Kurt Cobain; wealthy; suffered horrible depression. Shot himself in the head because he couldn't take it anymore. Money didn't save him.
This money doesn't fix everything rule gets tossed around a lot and the unfortunate truth is that money itself causes more problems than good. Money creates greed and desire to be the guy with the most toys when the time comes.
Today the NJ Supreme Court ruled that the State must put an additional $500M back into the hands of the Abbott Districts because the cuts enacted by the Christie Administration were ultimately unconstitutional. Christie went on record today as saying, "We must acknowledge that money does not equal quality results." (Newark Star Ledger 5/24/11 http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/gov_christie_legislature_must.html). If money does not equal quality results then why not hand Mark Zuckerberg back that $100M check he gave to the Newark schools in September. OK, I say check for sake of being dramatic. It was a $100M grant (Newark Star Ledger 9/27/10 http://blog.nj.com/ledgerarchives/2010/09/facebook_ceo_mark_zuckerbergs.html).
So how is it that the $500M won't solve anything when in Newark $100M will? It seems to me that sometimes money does solve the problem and sometimes it doesn't. So which is it? Christie claims that the Abbott funding formula is a failed educational theory. What theory would that be exactly? The theory that money won't fix it. But yet that $100M from Zuckerberg will fix it?
The point in all of this is where does the money come from and how is it being used. There is a growing drive in this nation to turn education into a business that brings rewards to those who already have it. Do you think Mark Zuckerberg knew a thing about Newark schools and the situation there? He probably knew Newark only for the airport or the fact that at one time it was known as the car theft capital of the country. I doubt the plight of Newark students was really keeping Zuckerberg up at night so much so that he had to step in and save the day with his money.
No, he is a business man and he knows that his money will go towards a school that has better equipment, better paid teachers, and a link to a vast set of resources that will allow the school to succeed and achieve. So, maybe money does solve everything. Oh wait, no it doesn't. Read some of the articles out there about failed charter schools:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/100203439.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/education/02charters.html?scp=2&sq=charter+schools&st=nyt
http://www.irpumn.org/uls/resources/projects/2_Charter_Report_Final.pdf
I guess I'm going here with this discussion--money alone does not solve the problem. It takes a lot more than that. I am a firm believer and supporter of public education and I will also be first to admit it requires reform. No one denies this.
You don't just cut the budget and say, "do more with less." Just as you don't go hand over more money and say, "here, go nuts." You need a combination of good educational theory and practice, fiscal responssibility, and the resources (which yes means money). Look at the operating budget for any district and go line by line and ask yourself, "do we really need to spend that much on that?" Set out the priorities. Salary is always the largest expense. Granted salary for public schools are mandated by contracts and unions etc., you can still properly evaluate and analyze a teacher's ability to be effective. No you don't base it on test scores. You base it on the knowledge that a student obtains as a result of the teacher. This isn't fact and recall, this is actual ability to take what is learned and apply it. This concept and method of evaluation is difficult in courses like English or even History, but if you have the right people in place you can do this.
It's reform, not revolution, not destroy what we have and build it anew. It is work from within to change it. It can be done if you have the tools. Instead politicans make it into issues of money, tax payer dollars, corporate donations, etc. All to serve their own purpose to get somewhere in life.
You see that in NJ. Chris Christie has made it a battle among the people. One side complains about their taxes being too high and the other side are those who are blamed for the high taxes--the teachers that are part of this system. Don't make them out to be the bad guy here. Their union did what was right by its brothers and sisters. Now as elected officials you should do what's right for all, give the districts what they need, money, personnel, tools, which can be used to fix from within. I would gladly pay more in taxes if I knew it was going towards something that mattered. What I pay now I do happily because I see my oldest son in college, my middle one headed there, and my youngest getting the resources he needs as a disabled student. Is it perfect? No, but my children are intelligent and while my wife and I have a piece in that, so too do the schools they have gone to. I see the benefits obtained from the cost of my taxes, at least as they pertain to education in my town. Can everyone say that? No, and that is why we have this battle.
I don't have the immediate solution and I never promised one. I guess like in all debates I look at the much larger issue than the one standing in front of me. Politicans have always played games with our money and our people and it has to stop. To some degree the Supreme Court of NJ did that. They told a schoolyard bully he can't just cut what he deems as not important, at the same time they can't tell all of us how our money should be spent because that is not their place.
I guess my concern is more on the principle of this case. I don't like Chris Christie, and I didn't like Jon Corzine before him, or Jim McGreevey or Christie Todd Whitman, or Jim Florio.
I don't like the politics of this country and the greed it propogates.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
More tax revenue?
OK, this one will be quick and to the point. Word came out today that NJ is expecting an additional $300M more in tax revenue this year and this in turn will go towards higher homestead rebates. Taxpayers are rejoicing and Governor Chris Christie and his brainwashed followers are taking to the web to proclaim the Governor's policies a success. So I wondered, how is this a success? Where is this money coming from?
I asked a person who goes on Twitter as Capt. Republican, a loud mouthed poster child for the unintelligent. Sorry, had to take the dig. This person claims people are making more and thus paying more in taxes which means higher revenues.
Let me make sure the readers at home get this. PEOPLE ARE MAKING MORE MONEY AND SO THEY ARE PAYING MORE TAXES. If that is true, and a person making $200K is taxed at (let's use simple math here) 10%, they pay $2000 in taxes. Let's apply the same logic to the "Millionnaire's Tax" which Christie vetoed and vows to never restore. A person making $1M, taxed at 10% brings in $100K. You make more, you pay more.
So now I ask you out there, shouldn't we tax the higher wage earners more? Wouldn't that bring in more revenue? They are paid more, they'll pay more. Or they'll pay the same and simply use loopholes to avoid the additional taxes.
The Christie clan claims the millionnaires will flee the state if we tax them. I challenge you, find me one person of millionnaire status that has moved from NJ and will go on the record as saying they left because taxes were too high. Cause you know I don't see a lot a vacant properties in Englewood Cliffs, I believe Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy still own residences there. I know Bruce Springsteen lives in NJ and Jon Bon Jovi still has a house here. New Jersey is known as one of the more affluent states. There was a point in time when Bergen County ranked as one of the most exclusive and affluent areas to live.
Provide proof to back up the claims. I just never seem to see that.
I asked a person who goes on Twitter as Capt. Republican, a loud mouthed poster child for the unintelligent. Sorry, had to take the dig. This person claims people are making more and thus paying more in taxes which means higher revenues.
Let me make sure the readers at home get this. PEOPLE ARE MAKING MORE MONEY AND SO THEY ARE PAYING MORE TAXES. If that is true, and a person making $200K is taxed at (let's use simple math here) 10%, they pay $2000 in taxes. Let's apply the same logic to the "Millionnaire's Tax" which Christie vetoed and vows to never restore. A person making $1M, taxed at 10% brings in $100K. You make more, you pay more.
So now I ask you out there, shouldn't we tax the higher wage earners more? Wouldn't that bring in more revenue? They are paid more, they'll pay more. Or they'll pay the same and simply use loopholes to avoid the additional taxes.
The Christie clan claims the millionnaires will flee the state if we tax them. I challenge you, find me one person of millionnaire status that has moved from NJ and will go on the record as saying they left because taxes were too high. Cause you know I don't see a lot a vacant properties in Englewood Cliffs, I believe Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy still own residences there. I know Bruce Springsteen lives in NJ and Jon Bon Jovi still has a house here. New Jersey is known as one of the more affluent states. There was a point in time when Bergen County ranked as one of the most exclusive and affluent areas to live.
Provide proof to back up the claims. I just never seem to see that.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Politics in all its glory
In NJ last year school budgets went to vote and of the 541 voted on 316 were defeated. Governor Chris Christie called this moment a sign that the people of NJ agreed with him that these budgets were out of control and spending needed to be controlled. At the time that the budget elections took place Christie had already called for the cut of $820 million in aid to schools. In a grand political move Christie took the defeat of the budgets as a sign that he had succeeded in proving that people didn’t want to see their taxes go up to make up the difference.
OK, that makes sense. People didn’t want to see their taxes go up by some incredible rate. That brings us to 2011.
This year voters went to the polls for school budgets and as of today, 301 of 373 school budgets passed. We’re still waiting to get the results from another 165, but at this point it’s clear that we’ve seen the majority will pass. Now again Christie views this as a victory for his stand. But is it really a victory for him or just a victory based on circumstance?
Towns got less aid from the State last year and the current projections, while showing a slight increase in State aid, are still lower than usual. As a result of last year’s significant cuts people were laid off, budgets were cut and now there is no need to suggest or submit a budget that goes far beyond what the expected annual tax increase is. So is that really a victory? No it’s just budgeting based upon the knowledge that you’ll have less to work with.
I work for a company and had to make my first budget for my department this year. I’m also a finance major and did very good in my budgeting and forecasting class. When creating a budget it is important to know the limits if you are going to see it approved. You have to anticipate increases on a year to year basis due to inflation in certain areas, and at times, based on the economic environment can expect lower costs in other areas. However, on the majority whole you should expect increases. The level to which you increase is of course based upon your forecast. Will you have the funds to cover the budget and end the year even, above, or below your budget. Think of the expected State aid as part of the forecasted income to cover the necessary costs. If you know your income is fixed you aren’t going to create a budget that challenges the expected income. Since our financial planners in the districts know Christie will not budge on the amount of aid districts will get they are not going to make a budget that challenges that. So it stands to reason that there is no way any district will propose a budget that would be voted down. It is simple logic! If last year districts knew that there would be no movement from Christie and no increase in aid they probably would have made budgets that met the ultimate income expectations.
Now, will the Supreme Court order Christie to restore funding to schools? Who knows? Will he actually restore it if they do? That is also up in the air, but the point remains, this method of saying defeats one year are a victory, and victories the following year are also victories is just all political nonsense and a way to further flash the smoke and mirrors from the real issue—we are a State that has seen Democracy erode into Dictatorship. A State where a bully gets what he wants because he’s got a big mouth and a really pointy finger. And like any good bully he knows how to play the game to always look like the good guy because people are too stupid to question him. Yet even if they did, would they get results? Nope, they’ll just get escorted from the Town Hall meeting.
OK, that makes sense. People didn’t want to see their taxes go up by some incredible rate. That brings us to 2011.
This year voters went to the polls for school budgets and as of today, 301 of 373 school budgets passed. We’re still waiting to get the results from another 165, but at this point it’s clear that we’ve seen the majority will pass. Now again Christie views this as a victory for his stand. But is it really a victory for him or just a victory based on circumstance?
Towns got less aid from the State last year and the current projections, while showing a slight increase in State aid, are still lower than usual. As a result of last year’s significant cuts people were laid off, budgets were cut and now there is no need to suggest or submit a budget that goes far beyond what the expected annual tax increase is. So is that really a victory? No it’s just budgeting based upon the knowledge that you’ll have less to work with.
I work for a company and had to make my first budget for my department this year. I’m also a finance major and did very good in my budgeting and forecasting class. When creating a budget it is important to know the limits if you are going to see it approved. You have to anticipate increases on a year to year basis due to inflation in certain areas, and at times, based on the economic environment can expect lower costs in other areas. However, on the majority whole you should expect increases. The level to which you increase is of course based upon your forecast. Will you have the funds to cover the budget and end the year even, above, or below your budget. Think of the expected State aid as part of the forecasted income to cover the necessary costs. If you know your income is fixed you aren’t going to create a budget that challenges the expected income. Since our financial planners in the districts know Christie will not budge on the amount of aid districts will get they are not going to make a budget that challenges that. So it stands to reason that there is no way any district will propose a budget that would be voted down. It is simple logic! If last year districts knew that there would be no movement from Christie and no increase in aid they probably would have made budgets that met the ultimate income expectations.
Now, will the Supreme Court order Christie to restore funding to schools? Who knows? Will he actually restore it if they do? That is also up in the air, but the point remains, this method of saying defeats one year are a victory, and victories the following year are also victories is just all political nonsense and a way to further flash the smoke and mirrors from the real issue—we are a State that has seen Democracy erode into Dictatorship. A State where a bully gets what he wants because he’s got a big mouth and a really pointy finger. And like any good bully he knows how to play the game to always look like the good guy because people are too stupid to question him. Yet even if they did, would they get results? Nope, they’ll just get escorted from the Town Hall meeting.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
I wonder how many people are gay BECAUSE of Victoria Jackson
Here's a great way to remind people that you're alive. Suddenly jump out of nowhere and complain that Glee is making kids gay. Even better, complain that your teenage daughter can't watch TV because it will poison her mind. Wait, if your teenage daughter watches your acting THAT may poison her mind.
I'm talking about Victoria Jackson, former SNL star and star of such hit movies as . . . wow, even the bad movies are so bad you wouldn't get the references if I mentioned them! Anyhow she has long been known for some nutty claims all from the far right wing. Her new target is Glee. She claims that the show is cramming homosexuality down our throats and is actually helping to make people gay. OK, I don't know if anyone reading this (or if anyone is reading this) has ever watched the show, but trust me, being gay on the show is not a positive. The character of Kurt was tormented for his love interests to the point of leaving the school and his friends. He was assaulted by a closeted football player who might have alternated between beating the shit out of him and viciously raping him. His father is as accepting as he can be, but he still drops some incredibly homophobic comments. So I am not certain how this could make anyone gay. Would you chose a lifestyle that has you as the punchline to jokes, and punching bag for those who feel you are a curse and a sin and a plague on this Earth? The short answer, no you wouldn't.
It is not a choice it is just who you are and I for one am sick of this idiots thinking that the portrayal of gay characters on TV are going to corrupt our society. These shows instead show how hateful this world is. Perhaps that's what they want hidden. I bet Victoria Jackson, for all her love of God and Jesus would quicker shoot a gay person to death than help an old lady cross the street. The same goes for all these other right wing kooks, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, et al.
Oh and another thing about the right, they fail to ever pay attention. Victoria mentions in her rant that shows like Glee should preach celebacy. Oddly the last episode (which featured the gay kiss that got her going) also highlighted the school's Celebacy Club where its members commit to a no sex relationship. The show is great about exploring the diverse ends to all issues
I just don't get it and thought I should share that. So like George Takei tweeted today, more people are gay because of Victoria Jackson than because of Glee. Afterall have you heard her voice? It's like nails on a blackboard. Gag me with a bible!
I'm talking about Victoria Jackson, former SNL star and star of such hit movies as . . . wow, even the bad movies are so bad you wouldn't get the references if I mentioned them! Anyhow she has long been known for some nutty claims all from the far right wing. Her new target is Glee. She claims that the show is cramming homosexuality down our throats and is actually helping to make people gay. OK, I don't know if anyone reading this (or if anyone is reading this) has ever watched the show, but trust me, being gay on the show is not a positive. The character of Kurt was tormented for his love interests to the point of leaving the school and his friends. He was assaulted by a closeted football player who might have alternated between beating the shit out of him and viciously raping him. His father is as accepting as he can be, but he still drops some incredibly homophobic comments. So I am not certain how this could make anyone gay. Would you chose a lifestyle that has you as the punchline to jokes, and punching bag for those who feel you are a curse and a sin and a plague on this Earth? The short answer, no you wouldn't.
It is not a choice it is just who you are and I for one am sick of this idiots thinking that the portrayal of gay characters on TV are going to corrupt our society. These shows instead show how hateful this world is. Perhaps that's what they want hidden. I bet Victoria Jackson, for all her love of God and Jesus would quicker shoot a gay person to death than help an old lady cross the street. The same goes for all these other right wing kooks, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, et al.
Oh and another thing about the right, they fail to ever pay attention. Victoria mentions in her rant that shows like Glee should preach celebacy. Oddly the last episode (which featured the gay kiss that got her going) also highlighted the school's Celebacy Club where its members commit to a no sex relationship. The show is great about exploring the diverse ends to all issues
I just don't get it and thought I should share that. So like George Takei tweeted today, more people are gay because of Victoria Jackson than because of Glee. Afterall have you heard her voice? It's like nails on a blackboard. Gag me with a bible!
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Look what happens when you read between the lines
Over the weekend I got my mail and there was a letter from JPMorgan Chase. It stated that in July of this year I would no longer get Continental OnePass miles on purchases I make with my Chase debit card. I was very upset and annoyed. In the last few years that card has gotten me tickets to visit family in Arizona and San Francisco. It is one rewards program that has actually provided a reward.
In the letter there was reference to something called the Durbin Amendment. So I did what anyone would do, I googled it.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/10/minnesota-leads-charge-against-durbin-amendment-on-debit-card-fees-in-dodd-frank-bill/
OK, so the story is this. As part of an attempt to put greater regulation on Wall Street, Dick Durbin (D-IL) added a measure to make one of his corporate consituents happy. The constituent, Walgreen's. The measure, to alter the fees banks charge in order to allow merchants to accept debit cards. Who pays? The banks, they will see a reduction in revenue as a result of lower fees. It sounds great. Big banks bad, merchants and consumers good. But the banks are smarter than everyone.
I got a letter from my other bank, TD Bank back in February which mentioned that in July the bank would charge more money whenever I use my card to take money out of a non-TD ATM machine. Annoying, yes. Surprising, no. Banks are always trying to make money wherever they can. It's through their nickel and dime tactics that they make billions each year. ATM fees are exactly that.
But now, having read up on Durbin I realize the fee increase at TD Bank was part of this. It was TD Bank's way of closing a the revenue gap so that they'd make up their merchant losses with ATM fees.
Welcome to the American Dream people! Everyone is out to make a buck.
In the letter there was reference to something called the Durbin Amendment. So I did what anyone would do, I googled it.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/10/minnesota-leads-charge-against-durbin-amendment-on-debit-card-fees-in-dodd-frank-bill/
OK, so the story is this. As part of an attempt to put greater regulation on Wall Street, Dick Durbin (D-IL) added a measure to make one of his corporate consituents happy. The constituent, Walgreen's. The measure, to alter the fees banks charge in order to allow merchants to accept debit cards. Who pays? The banks, they will see a reduction in revenue as a result of lower fees. It sounds great. Big banks bad, merchants and consumers good. But the banks are smarter than everyone.
I got a letter from my other bank, TD Bank back in February which mentioned that in July the bank would charge more money whenever I use my card to take money out of a non-TD ATM machine. Annoying, yes. Surprising, no. Banks are always trying to make money wherever they can. It's through their nickel and dime tactics that they make billions each year. ATM fees are exactly that.
But now, having read up on Durbin I realize the fee increase at TD Bank was part of this. It was TD Bank's way of closing a the revenue gap so that they'd make up their merchant losses with ATM fees.
Welcome to the American Dream people! Everyone is out to make a buck.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Let it Snow
Wow, so much to say. In case you live in a cave you should know that in NJ we had a snowstorm this week. The snow started falling on Sunday at about 1 PM and continued through the day and night. It was sunny on Monday morning, but by that point inches upon inches of snow had fallen. Add to that the blizzard like effects of wind and there were snow drifts that were easily 3 feet high. After a path was shoveled from the gate in my backyard to my back door we had an area of snow that was nearly 5 feet high. It came up to my neck!
I didn’t expect with the storm that I’d find Twitter to be so much fun. I follow Newark Mayor Cory Booker. I’m not a huge fan of politicians, but I do like when they function like humans and actually care about people. Mayor Booker has been Tweeting nonstop since Sunday and it seems without a break. He’s been shoveling out cars all over the city; coordinating plows and police to keep the city clean and functioning. He has proven to be somewhat of a superhero. He was even photographed and it appeared he was trying to calm a dispute. In the photo he was not in a suit and tie, not even in a jacket! He was in sweats, no gloves, no hat (and he’s bald), but the point is that he was there.
I learned late on Sunday as the snow began to pile up and that my office was closed because of snow that a state of emergency had been declared. What was most telling however was who had made that declaration—State Senate President Stephen Sweeney. Seems he was given the role of acting governor because both Governor Chris Christie and Lt. Governor Guadagno were out of state on vacation. I paused. A storm was predicted for 5 days, reports from the South on Christmas Day told us the storm would be bad. Forecasters did not hesitate, they predicted more than 12 inches. And while all this was happening these two idiots packed up their families and headed to the airport. On Sunday as the snow approached they boarded planes and flew off on vacation.
Christie never stopped to say to his kids, “hey your mother and I make over $400 thousand a year, we can go to DisneyWorld anytime. There’s a storm headed and I need to coordinate efforts to keep the state moving.” Guadagno could leave, she’s useless anyhow. In fact maybe she’ll stay in Mexico.
Now add to this the fact that I have not read in any article yet, how will this storm affect the bottom line? Christie cut aid to towns and put upon them the difficult task of keeping their property tax increases below 2%. Now we just had a storm that required municipal workers and county workers to be in plows at all hours. I’m sure their overtime is going to be huge. Cops had to be out to cover accidents and to keep the roads clear so plows could go through. Again, overtime. Often during storms local fire departments step in to assist with stranded and stuck cars. Other emergency services are generally on alert and all of this costs money. Now let’s add the other costs of salt and gas and mix that with the fact that many towns had to lay off many of the people that handle these services because of the budget cuts and you’ve got what we are witnessing. Roads are not in great shape, I didn’t see salt down anywhere, and a lot of frustrated people.
Look cleanup after a storm like this can never be perfect. Cleanup after 5 inches generally is never good, but the bigger point is just how this all looks. Governor cuts budget, towns cut back, governor goes on vacation and basically throws his arms up and says, “deal with it,” when a record storm brings the state to a halt. Oh yeah, that’s the way to lead.
Author Robert Heinlein once said, “an armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” In place of arms we have technology right now. We have phones with Internet access and the ability to reach out to the world in real time. So when a car is stuck on Springfield Avenue in Newark, Mayor Booker is called to task thanks to Twitter. And unlike other politicians he has not fled and gone on vacation. He instead asks for the address and says he’ll a get a crew out there ASAP. And if the crew can’t make it he’s shown up personally to help.
So take that Chris Christie, how’s the line for the Tea Cups?
I didn’t expect with the storm that I’d find Twitter to be so much fun. I follow Newark Mayor Cory Booker. I’m not a huge fan of politicians, but I do like when they function like humans and actually care about people. Mayor Booker has been Tweeting nonstop since Sunday and it seems without a break. He’s been shoveling out cars all over the city; coordinating plows and police to keep the city clean and functioning. He has proven to be somewhat of a superhero. He was even photographed and it appeared he was trying to calm a dispute. In the photo he was not in a suit and tie, not even in a jacket! He was in sweats, no gloves, no hat (and he’s bald), but the point is that he was there.
I learned late on Sunday as the snow began to pile up and that my office was closed because of snow that a state of emergency had been declared. What was most telling however was who had made that declaration—State Senate President Stephen Sweeney. Seems he was given the role of acting governor because both Governor Chris Christie and Lt. Governor Guadagno were out of state on vacation. I paused. A storm was predicted for 5 days, reports from the South on Christmas Day told us the storm would be bad. Forecasters did not hesitate, they predicted more than 12 inches. And while all this was happening these two idiots packed up their families and headed to the airport. On Sunday as the snow approached they boarded planes and flew off on vacation.
Christie never stopped to say to his kids, “hey your mother and I make over $400 thousand a year, we can go to DisneyWorld anytime. There’s a storm headed and I need to coordinate efforts to keep the state moving.” Guadagno could leave, she’s useless anyhow. In fact maybe she’ll stay in Mexico.
Now add to this the fact that I have not read in any article yet, how will this storm affect the bottom line? Christie cut aid to towns and put upon them the difficult task of keeping their property tax increases below 2%. Now we just had a storm that required municipal workers and county workers to be in plows at all hours. I’m sure their overtime is going to be huge. Cops had to be out to cover accidents and to keep the roads clear so plows could go through. Again, overtime. Often during storms local fire departments step in to assist with stranded and stuck cars. Other emergency services are generally on alert and all of this costs money. Now let’s add the other costs of salt and gas and mix that with the fact that many towns had to lay off many of the people that handle these services because of the budget cuts and you’ve got what we are witnessing. Roads are not in great shape, I didn’t see salt down anywhere, and a lot of frustrated people.
Look cleanup after a storm like this can never be perfect. Cleanup after 5 inches generally is never good, but the bigger point is just how this all looks. Governor cuts budget, towns cut back, governor goes on vacation and basically throws his arms up and says, “deal with it,” when a record storm brings the state to a halt. Oh yeah, that’s the way to lead.
Author Robert Heinlein once said, “an armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” In place of arms we have technology right now. We have phones with Internet access and the ability to reach out to the world in real time. So when a car is stuck on Springfield Avenue in Newark, Mayor Booker is called to task thanks to Twitter. And unlike other politicians he has not fled and gone on vacation. He instead asks for the address and says he’ll a get a crew out there ASAP. And if the crew can’t make it he’s shown up personally to help.
So take that Chris Christie, how’s the line for the Tea Cups?
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Bill Gates!?
Read the article from NY Times.com and then the comments below:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/us/19gates.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=bill%20gates&st=cse
OK, Have you ever used Windows? I have, and it often has problems. Ever get the blue screen about some error that requires a memory dump and restart? I have. Do you trust the guy who made this thing give our districts advice on where and what to cut? I don't. But really, Windows aside, that is not why. I don't trust him because he has no experience in education. That man dropped out of college and he wasn't going for a teaching degree.
Sure his money has put him in a well placed position to be an "authority." And yes he does not want to be outdone by Marc Zuckerberg, but come on, he's the one telling schools what to do?
Bill Gates can solve the problem, take about 2% of his worth and pump it into schools.
As the article states, there is solid evidence to show that smaller class sizes, not larger ones, are more effective. Imagine the drain on a teacher having to grade 60 papers versus 30 in a day and doing it in true critical fashion. Don't pay a teacher because they have an MS, pay them because their kids do well on a standardized test? OK, the private sector pays people based upon educational experience and these are people who are not shaping tomorrow's leaders. Doesn't it make sense to pay based upon qualifications and experience? I know plenty of seasoned teachers that have kids who they cannot reach, no matter how hard I try. Now tell someone who's been a teacher 20 years you're docking them because that kid didn't meet the expectations. How is that fair when they did all they could. Teachers are told to reward students for trying, why not reward teachers for the effort as well?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/us/19gates.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=bill%20gates&st=cse
OK, Have you ever used Windows? I have, and it often has problems. Ever get the blue screen about some error that requires a memory dump and restart? I have. Do you trust the guy who made this thing give our districts advice on where and what to cut? I don't. But really, Windows aside, that is not why. I don't trust him because he has no experience in education. That man dropped out of college and he wasn't going for a teaching degree.
Sure his money has put him in a well placed position to be an "authority." And yes he does not want to be outdone by Marc Zuckerberg, but come on, he's the one telling schools what to do?
Bill Gates can solve the problem, take about 2% of his worth and pump it into schools.
As the article states, there is solid evidence to show that smaller class sizes, not larger ones, are more effective. Imagine the drain on a teacher having to grade 60 papers versus 30 in a day and doing it in true critical fashion. Don't pay a teacher because they have an MS, pay them because their kids do well on a standardized test? OK, the private sector pays people based upon educational experience and these are people who are not shaping tomorrow's leaders. Doesn't it make sense to pay based upon qualifications and experience? I know plenty of seasoned teachers that have kids who they cannot reach, no matter how hard I try. Now tell someone who's been a teacher 20 years you're docking them because that kid didn't meet the expectations. How is that fair when they did all they could. Teachers are told to reward students for trying, why not reward teachers for the effort as well?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
