FormerRegionite

Comments

If you can't measure it, you can't manage it. So we should just continue to throw more money at the problem? SAT scores have fallen every year since 1967. We now spend 4 times more per student in real (inflation adjusted) dollars. That's more than every nation other than Switzerland. Class sizes are 40% smaller over the same time period.

The first results of free and open markets (competition) are reduced prices and increased quality. That is all education reform is about: measuring the results of competing alternatives and allowing competition to be the driving force in the education market rather than the inertia of the status quo.

After spending several years in public schools and switching to a private school I discovered I was two years behind my classmates. I caught-up in the private school environment. Those left to languish in the same public school environment never have the opportunity to catch-up.

April 06, 2013 9:18 am on RICH JAMES: Much of education reform is about politics, not kids
There is NO correlation between the amount of money spent on education and outcomes. Since 1967 SAT scores have continuously declined. During that time frame per-pupil expenditures have increased more than 400% in real dollars and average class sizes have declined 40%. Only Switzerland spends more on education. K-12 spending in this country averages from $10K to $18K per pupil depending on location. The truth of the matter is the systematic destruction of the family unit and intentional lowering of expectations (soft bigotry) by the Democrat Party has achieved its goal--an ever-expanding dependent class. Only an open admission of guilt, heartfelt apology and the volunteering of all their remaining time on this earth to remedy this situation will suffice.

February 03, 2013 10:19 am on GUEST COMMENTARY: Public school funding is same old shell game
Ditto my comment under: "U.S. shouldn't scrimp on educating our children" above.

January 26, 2013 11:18 am on GUEST COMMENTARY: Dems' views on education merit consideration
SAT scores have declined every year since 1967. Also during that time frame spending on K-12 education has increased four-fold in constant dollars on a per pupil basis. And average class size has declined 40%. World-wide only Switzerland spends more per pupil than we do. More money isn't the solution.

This time frame also parallels the launch of LBJ's Great Society programs. The solution is for the Democrat Party to admit their willful destruction of the family unit and individual responsibility followed by a heartfelt apology to the American people. Then all good Democrats must volunteer their time to remedial education for those they have condemned to a life of poverty through their bigotry of low expectations.

January 26, 2013 10:59 am on U.S. shouldn't scrimp on educating our children
This is an old, tired argument. The Constitution is a document designed to protect citizens from government. The founders recognized that all government is inherently corrupt. Therefore, it must be kept small, weak and as close to the people as possible. The definition of "close" in colonial times was within musket range. The right to "keep and bear arms" is the expressed recognition that governments can do horrible wrongs between elections and politicians need to be aware they can be removed from office by other than electoral means.

That is why the "militia" and "arms" clauses are independent. The best way to have a "well regulated Militia" is to keep the militia's arms locked-up in an armory and forbid citizens the right to keep and bear arms. If the founders had not intended an individual right to "keep and bear arms" there would have been no mention of it at all. If their sole intent was to authorize a "well regulated Militia" the "keep and bear arms" clause is unnecessary.

December 30, 2012 8:50 am on The Constitution does not protect absolute gun rights
As Democrats always choose to forget: since there have been 50 states, Republicans have NEVER held 60 senate seats. That means Democrats have been able to STOP any bill during that time frame. Since 1948, Democrats have held simultaneous control of the legislative and executive branches of the federal government more than 40% of the time, Republicans less than 10%. This overwhelmingly disproportionate duration of control has led to Democrat control of the federal judiciary as well. If you don't like the state of the nation it's clear Democrats are the irresponsible party.

December 29, 2012 8:06 am on Republicans carry a big chunk of America's financial woes
Just another example of how a good program was co-opted over time by the powers that be. This program was started by Ed Vennon, then Executive Director of the NW Indiana Association of Commerce & Industry. It was designed to educate the business community about the perils they faced from local government in the region and how to combat them. After Mr. Vennon left to become head of the IN Manufacturer's Association, the NWINACI was taken-over by Tom McDermott and became The Forum. What was then known as Leadership Calumet was spun-off to the academics who turned it into the feel-good organization it is today. This program was an inconvenience to Mr. McDermott who was only interested in boosting his Forum salary while using his position to build a real estate brokerage business, all in the name of "economic development."

December 22, 2012 10:30 am on Region leadership program celebrates 30 years
If you are looking to identify who bears responsibility for the condition we find ourselves in today you need look no farther than who had simultaneous control of all elected branches of the federal government. Since 1948, Republicans had control of Congress, the Senate and the Presidency 9% of the time and Democrats 40%. And Democrats have used this advantage, over time, to control the judicial branch as well. It also explains why the federal bureaucracy is populated almost entirely by Democrats and once something becomes law it is almost impossible to change. This is why the Founders set-up a system where government was meant to be small, weak and as close to the people as possible (no farther than musket range).

December 16, 2012 7:58 am on LBJ's Great Society plan has worsened our society
Urbaszewski is either uneducated, a propagandist, or a fool. Just as businesses do not pay taxes, they also do not pay for government mandates. All costs imposed by governments are borne by a company's customers. Both operating and capital expenditures must be recovered along with an adequate profit or the company would cease to exist.

December 08, 2012 9:32 am on Manufacturing groups: EPA proposals costly, 'dampen growth'
Me thinks the professor is cooking the books a bit. He states the national debt is currently 73% of GDP and rising. He's correct about the "rising" part but with the debt at about $16.25T and GDP of about $16.5T , it's much closer to 100% and STILL rising. The only way the ratio could be said to be 73% is if the professor is comparing the debt to POTENTIAL GDP. But we'll never get to POTENTIAL GDP with current federal government policies. It's as simple as M x V = GDP. There is plenty of M out there but V is lacking because of Obama's desire to punish profit and capital gains. The main driver of V is increased productivity and that is driven by business capital investment. It's not more people working harder that's important. It's more output per man-hour and that only comes about through technological improvement. Since Obama has taken the reward out of the risk/reward equation don't be looking for any improved living standards for years to come.

November 25, 2012 9:10 am on LARRY DeBOER: Looking over the fiscal cliff