A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

[5mn_Major]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Texas, as a state, is a mess in many ways. But protection of U.S. borders is a federal issue, and immigration laws are federal, not state, as we all heard a few years ago when Arizona tried to adopt some draconian measures. I'm not sure I want the Texas, Arizona, California and N.M. militias out in force defending the border.

Its not a debate on whether borders are fed territory...its a debate on how much feds should pay for as this is paid by other states. And there won't be tons of sympathy if other states have pay an undue amount of border states' day to day bills.

 

[walrus]

This is right out of the Americans for Tax Reform playbook:

1. Cut taxes and services; wait for a crisis.
2. Crisis comes, government unable to respond.
3. Bray "See? Government doesn't work, we told you so!" Go to step 1.

Repeat endlessly. Those guys have been doing this since 1978 -- it's their whole strategy.

First rule of govt, never have any money left after the year is done. So why would the tax rate matter?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

It's like private school vouchers: "you should pay for my preferences." Classic back-door free riding, drizzled in the piquant sauce of bogus self-reliance.

that is one of the most short-sighted and thoughtless comments on this subject i've ever read. where do you think tomorrow's workers are going to come from? public high school graduation rates in our major cities are under 60%! do you want one of those people trying to read your blood pressure?

It's not a 'preference' for all children to have access to a decent, basic, quality education: it is one of the leading civil rights issues of the day. California courts have ruled that public school districts are systematically discriminating against the poor and disadvantaged by disproportionately dumping all the "under-performing" teachers into their schools. In the short run, vouchers are the only way for poor people to escape that discrimination.

and here I thought you were a progressive....


It's a lot cheaper to issue vouchers than it is to reform the public school system.

 

[Kepler]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

that is one of the most short-sighted and thoughtless comments on this subject i've ever read. where do you think tomorrow's workers are going to come from? public high school graduation rates in our major cities are under 60%! do you want one of those people trying to read your blood pressure?

It's not a 'preference' for all children to have access to a decent, basic, quality education: it is one of the leading civil rights issues of the day. California courts have ruled that public school districts are systematically discriminating against the poor and disadvantaged by disproportionately dumping all the "under-performing" teachers into their schools. In the short run, vouchers are the only way for poor people to escape that discrimination.

and here I thought you were a progressive....


It's a lot cheaper to issue vouchers than it is to reform the public school system.

Bullshit. School vouchers were just a way to get taxpayers to foot the bill for Cheney's grandchildren going to Choat.

We can restore public schools to the level they were at 50 years ago by evening out funding at the state level, rather than having it at the local level which merely perpetuates ghettoization of poor and rich neighborhoods.

I'm a proud public high school graduate and I had an excellent education -- because our district was rolling in dough. Do the same for all districts and we can break the cycle of poverty in one generation.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Its not a debate on whether borders are fed territory...its a debate on how much feds should pay for as this is paid by other states. And there won't be tons of sympathy if other states have pay an undue amount of border states' day to day bills.

So again, if you or whoever judges that a border state isn't paying their fair share (that'll be a barrel of fun arguing over that), then they don't get as good of border security? The feds say it's their issue, but they won't own it and fix it, putting border states in a really bad spot. Perry calling up troops won't do a whole lot, but I can't blame him for doing what he can to get more attention on our continually broken southern border.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

So again, if you or whoever judges that a border state isn't paying their fair share (that'll be a barrel of fun arguing over that), then they don't get as good of border security? The feds say it's their issue, but they won't own it and fix it, putting border states in a really bad spot. Perry calling up troops won't do a whole lot, but I can't blame him for doing what he can to get more attention on our continually broken southern border.

That's the crux of it. There is no objective mark on how much border security. The feds could probably do more...but its finite.

Border states should definitely be doing much more...which could be much less finite. But this appears to be another race to the bottom where border state elected officials are competing to see who can spend the least to the detriment of local quality of life. Couple that with border states allowing for free access to guns...and I would be very nervous for the future of those regions.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

That's the crux of it. There is no objective mark on how much border security. The feds could probably do more...but its finite.

Border states should definitely be doing much more...which could be much less finite. But this appears to be another race to the bottom where border state elected officials are competing to see who can spend the least to the detriment of local quality of life. Couple that with border states allowing for free access to guns...and I would be very nervous for the future of those regions.

When border states have tried to do more, it hasn't been well received by the feds in recent years. And if you think states should write a blank check to the feds to pay for border security, letting Obama spend it as he likes, that's simply not going to happen, as there's no reason for border states to trust that Obama would do any better than he has to this point.

One objective measure of border security is that American citizens could go to border areas and be relatively safe, a situation that doesn't exist in large swathes of border states. When the feds tell Americans to stay out of large chunks of border territory, it speaks volumes.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

When border states have tried to do more, it hasn't been well received by the feds in recent years. And if you think states should write a blank check to the feds to pay for border security, letting Obama spend it as he likes, that's simply not going to happen, as there's no reason for border states to trust that Obama would do any better than he has to this point.

One objective measure of border security is that American citizens could go to border areas and be relatively safe, a situation that doesn't exist in large swathes of border states. When the feds tell Americans to stay out of large chunks of border territory, it speaks volumes.

Its simple the federal government is waay over spending...it needs to cut not increase spending. States need to tax more to help out, not race to the bottom. Perry is doing more now. If he's serious, it will last and be expanded.

Edit: when I start to feel tempted to post things I've already posted in the same conversation or see others repeat their points, I sense the conversation is about over.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Its simple the federal government is waay over spending...it needs to cut not increase spending. States need to tax more to help out, not race to the bottom. Perry is doing more now. If he's serious, it will last and be expanded.

Edit: when I start to feel tempted to post things I've already posted in the same conversation or see others repeat their points, I sense the conversation is about over.

So the feds cut back, border security decays even further, and the states are very limited in what they can do, given that border security is fundamentally a federal responsibility. That's a recipe for making things worse while maybe saving a little money short term. That would not be a responsible solution to the situation.

 

[joecct]

Bullshit. School vouchers were just a way to get taxpayers to foot the bill for Cheney's grandchildren going to Choat.

We can restore public schools to the level they were at 50 years ago by evening out funding at the state level, rather than having it at the local level which merely perpetuates ghettoization of poor and rich neighborhoods.

I'm a proud public high school graduate and I had an excellent education -- because our district was rolling in dough. Do the same for all districts and we can break the cycle of poverty in one generation.

The Obamas are attending a prestigious private school as do most of the Washington elite.

 

[Kepler]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

The Obamas are attending a prestigious private school as do most of the Washington elite.

Which doesn't change anything I said.

Also: I can understand the president or a billionaire sending his kids to a private school -- their kids are at risk. Tucker Carlson, however, should take his chances with the rough and tumble Old Towne Alexandria school system.

 

[Critical Thinker]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Bullshit. School vouchers were just a way to get taxpayers to foot the bill for Cheney's grandchildren going to Choat.

We can restore public schools to the level they were at 50 years ago by evening out funding at the state level, rather than having it at the local level which merely perpetuates ghettoization of poor and rich neighborhoods.

I'm a proud public high school graduate and I had an excellent education -- because our district was rolling in dough. Do the same for all districts and we can break the cycle of poverty in one generation.

Spend all you want on education, but nothing will change if students continue to not pay attention in the classroom. Teachers have virtually no control over students. The disrespect shown to teachers by students is unbelievable. And what can schools do about it? Can't damage their fragile self esteem. So can they tell the parents? Doesn't do much good if dad abandoned the kid and mom is just struggling to get by. There's virtually no disincentive to breaking school rules. Unless the money is going to straightjackets, it's a complete waste. Kids are better off in a private Catholic school full of ruler-wielding nuns.

 

[joecct]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Spend all you want on education, but nothing will change if students continue to not pay attention in the classroom. Teachers have virtually no control over students. The disrespect shown to teachers by students is unbelievable. And what can schools do about it? Can't damage their fragile self esteem. So can they tell the parents? Doesn't do much good if dad abandoned the kid and mom is just struggling to get by. There's virtually no disincentive to breaking school rules. Unless the money is going to straightjackets, it's a complete waste. Kids are better off in a private Catholic school full of ruler-wielding nuns.

The nuns left in the 70's. Another V-II casualty along with corporal punishment and eraser targeting.

There was a political cartoon the other day showing a comparison between bad grades in 1969 and today. In 1969, the parents were holding their child accountable. Now - it's the teacher's fault.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Spend all you want on education, but nothing will change if students continue to not pay attention in the classroom. Teachers have virtually no control over students. The disrespect shown to teachers by students is unbelievable. And what can schools do about it? Can't damage their fragile self esteem. So can they tell the parents? Doesn't do much good if dad abandoned the kid and mom is just struggling to get by. There's virtually no disincentive to breaking school rules. Unless the money is going to straightjackets, it's a complete waste. Kids are better off in a private Catholic school full of ruler-wielding nuns.

Sure, students (and parents) are responsible for their education. Its the way its always been. But so are schools/teachers. What you say is true, even so both family and education/training aren't anything less than society's top two priorities.

 

[Kepler]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Sure, students (and parents) are responsible for their education. Its the way its always been. But so are schools/teachers. What you say is true, even so both family and education/training aren't anything less than society's top two priorities.

Education should always be the top priority -- it drives everything else (poverty, health, crime, social spending, worker productivity). The owner/employee dichotomy of the 19th century really doesn't apply anymore outside of low skill labor, but our government and our ruling class just hasn't caught on yet. The German miracle was an education miracle. So was Korea's. If you want a high skill labor force you have to pay a ton of money to educate them both directly and also indirectly by pulling up the entire class of multi-generational poor who don't support their own kids' education.

Women are the key. Mothers don't want their kids to fail. Educate women, give them free child care so they can work, stop punishing and stigmatizing them for their no-good men walking out on them, give them full unhindered reproductive freedoms and contraception so they can control their number of children. Basically, give them all the advantages nice white middle class women have, and they'll be just as fierce advocates of their own childrens' welfare (probably moreso since they won't be entitled).

This is something both the left (welfare, education) and the right (Kinder, Küche, Kirche) should be able to work together on.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Spend all you want on education, but nothing will change if students continue to not pay attention in the classroom. Teachers have virtually no control over students. The disrespect shown to teachers by students is unbelievable. And what can schools do about it? Can't damage their fragile self esteem. So can they tell the parents? Doesn't do much good if dad abandoned the kid and mom is just struggling to get by. There's virtually no disincentive to breaking school rules. Unless the money is going to straightjackets, it's a complete waste. Kids are better off in a private Catholic school full of ruler-wielding nuns.

So true. I know a number of folks who were good teachers and loved the job, but between dealing with unruly kids (with parents back up the kids) and so much bureaucracy that they can't focus on teach much of the time, they've had it and leave the profession. Can't say I blame them.

 

[Kepler]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

So true. I know a number of folks who were good teachers and loved the job, but between dealing with unruly kids (with parents back up the kids) and so much bureaucracy that they can't focus on teach much of the time, they've had it and leave the profession. Can't say I blame them.

Of course, those demanding Draconian cuts in school budgets, demonizing teachers as unionized layabouts, and generally pouring acid on the idea of public service not primarily motivated by greed, are not in any way to blame.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

School vouchers were just a way to get taxpayers to foot the bill for Cheney's grandchildren going to Choat.

Big difference between "were" and "are." (the 1990s called, they want their prejudices back).

Whether you look at charter schools in NY (not "voucher" per se, yet a strong alternative to traditional public school system), the DC voucher system, the Milwaukee voucher system, or the state of LA voucher system, the majority of beneficiaries TODAY are poor and minority students.

The crux of the court ruling in CA was that "funding" was not the issue, it was the disparity in teacher quality between well-to-do school districts and school districts that serve primarily poor and minority students. Work rules make it nearly impossible to reward good teachers and shed substandard teachers, and so the "sideways promotion" exit strategy was used instead: the substandard teachers wind up disproportionately in school districts that primarily serve poor and minority students.

Trying to reform work rules in public school systems involves intractable union opposition to any changes at all. Children's futures are at stake, can we really consign yet another generation to sub-standard teaching?

 

[Kepler]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Trying to reform work rules in public school systems involves intractable union opposition to any changes at all. Children's futures are at stake, can we really consign yet another generation to sub-standard teaching?

Teaching is substandard because salaries are low, teachers are treated like garbage, and neighborhoods with no tax base are the source of the funding for the schools that are supposed to lift the population out of poverty.

But by your sincere alarm and honest concern I know you will be willing to foot the bill for the resources required. See my other post for optimal tax brackets. We'll take a check.

A Republican fretting (oh so publicly) about children is one of those images that's too rich for parody.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: A Discussion of US Immigration Policy

Of course, those demanding Draconian cuts in school budgets, demonizing teachers as unionized layabouts, and generally pouring acid on the idea of public service not primarily motivated by greed, are not in any way to blame.

Not compared to the stuff I cite, at least from the variety of current and former teachers I know, including a handful of relatives.