It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats love to spend your money

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I live in a large city, and about fifteen years ago the public schools were taken over by a federal Judge because they were failing to teach.

The judge concluded that the inner city schools were academically inferior to the suburban schools because of money.

He said that inner-city schools were old, the books
dilapidated and the teachers underpaid and perhaps unqualified.

So the judge set out to make things right, he doubled the property taxes and raised
a few billion dollars to finance a new public school system for the city. Many of the old schools were torn down, some were remodeled and expanded, but most were built new.

The judge spared no expense, and built fantastic schools for the disadvantaged.
He ordered the school board to hire the best teachers money could buy, and
recruited not locally but nationally and internationally for the best
talent.

Each school along with its regular curriculum had a special theme,
whether it was computer science, foreign languages, band, mathematics,
and the arts.

All subject matter was covered by one of the schools and taught
by instructors who were masters at their profession.

Ten years and billions of dollars later the city is stuck with a glamorous
school system that consistently puts out uneducated students year after
year, until last year the state was forced to take away the
schools accreditation.

All the money in the world and the best-paid teacher's has proven [not] to be the solution.

The lack of parent involvement is probably a factor, but Democrats cant raise taxes for that so it is overlooked.

Democrats love to spend your money---unfortunately their methods rarely fix the problem.




posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   
You say "their methods" as though there is no Republican out there who finds that updating and replacing an old sysytem is not a jump start to a better education system...and that's what it is....a short-term goal on list of long-term objectives.

Just b/c a bunch of democrats get together and talk about education, doesn't mean each one is going to say "well, it's the atmosphere of the school...let's just tear this all down and make it more fung shway...(sp?)"


Besides...raising money and taxing people more isn't going to solve household issues....and who's to say that those schools weren't already well on their way to loosing their accrediation in the first place? Many schools are over-looked with the good intentions of the school officials to make some kind of last ditch effort - obviously, in this case, it didn't work...but the democratic party should not be your form of catharsis....



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
What most fail to understand is that the federal government fails to do almost everything it sets out to do, barring war (mainly because the lifespan of any war is relatively short).

The federal government is a failure at education, poverty, unemployment, ANY social program, roads, etc.

Is it any wonder why Universal Healthcare is the worst idea in the past... almost 100 years. It will cripple the US.

There is no changing the federal government. The only thing the Republicans and Democrats will do is increase the gavernment and perpetuate our fall.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
What most fail to understand is that the federal government fails to do almost everything it sets out to do, barring war (mainly because the lifespan of any war is relatively short).

The federal government is a failure at education, poverty, unemployment, ANY social program, roads, etc.

Is it any wonder why Universal Healthcare is the worst idea in the past... almost 100 years. It will cripple the US.

There is no changing the federal government. The only thing the Republicans and Democrats will do is increase the government and perpetuate our fall.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
What most fail to understand is that the federal government fails to do almost everything it sets out to do, barring war (mainly because the lifespan of any war is relatively short).

The federal government is a failure at education, poverty, unemployment, ANY social program, roads, etc.

Is it any wonder why Universal Healthcare is the worst idea in the past... almost 100 years. It will cripple the US.

There is no changing the federal government. The only thing the Republicans and Democrats will do is increase the government and perpetuate our fall.


Seriously KJ, what condition do you think the middle class would be in if not for FDR? Do you really think we'd even have a middle class around to complain about the government if not for government intervention?

And IMO for profit medicine is the worst and most immoral idea in human history. As for just the last 100 years, I'd have to go with the FCC allowing advertising and corporate ownership of public airwaves. Not just pharmaceuticals. All advertising. And I'm in the industry.
I know it's evil, counterproductive and an a offense to humanity.

Were I to really investigate the issue, I'd probably determine it's unconstitutional too.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Well, regardless of which party is responisble for spending YOUR money, here's a good site of that money (taxes) being wasted. www.taxpayer.net... When you read the articles on this site you begin to wonder why the government is a failure at education, poverty and unemployment.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Seriously KJ, what condition do you think the middle class would be in if not for FDR? Do you really think we'd even have a middle class around to complain about the government if not for government intervention?

And IMO for profit medicine is the worst and most immoral idea in human history. As for just the last 100 years, I'd have to go with the FCC allowing advertising and corporate ownership of public airwaves. Not just pharmaceuticals. All advertising. And I'm in the industry.
I know it's evil, counterproductive and an a offense to humanity.

Were I to really investigate the issue, I'd probably determine it's unconstitutional too.


It's nearly impossible to say what would have happened without FDR. That's the thing about it, you just can't say.

But that was a long time ago, and a good case can be made against the Federal Reserve in the economic ills category (although that is not my particular strong suit, but am willing to discuss it in another thread).

If it's welfare specifically you are talking about, well that was not such a bad idea. The bad idea was the institution being directed, funded, and managed through the federal government. We've become a handout nation.

As far as I'm concerned, a cold buck from the government isn't half as valueable as a warm hand from the community.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 08:42 PM
link   
there is nothing wrong at all with providing your kids with the best education that the state can offer. If this program the judge did helped change one students life and allowed him onto college it was well worth every cent.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 09:41 PM
link   
interesting story. i don't understand what country you are referring to though. judges can't levy taxes in america.

-koji K.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 10:31 PM
link   
The Democrats like spending your money? How about $392 billion in the next ten years, solely on the fallacy of the Iraq war? What could you have achieved socially with that that money? I'm not even American, but I can still see the very narrow path you're being led up.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   
If Democrats spend money then Republicans....



[edit on 31-8-2004 by Jazzerman]



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
What most fail to understand is that the federal government fails to do almost everything it sets out to do, barring war (mainly because the lifespan of any war is relatively short).

The federal government is a failure at education, poverty, unemployment, ANY social program, roads, etc.

Is it any wonder why Universal Healthcare is the worst idea in the past... almost 100 years. It will cripple the US.

There is no changing the federal government. The only thing the Republicans and Democrats will do is increase the government and perpetuate our fall.


Seriously KJ, what condition do you think the middle class would be in if not for FDR? Do you really think we'd even have a middle class around to complain about the government if not for government intervention?

And IMO for profit medicine is the worst and most immoral idea in human history. As for just the last 100 years, I'd have to go with the FCC allowing advertising and corporate ownership of public airwaves. Not just pharmaceuticals. All advertising. And I'm in the industry.
I know it's evil, counterproductive and an a offense to humanity.

Were I to really investigate the issue, I'd probably determine it's unconstitutional too.


Oh thank you rant I was hoping someone would open up this particular can of worms. So you believe in your words

for profit medicine is the worst and most immoral idea in human history


Really? lets look at this logically, If for profit medicine was outlawed, then the government would be in charge of devolping new medicines right? Well do you have any Idea how much that costs?
According to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association in 2002 the R&D spent by Americas Pharmaceutical companies was 32 billion dollars. By comprison the entire NIH budget was only 24 billion. So right off the bat the U.S. government would have to shell out an additional 32billion dollars a year just to begin devolping drugs. With the average cost of devolping a new drug and bringing it to mrket being 802 million dollars coupled with the fact that only 3 out of every 10 drugs devolped ever makes enough to reach break-even with its devolpment costs that meanse that roughly 70% of all the money spent on R&D is never recovered. Add that to the fact that as this would be government controlled, and funded. That means that that there would be no profits generated to fund the next years R&D.. That in turn means that even more money would have to be poured into R&D into to make up for the 70% of the R&D budget that never creates revenues. Bottom line it would cost the U.S. government at least 95 billion dollars per year to have a self sustaining drug research and testing division which would not create any revenue, leading to a higher tax burden for everyone, with less rapid advances in pharmaceutical science, and as with all government projects would take longer to bring to market. So tell me Rant, why is it better Idea to have the U.S. government produce drugs?

www.phrma.org...

[edit on 1-9-2004 by mwm1331]



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Throwing money at problems doesen't solve it.. but better organization of the existing money could solve many things.

The Federal Government could fix a lot of problems if it did not....

1. Misplacing millions or billions of dollars every once in awhile as it admits to.

2. Foreign aid programs- Alot of it ends up in the hands of druglords, terrorists, and rebel organizations.

3. Unnecessary military interventions (Afghanistan should of been the focus of the so called "terror war" Not Iraq

4. The overbloated welfare and the failed Social security system.. As a socialist I wish to ensure everyone can live the highest standard of living possible... but these systems are a failed mess of misplaced money and poor management. I'd like to see these programs localized to the community level which would ensure better control and better distribution of services to those requiring it. The federal government is too large and too disorganized to manage such a system.

5. The fed can't even run the SS Program.. it would never be capable of running a universal healthcare system. This is better left off to the local community level like I said. For the fed is not capable of the type of organization for a national level. Smaller, more able local governments could serve just the area of it's jurisdiction.


I agree with KrazyJethro and his localization ideas. Cut the federal programs and localize it to the community.


[edit on 1-9-2004 by RedOctober90]



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I'm a democrat, I don't have my own money to spend, wish I could spend someone else's. Any takers?



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by deeprivergal
I'm a democrat, I don't have my own money to spend, wish I could spend someone else's. Any takers?


Just sign up for your parties' favorite program (or so it seems) Welfare. That and Social Security are the 2 most retarted programs that my hard earned cash is taxed for. I work my ass off 6 days a week 9 hours a day so that some one who is too lazy to actually find a job can sit on their ass all day and live off my money.
O and the same thing goes for medicare.



posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 03:23 AM
link   
democrats spending your money?
The Democrats are the fiscal conservatives! Bush and Reagan spend like madmen while Clinton tried to get the foreign debt out of control. Stop spending money that you don't have. Simple.

Thank god my country is slashing all it's foreign debt i never want to see it again.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Yeha but there are also those working 6 days a week or more, working there arses off yet still can't make ends meet..

Not everyone on welfare are lazy bums.

I work hard too, yet I'd have no problem contributing a portion of my earnings to social systems. Because its not just there for others.. it is also there for yourself if something bad happens.

It's unfortunate Senior Citizen retirees who worked hard all there life still cannot pay for corporate overbloated prices on prescription drugs, forcing them to go to Canada where the prices are not as intentionally jacked up to run you dry on cash.

[edit on 2-9-2004 by RedOctober90]

[edit on 2-9-2004 by RedOctober90]



posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 10:30 AM
link   
kegs,

I guess they have ignored your post, but I agree with you and does that include the spending on Afghanistan reconstruction also?

How about the defense budget? Meanwhile unemployment, lack of affordable health care and poverty in this country is overseen by this administration but the wealth fare of these two countries Iraq and Afghanistan is top priority.

Thanks of bringing that up.



posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
there is nothing wrong at all with providing your kids with the best education that the state can offer. If this program the judge did helped change one students life and allowed him onto college it was well worth every cent.



The states don't offer great education. In fact, from what I've been hearing and reading, the states scam the money given them by the feds. And if all that money and all those changes ONLY helped one kid, it wasn't worth it at all. It means it was a colossal failure. The schools' problems are two-fold. Bad/wrong/outdated textbooks and unqualified teachers in some places are the shool's problem; and the rise in disciplinary problems and lack of parent involvement are the community's problem. I had classes where the teacher spent fully, if not more, of the entire time on disciplinary problems. And that was when Reagan was in office, not a Democrat.

It's kind of funny.... I heard Edwards at the DNC promising that they'd get everyone healthcare, more jobs, more money, tax breaks, chocolates, teddy bears, rainbows.... then I saw Bush a few days later saying it sounded good, but where were they going to get the money? It's not just Democrats or Republicans, it's everyone in the current form of government.

Makes me think it's time to smash this two party system once and for all.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join