Wisconsin schools hiring more teachers now due to elimination of exorbitantly-priced former union medical plan

The Washington Examiner is a garbage rightwing paper. They can't even give it away. It is most often found littering the bottom of metro cars.

Tinfoil wrote:

The Washington Examiner is a garbage rightwing paper. They can't even give it away. It is most often found littering the bottom of metro cars.

Good job Tinfoil. You have successfully mastered the old "attack the messenger" argument. You are unable to counter the facts presented above, so you simply attack the source. You are trained well.

Except that the captive program could outbid United health Care when they were required to price the same benefits:

http://shorewood.patch.com/articles/district-sticks-with-teachers-union-health-care-plan

All Wisconsin has done is cut health care benefits for teachers by going with high deductible plans instead of the quality coverage that the teacher's union plan provided at very competitive rates.

Sure, you can hire a bunch more teachers by slashing their benefits. But every time you take away from teachers, you are sending more quality people away from the profession.

It has always been the plan of the right to destroy public education to create a two tiered society where the rich have excellent private schools (funded by vouchers) and everyone else gets minimal education to be able to function in the service sector.

Wow, that's a literate, informed, articulate rebuttal. Thanks.

Wonder why Obama didn't visit Wisconsin on his campaigning tour?

Tinfoil wrote:

The Washington Examiner is a garbage rightwing paper. They can't even give it away. It is most often found littering the bottom of metro cars.

Notice you could not counter the points in Sagarin's post in any way. You just attacked the source.

Typical liberal response..."our ideas and philosophy are so rooted in irrationality that we need to try to discredit anyone or any new organization that points out our blatant stupidity."

When judging the merits of an argument the credibility of the source and their objective is of the utmost importance. To ignore this simple fact is very naive of you.

real al lity wrote:

Tinfoil wrote:

The Washington Examiner is a garbage rightwing paper. They can't even give it away. It is most often found littering the bottom of metro cars.

Notice you could not counter the points in Sagarin's post in any way. You just attacked the source.

Typical liberal response..."our ideas and philosophy are so rooted in irrationality that we need to try to discredit anyone or any new organization that points out our blatant stupidity."

Is this a running site?

In this case the source as zero credibility (on par with a tabloid) and their mission is one sided.

Precious Roy wrote:

It has always been the plan of the right to destroy public education to create a two tiered society where the rich have excellent private schools (funded by vouchers) and everyone else gets minimal education to be able to function in the service sector.

Completely false. Conservatives want more competition and less "tenure" in schools, sure, because it WORKS. We throw more and more money at education every year and get inferior results. Obviously, a lack of quality parenting and the cultural depravity we have cultivated in our secularized society is a huge part of this, but the Department of Education got @ a 15% raise last year? For what exactly? What do they actually accomplish? How about giving that money to the states? How about eliminating a full layer of bureaucracy in public schools and giving the teachers more control in terms of curriculum, cohesiveness with the board, etc? Private and charter school teachers are paid less, but mostly (not always) get better results, because they have more flexibility. That's certainly been our experience.

[quote]Tinfoil wrote:

When judging the merits of an argument the credibility of the source and their objective is of the utmost importance. To ignore this simple fact is very naive of you.

[quote]

Well if his source has no credibility and the linked story has no facts, then you should have no problem destroying the OP's argument.

Go ahead...we're waiting.

Talk about a bad argument. Private schools get a different (self-selected) population of students.

Sagarin wrote:

Private and charter school teachers are paid less, but mostly (not always) get better results, because they have more flexibility. That's certainly been our experience.

Now the next thing we need to tackle are the garbage public school lunch menus that the teachers and students access, and then healthcare will take care of itself. No need for bloated plans if we don't have bloated people (just look around - it should disgust you). We could free up a lot of capital in this country if we could get people to eat correctly. Type II diabetes, heart disease, and other "syndrome X" diseases eat up almost 60% of medicare. There's your model for a public plan.

That's true, but charter schools don't.

Tinfoil wrote:

Talk about a bad argument. Private schools get a different (self-selected) population of students.

Sagarin wrote:

Private and charter school teachers are paid less, but mostly (not always) get better results, because they have more flexibility. That's certainly been our experience.

Charter schools do as you have to select to place your child in the lottery.

Sagarin wrote:

That's true, but charter schools don't.

Tinfoil wrote:

Talk about a bad argument. Private schools get a different (self-selected) population of students.

For your consideration, this article that takes a critical look at your source:

http://veracitystew.com/2011/07/27/a-bakers-dozen-lies-the-walker-was-right-viral-email/

Sagarin wrote:

That's true, but charter schools don't.

and with a small handful of exceptions, most charter school do no better that traditional schools.

That's from the Washington Times BTW, not exactly a liberal bastion. If you look wider you'll see the overall record of charter schools is pretty bad.

Conservatives know that a truly educated populace would mean the end of conservatism is it's known today, so they attack the source of the truth; public education. Anyone with an IQ above luke warm knows the whole charter school phenomenon is just a right wing wet dream with little factual basis behind it. They know more smart people equals more liberals, so they have to stop it to survive.

Sure, it was well worth trying it because it MIGHT have worked. But conservatives continue to push it as a panacea even though it's been mostly a flop. (Think tax cuts, supply side, and every other discredited conservative idea).

So are you saying the charter school "lottery" is a way for them to hand-pick the best students and that's why charter schools have been so effective?

Tinfoil wrote:

Charter schools do as you have to select to place your child in the lottery.

Sagarin wrote:

That's true, but charter schools don't.

Any parent in the district can put their child in the lottery and the selection process from the lottery is random (with some exceptions such as if an entrant has a sibling already enrolled in the school) so it is not selective like a private school where only the top students can enroll.