Is the Defense budget no education what needs cut! dummy!

Yes, once again the geniuses in our congress now house majority Republicans wants to do cuts in the wrong areas of the government to say that they are doing something for the nations debt.

But what they are not telling is how this proposed cuts will affect the people no the big defense budget that is killing this nation

In efforts to get the federal deficit down, House Republicans have recently proposed a plethora of solutions, most aimed solely at the 15 percent of spending known as non-security discretionary spending. Cuts to this relatively small piece of the federal budget have the greatest potential to affect day-to-day activities for many people.

Most of this money is allocated to agencies such as the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services, who in turn pass this money onto state and local governments to fund schools, public transportation and other critical services. Reductions in this money would further threaten an education system that has a host of issues.

I guess keeping the masses dumb and stupid with poor education will generate a generation that will have not will or understanding of why our nation is going backward, but still they can wag their littler patriotic flags to the great military complex.

Are we really voting this bubble heads into our nations government? or they are appointed for us . . .

www.economyincrisis.org...

Here, here.
You are spot on, I have said this so many times in my life it's not funny.
When I was a kid my mother always told me not to put good energy (money, time etc..) towards bad. It is just plain, old common sense! Yet, our tax dollars and families lives are constantly feeding this war machine. It is futile and incoherent to me. The work of the ultimate, psychpathic, schizophrenic mad man. Whomever that may be.

After carefully reading the op and the article the following can be stated:
It is perhaps time that the department of education go away. In years past, the only thing that was required to teach a child, was a teacher, a book, and a black board. Supplies that a child needed were paper, pencil and pen. It was not modern technology that educated children, rather it was simple use of the human mind. Children had to read, TV was a novelty, parents were more active in the school system and with the education of their children. Discipline was something that most schools had at one time, where a note home to the parents, or even the threat of suspension was enough to make most children behave. Now, such is long gone, but here the OP, has stated, that the defense department is what needs to be cut, yet fails to mention, that every time there is an attempt to cut spending and reduce the different bases in the area, that congress all fights like cats and dogs to keep the bases in their states open and the industry that provides the equipment going. Not one person in congress is willing to accept a cut that would affect their state, as it would mean a lose of jobs for the very people that they are suppose to represent. There really is not a state that does not benefit one way or the other from the military, as most states have some form of base or industry in it. If you believe that such should be cut, the focus on your state first, cutting the defense departments presence in it, however, it would mean that the money that is generated from the business would no longer be there, nor would that state have a national guard, or a reserve unit based in it. In this economy anything that helps a states economy along, bringing much needed money into an area can not be cut, nor should it, as it affects all aspects in that state, to include education.
But consider this, if the department of education is cut, having worked in a school, then what would happen, perhaps then the teachers union would be forced to concede that letting bad teachers go is more justified and the quality of education goes up, rather than having districts where the education is questionable. It would also force schools to be on a tight budget, competition to be the best teacher would result and the education would get going in the right direction.

reply to post by marg6043


Right-on, Marge!

This also points out the total hypocracy of politicians today, and the GOP in particular in this instance. Military spending is the hugest chunk of money spent by this country, and military spending is the worst kind of spending possible from the point of view of having a healthy economy.

The GOP doesn't care about deficits, that is plain from the history of the Bush regime. They care about spending money on things that do not further fatten their pockets, or the pockets of their corporate masters, but they clearly do not care about deficits per se.

Thanks everybody for your input,

Bottom line is that as the Federal spending is cut in local programs for the states, is the state the one that will be raising taxes to balance their budgets, while the Federal government is promising no taxes, do not expect the states to do the same

Wait for Obama care to hit your state specially if your state is under budget, on majority welfare, bankrupt or about to go bankrupt.

Then unemployment is very high regardless of the sugar coating of the government figures, states are losing revenue from taxes everyday.

The right wing in our country is only interested in three things: war and the well-being of corporations and the very rich top 2% of Americans. Oh yes, they are also interested in restricting women's right to make their own reproductive choices and in general imposing their version of religious morality on the population.

That's it. That's what they're all about.

What they want to do is to cut all social programs -- including educating the next generation of citizens -- because they do not think that old or disabled or middle-class people in general are worthy of being helped in any way. Those who are not young enough or smart enough or privileged enough or ruthless enough to claw their way up to the top of the economic ladder deserve to suffer and die. These people are losers in Darwin's theory of "survival of the fittest" so it's best that they just naturally become extinct.

Not that right-wingers are not charitable at times. They just want their money to go ONLY to those they personally consider "worthy" of their assistance. They don't want the government to step in and be impartial about who gets the benefits.

The Democrats are almost as bad as the Republicans when it comes to funding the wars. Most of the millions of dollars they send to help the countries in which they are fighting wind up in the pockets of the very rich, not the people at all.

A agree. Let's take care of our people at home and not try to rule the world.

reply to post by marg6043


Source- Sam Williford graduated from the College of Charleston (Charleston, SC) with a degree in Communications. Past politcal work includes Democracy Matters, a campaign finance reform group, and serving as a Page in the South Carolina State Senate for Senator Robert Ford and United States Congress for Congressman John Spratt. Sam also served a year in AmeriCorps, assisting with disaster relief in the Gulf and Tennessee.

Marg, the blog you provided gives NO sources. The one source in the article sources another article, written by himself.


www.washingtonpost.com...

Ooooh, I found his source for the $3 trillion.

But today, as the United States ends combat in Iraq, it appears that our $3 trillion estimate (which accounted for both government expenses and the war's broader impact on the U.S. economy) was, if anything, too low. For example, the cost of diagnosing, treating and compensating disabled veterans has proved higher than we expected.

Oh, another one of those GUESSTIMATES from the WAPO.

That is the most glaring bull I got from quick scan.

Just one more part of the blog-

Cutting aid to the middle and lower classes is not the answer.

Tell me, what aid is the middle class getting? What is the definition of his middle class?

You can definitely tell this guy is a politico, he has that class envy thing going well.

but we can't fund our schools?

Hmmmm, the amount of money dumped into schools over the years and the numbers only go DOWWWWNNN!

Maybe people should take a look at the school that Obama mentioned in the SOTU-www.abovetopsecret.com...

Bruce Randolph was a middle school when it opened in 2002. In 2007, Denver Public Schools gave Bruce Randolph School permission to operate autonomously. It was the first school in the state to be granted autonomy from district and union rules.

Each teacher then had to reapply for his or her job. A published report said only six teachers remained.

"Teachers who didn't believe in the students didn't come on board," said Kristin Waters, principal during the transition. Teachers also had to have "a willingness to learn and to grow and to work with other teachers.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


As everything in life and politics we ten to take what agree with us and defame what doesn't, you can take the source and make whatever you want out of it.

But at the end, we are fighting 4 wars that are killing our nation, we are forcing a debt into the tax payer and then forcing states to take matters into their own hands (as it should be with a republic) to find ways to pay for federal deficits.

I have been on politics for a long time, until this day I can not find a political party that is not full of BS, yet.

reply to post by marg6043


I agree about the wars, but the author of the article attempts to say that throwing money at education will actually help it. The US department of Ed and the schools have had increasing amounts of money thrown at it, and the numbers only seem to go down.

As I said earlier, the school that Obama mentioned in the SOTU was a school that got rid of the entrenched union teachers and changed the entire structure. They got rid of the curriculum from the government and went their own way, the end result?

Being a former Site Superintendent I had some sub contractors that thought throwing labor at a problem would fix things. It is the same thing as with money, if it is not applied properly, it can actually harm the outcome.

I will just say that the author has failed to persuade me on the points he was trying to make because historically, the things he foments have not worked. The structural system created in education is failing and just throwing resources at it, will do nothing but cause more problems.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


I focus on the article when it comes to the realities of how our politicians wants to gain votes showing that they care about our deficit, but forget to target what is actually causing much of the economic downfall.

Part of the Social programs, welfare, education etc, also include our social health care system, one that is about to take center state with Obama care.

Our bubble heads think that cutting on programs will not affect how the new health care implementation will be affected, but education seems an easier target.

What could be the solution if the real culprit of our economic leaching is not targeted.

Privatizing ? nothing in this nation is done without money signs attach to it.

Privatizing education will only pass the financial burden on the tax payer and those that will win the bid will look for ways to profit on the tax payer also.

Education in the US is worst that in many developing countries, we rank poorly when it comes to science and math, definitely needs a complete overhauled, but nobody is looking for a solution to that.

One out of twenty five people are Sociopaths. It IS the most dangerous and the most prevalent of personality disorders. If one of them obtains a bigger stick than you, they WILL use it against you! When they obtain a bigger or better weapon, then out of self preservation, you better get a bigger stick!
Defense...something to keep these sickos out of your back yard.

reply to post by Violater1


Well that is not what our military industrial complex is all about this days, most of our defense budget doesn't go to military directly is goes to pay all the private entities that are leaching the tax payer in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, all the waste and mismanagement of tax payer money that can not be accounted for.

Yes, private contractors are the ones reaping the benefits of having those two wars.

Originally posted by Sestias
The right wing in our country is only interested in three things: war and the well-being of corporations and the very rich top 2% of Americans. Oh yes, they are also interested in restricting women's right to make their own reproductive choices and in general imposing their version of religious morality on the population.

That's it. That's what they're all about.

What they want to do is to cut all social programs -- including educating the next generation of citizens -- because they do not think that old or disabled or middle-class people in general are worthy of being helped in any way. Those who are not young enough or smart enough or privileged enough or ruthless enough to claw their way up to the top of the economic ladder deserve to suffer and die. These people are losers in Darwin's theory of "survival of the fittest" so it's best that they just naturally become extinct.

Not that right-wingers are not charitable at times. They just want their money to go ONLY to those they personally consider "worthy" of their assistance. They don't want the government to step in and be impartial about who gets the benefits.

The Democrats are almost as bad as the Republicans when it comes to funding the wars. Most of the millions of dollars they send to help the countries in which they are fighting wind up in the pockets of the very rich, not the people at all.

A agree. Let's take care of our people at home and not try to rule the world.

Right wing Republicans and right wing Democrats (The Clinton Administration) are all eugenicist fascists. They are cold-blooded reptilians < proverbialy speaking) who are psychopaths in their brains. It makes me truly wonder if some 'humans' (humanoids) have souls.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Violater1

 

Well that is not what our military industrial complex is all about this days, most of our defense budget doesn't go to military directly is goes to pay all the private entities that are leaching the tax payer in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, all the waste and mismanagement of tax payer money that can not be accounted for.

Yes, private contractors are the ones reaping the benefits of having those two wars.

Yup.

Both need a huge cut.