisers and athletic associations let alone them holding fundraisers involving bake sales, World's Finest Chocolate, awards dinners, and numerous other events involving food.

Reality, many of those sports programs in the schools are having their funding cut. Worse yet, schools are being told that they MUST hold boys and girls sports at the same time in the season thus putting a strain on gym time, etc... Results, many of the public schools are cutting back or eliminating competition sports at a time when Progressives are complaining about obesity and lack of exercise.

BTY, this was number one topic on Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannanty, and most likely tonight on Bill O-Reilly.

So, you want Federal Money for sports?

If local communities want a vibrant HS sports program it's another easy answer. Pay for it with taxes or fees for the participant etc.

[SRV Ron]

Originally Posted by Combat Engineer

If local communities want a vibrant HS sports program it's another easy answer. Pay for it with taxes or fees for the participant etc.

Not when the Progressives will bitch that such fees are unfair to minorities and the poor. That is what happened locally when some cash strapped public schools starting charging students that wanted to participate in sports.

The booster's and other fundraiser money is used to provide transportation to away games, uniforms, and other equipment that is not provided by the school sports programs.

Those problems didn't exist until the Department of Education was formed and started their carrot stick program when the state and local supported schools got hooked on the Federal funds.