Yes (Give 55 EV's its slightly under 2%), but OTOH in a sate like CA it becomes easy for an EV to get lost (if two parties each get 1% (say libertarians, and socialist) neither has crossed the threshold to get an EV bu together they assure one is "lost"
True, but the total number of EC votes is still not a direct representation of population.
In CO yes it is nine votes divided up among the % of the population. The only way someone might take interest in CO is if its a real blowout (and even then it has to be close to dropping a vote).
If youre beating me 60-45 (A huge blowout) There is little reason for you or I to try it out. You need to gain 7 points to pick up *1* EV, I need to lose 4.1 points to lose *1* EV. No state in the nation is this weak a pull.
And Ohio will likely receive more attention than every Western state combined this year.
Yes Ohio, a much smaller state than CA. Here is the real issue its no about states, but the size of the cities within them. I guarentee you that if we did a popular vote ID would still get zero attention. CO might (Denver), IL might (Chi), Heck even MN might (MSP), CA would (LA/SF), The north east would get attention (NYC, BOS, DC, PHIL). TX would SA, HOU)..
Basically all the money and favors would be spent in the cities..
No to 3rd Parties ME or NB would become more interesting because there you only have to win 1 district to win a vote (which if CO was going to do I would be fine with), but in CO you have to win 11.1% of the vote across the whole state in my lifetime ony Perot has managed that outside of the two parties.
But all vote do count twords, law makers are elected by % of the vote. THe the presidant is not the president of the people but the president of the states. He represents the Federal Republic. But any of his powers are held in check by the peoples represenatives (congress and in recent times the senate)..
Actually this is exactly! what they are doing in colorado. They are handing out EC voted based only on the percent of the population received. If you think anyone would care at all about CO after this I want some of what your smoking..
Lets say that I am losing 42-50, right now I would not fight because I will get nothing. But under the CO system I am going to get 4/9 EV's. If I lose by one vote I get 4/9 EV's and even if I lose 40-50 I get 4/9 ES's... Same goes for if I am winning, only if I gain 6% more will I pick up an extra EV.
ME and NB have it right EC all or nothing by district! and two for the winner of the state. This way if I am down 44-50 (or up 50-44) I might see one or two *districts* I can fight for. If this goes by CO is worth at most! 2 ev's. Lets also consider what havoc this could render on the EV system in NY in 2000 Bush would have won 11, Kerry 19.. oops NY has 31 Electors but enough voted for differing 3rd parties to take up an EV but not enough voted for any one for them to get it...
It also gives a third party a real chance to not only be a focatro (like Perot in 92, or Nader in 2000) but also to actuall take home an EV or two..
Breaking the EV up by district, good idea (Not perfect but nothing is)... Doing % of the vote stupid. Congress is where % of the vote matters..
ME an NB do not have proportinal electoral votes. THe give ont electors by congressional districts not by percent of the vote. If you win ME 1st congressional district by one vote you get 1 elector, if you win it by 1 Million you get 1 vote. If you win the state by one vote you get 2 more,...
But we are not a democracy, we are a Federal Republic of which the sates are members. As a member a state has the right to determine how its electors are selected. States can maintain a reasonable amount of autonomy this way..
And, how am I ignoring my "blood for oil war" claim? I do feel that this administration has started a war of aggression for control of the second-largest oil and natural gas reserves in the world
"Liberal asshole" and "Republican god", rather than face the messier reality of real life.
You may or may not have voted for CLinton in 1992 but 95% of the people making a stink about the ANG did, and they are liberal socialist. I am not a republican and am not voting for Bush *or* kerry in this next election but thatnks for playing.
3) Iraq keeps its oil, and the US cuts down on its dependance on foriegn oil by ramping up utilization of non-fossil fuel energy sources
Nice of you to decide what Iraq should do with its oil. Way to call Iraq a blood for oil war on one hand and ignore your own cliam the next..
So the lefties who are now flipping out about bush are also being two faced and political in their attacks.. thanks for clearing that up... Thank goodness Im voting 3rd party..
1) Didn't want to go to ANG duty, but still want to be elected? Lie about your service.
Hey CLinton had his number called and lied to get out of it, you speak as if this is something new.
2) Want to secure Iraq's oil supply, but populace won't support outright imperialism? Lie about your reasons (and scare the crap out of them).
Umm for the umpteenth time Oil is fungable if all the Oil in Iraq went to france the cost US companies pay for oil would go down as much as if all the Oil came to the US. If you dont understand market economics dont pretend to know what you are talking about..
3) Want to get credit for cracking down on terrorists, but didn't do squat to actually prevent September 11th? Lie about what info you had earlier in 2001.
Yes because puttiong that information togeter as it has now been done had nothing to do with the fact it actually happened? Look at Perl Harbor, all indications were months in advance something was going to happen, if we let the modern Liberal run things then we would still have comitties on why the radar was not followed up on, and would not have actually done anything about Japan..
Bush is a pathological liar, and a danger to this country. He will say whatever needs to be said to push through his agenda. And, that makes it important to stop him, and makes this issue non-trivial.
The relatives of 1,000 soldiers who died needlessly in Iraq disagree with you.
Really you have talked to all their families? In Korea we lost 10K a year.... Guess it would be better if my wifes family was forced to live in hell hole her father had to escape from (N Korea)..
Women who value their right to choose abortion disagree with you.
And Babies who would like to breath fresh air at least once disagree with you.
And in arguing against the first Gulf war he said that authorizing the use of force by the senate is the same as using force... Thats wht Kerry is so focused on Vietnam, anything he has said in the past decade has has said the opposit..
Umm why Clinton had a draft notice in his hand and dodged it. In 1992 the left cried it was never an issue.
The funny part in all of this is Bush has said thats Kerry's service is more heroic than his own was. He is not running on his war record from 30+ years ago, Kerry is..
It's a rare(bad?) teacher that works fewer than 11 months of the year and less than 10 hours a day (and a bit on the weekends).
Living around my teachers as a kid and knowing a few in my adulthood this is just flat out untrue. Maybe you do work those hours but in NY here is a good teachers day (11th Grade Chem).
Get in at 8:15 -> 8:30 (Study hall, he grades papers) -> 9:15 (Chem I) -> 10:00 (Orcanig Chem) -> 10:45 -> (Organic Lab, after 15 minutes going over the lab with us he spent the rest of the time grading our papers) -> 11:30 (Given a period for lesson planning) 12:15 Lunch -> 1:00 (Chem II) -> 1:45 (Chem II) -> 2:30 (Dentention, reviews homework)
This was not a bad teacher, he came in worked these hours 90% of the time and went home. He got a week off for spring & winter, he got 2 months off in the summer, all federal holidays.
The natioal hourly salary for a teacher is about 30$/hr..
I have a CS degree from one of the top-ten CS schools in the US, and seven years of teaching experience, but I make just over $35K. And I don't think I'm being selfish in saying that's too low for my level of education/skill and workload. Now, I'm not complaining, because I enjoy my job and knew the pay would be low before I got in, but the point is, most teachers deserve higher pay.
You're not being selfish but your also not being realistic. People dont pay you for your education they pay you for what you do for them (and how many other people can do it). I could have a Phd in physics but if I am flipping burgers I dont deserve 20k a year. You have a stable secure Job. I cant dream of working in the same state for ten years, let alone the same school district, that is worth an aweful lot of money. I dont have a degreee from a 'top ten school' just an Engineering degree from a State University (SUNY @ Buffalo) but I am more than capable than teaching.
And, in fact, the only reason I get paid as well as I do is that my school district spends slightly more than 80% of its overall budget on salaries. And so I don't have any budget whatsoever (so the $50 CD-burner I'm going to buy for my classroom will come out of pocket), but that's the breaks.
The average teacher makes 45K a year and a starting teacher makes 30K (according to the American Federation of Teachers). My first job offer out of school 32K a year as an EE working as a civi for the Army. Why so low? because I was working for the public in a relatively secure job. I left to make more money and have had to move three times in 5 years (Buffalo -> Boston -> Buffalo -> St Paul).
If we had a workable system of teacher evaluation and could easily get rid of bad teachers, then people would probably be comfortable paying the remaining "good" teachers more. Probably.
Without a doubt if we canned 10 - 15% of teachers and increased the class sizes of the remaining teachers than the money saved should be put *directly* into the salaries of the remaining teachers.
Also, I am from Texas, where teachers' salaries are ranked 30th in the nation.(average $40k/year, not starting)
So two teachers married make more than 80,000 a year? Thats not a bad haul considering they get the months of July and August off. They also get a week for Winter and spring breaks, and on top of that their sick and vacation time. Do you get that much time off, do you work on call? Do you always have a fixed hour day?
I make a bit more than ateacher on a four year degree, but I am not paid for my education I am paid for what I can do and how few (or many) people can do it.
I do believe that increasing teachers' salaries will draw more potential teachers to the area and give schools a better selection to choose from, but of course that's only one part of the solution. The other part is to free the teachers from their administrative- and litigation-fearing shackles and let them do their job.
Throwing more money at something never makes it better. Until you can fire a teacher for being bad at their job you will not have good teachers (and this is very hard to do). Youll simply have better paid bad teachers.
Elementary / Secondary. And in our school the only kids with cars were the children of teachers. The starting salary for a teacher is in the high 20's that is the poverty level for a family of five. Two teacher together *starting* make over 50K and work only about nine months. Im sorry they are not rich (and thus if you teach in a rich area the kids will have nice things) but they are far from poor (thus if you teach in a city the kids will not have nice things). Given the hours and demands of teachers they are paid just fine. I would be all for paying thme more if we grew the class size and got rid of the bad teachers..
Sorry I should have put sarcam tags in, I thing sitting down and reading with a kid it a great way to encourage them. But youre also right science experiments, critical (and lateral) thinking games are also a great idea..
Slashdot Mirror
Like John and Teresa Kerry who themselves only pay about 10% of their income while I pay close to 35%
Than go out work hard get rich and support yourself..
Yes (Give 55 EV's its slightly under 2%), but OTOH in a sate like CA it becomes easy for an EV to get lost (if two parties each get 1% (say libertarians, and socialist) neither has crossed the threshold to get an EV bu together they assure one is "lost"
In CO yes it is nine votes divided up among the % of the population. The only way someone might take interest in CO is if its a real blowout (and even then it has to be close to dropping a vote). If youre beating me 60-45 (A huge blowout) There is little reason for you or I to try it out. You need to gain 7 points to pick up *1* EV, I need to lose 4.1 points to lose *1* EV. No state in the nation is this weak a pull.
Yes Ohio, a much smaller state than CA. Here is the real issue its no about states, but the size of the cities within them. I guarentee you that if we did a popular vote ID would still get zero attention. CO might (Denver), IL might (Chi), Heck even MN might (MSP), CA would (LA/SF), The north east would get attention (NYC, BOS, DC, PHIL). TX would SA, HOU)..
Basically all the money and favors would be spent in the cities..
ME is not proportional is winner take all by Congressional district (so is NB)
No to 3rd Parties ME or NB would become more interesting because there you only have to win 1 district to win a vote (which if CO was going to do I would be fine with), but in CO you have to win 11.1% of the vote across the whole state in my lifetime ony Perot has managed that outside of the two parties.
But all vote do count twords, law makers are elected by % of the vote. THe the presidant is not the president of the people but the president of the states. He represents the Federal Republic. But any of his powers are held in check by the peoples represenatives (congress and in recent times the senate)..
Lets say that I am losing 42-50, right now I would not fight because I will get nothing. But under the CO system I am going to get 4/9 EV's. If I lose by one vote I get 4/9 EV's and even if I lose 40-50 I get 4/9 ES's... Same goes for if I am winning, only if I gain 6% more will I pick up an extra EV.
ME and NB have it right EC all or nothing by district! and two for the winner of the state. This way if I am down 44-50 (or up 50-44) I might see one or two *districts* I can fight for. If this goes by CO is worth at most! 2 ev's. Lets also consider what havoc this could render on the EV system in NY in 2000 Bush would have won 11, Kerry 19.. oops NY has 31 Electors but enough voted for differing 3rd parties to take up an EV but not enough voted for any one for them to get it...
It also gives a third party a real chance to not only be a focatro (like Perot in 92, or Nader in 2000) but also to actuall take home an EV or two..
Breaking the EV up by district, good idea (Not perfect but nothing is)... Doing % of the vote stupid. Congress is where % of the vote matters..
ME an NB do not have proportinal electoral votes. THe give ont electors by congressional districts not by percent of the vote. If you win ME 1st congressional district by one vote you get 1 elector, if you win it by 1 Million you get 1 vote. If you win the state by one vote you get 2 more, ...
Yes because instead of recounting several counties or a state we could have had to suffer a national recall in 2000.. great Idea..
But we are not a democracy, we are a Federal Republic of which the sates are members. As a member a state has the right to determine how its electors are selected. States can maintain a reasonable amount of autonomy this way..
And what do they have to gain by this?
You may or may not have voted for CLinton in 1992 but 95% of the people making a stink about the ANG did, and they are liberal socialist. I am not a republican and am not voting for Bush *or* kerry in this next election but thatnks for playing.
3) Iraq keeps its oil, and the US cuts down on its dependance on foriegn oil by ramping up utilization of non-fossil fuel energy sources
Nice of you to decide what Iraq should do with its oil. Way to call Iraq a blood for oil war on one hand and ignore your own cliam the next..
So the lefties who are now flipping out about bush are also being two faced and political in their attacks.. thanks for clearing that up... Thank goodness Im voting 3rd party..
You forgot to look at documents written by the same officer at about the same time...
Hey CLinton had his number called and lied to get out of it, you speak as if this is something new.
2) Want to secure Iraq's oil supply, but populace won't support outright imperialism? Lie about your reasons (and scare the crap out of them).
Umm for the umpteenth time Oil is fungable if all the Oil in Iraq went to france the cost US companies pay for oil would go down as much as if all the Oil came to the US. If you dont understand market economics dont pretend to know what you are talking about..
3) Want to get credit for cracking down on terrorists, but didn't do squat to actually prevent September 11th? Lie about what info you had earlier in 2001.
Yes because puttiong that information togeter as it has now been done had nothing to do with the fact it actually happened? Look at Perl Harbor, all indications were months in advance something was going to happen, if we let the modern Liberal run things then we would still have comitties on why the radar was not followed up on, and would not have actually done anything about Japan..
Bush is a pathological liar, and a danger to this country. He will say whatever needs to be said to push through his agenda. And, that makes it important to stop him, and makes this issue non-trivial.
Really you have talked to all their families? In Korea we lost 10K a year.... Guess it would be better if my wifes family was forced to live in hell hole her father had to escape from (N Korea)..
Women who value their right to choose abortion disagree with you.
And Babies who would like to breath fresh air at least once disagree with you.
And in arguing against the first Gulf war he said that authorizing the use of force by the senate is the same as using force... Thats wht Kerry is so focused on Vietnam, anything he has said in the past decade has has said the opposit..
The funny part in all of this is Bush has said thats Kerry's service is more heroic than his own was. He is not running on his war record from 30+ years ago, Kerry is..
Living around my teachers as a kid and knowing a few in my adulthood this is just flat out untrue. Maybe you do work those hours but in NY here is a good teachers day (11th Grade Chem).
Get in at 8:15 -> 8:30 (Study hall, he grades papers) -> 9:15 (Chem I) -> 10:00 (Orcanig Chem) -> 10:45 -> (Organic Lab, after 15 minutes going over the lab with us he spent the rest of the time grading our papers) -> 11:30 (Given a period for lesson planning) 12:15 Lunch -> 1:00 (Chem II) -> 1:45 (Chem II) -> 2:30 (Dentention, reviews homework)
This was not a bad teacher, he came in worked these hours 90% of the time and went home. He got a week off for spring & winter, he got 2 months off in the summer, all federal holidays.
The natioal hourly salary for a teacher is about 30$/hr..
You're not being selfish but your also not being realistic. People dont pay you for your education they pay you for what you do for them (and how many other people can do it). I could have a Phd in physics but if I am flipping burgers I dont deserve 20k a year. You have a stable secure Job. I cant dream of working in the same state for ten years, let alone the same school district, that is worth an aweful lot of money. I dont have a degreee from a 'top ten school' just an Engineering degree from a State University (SUNY @ Buffalo) but I am more than capable than teaching.
And, in fact, the only reason I get paid as well as I do is that my school district spends slightly more than 80% of its overall budget on salaries. And so I don't have any budget whatsoever (so the $50 CD-burner I'm going to buy for my classroom will come out of pocket), but that's the breaks.
The average teacher makes 45K a year and a starting teacher makes 30K (according to the American Federation of Teachers). My first job offer out of school 32K a year as an EE working as a civi for the Army. Why so low? because I was working for the public in a relatively secure job. I left to make more money and have had to move three times in 5 years (Buffalo -> Boston -> Buffalo -> St Paul).
If we had a workable system of teacher evaluation and could easily get rid of bad teachers, then people would probably be comfortable paying the remaining "good" teachers more. Probably.
Without a doubt if we canned 10 - 15% of teachers and increased the class sizes of the remaining teachers than the money saved should be put *directly* into the salaries of the remaining teachers.
So two teachers married make more than 80,000 a year? Thats not a bad haul considering they get the months of July and August off. They also get a week for Winter and spring breaks, and on top of that their sick and vacation time. Do you get that much time off, do you work on call? Do you always have a fixed hour day?
I make a bit more than ateacher on a four year degree, but I am not paid for my education I am paid for what I can do and how few (or many) people can do it.
I do believe that increasing teachers' salaries will draw more potential teachers to the area and give schools a better selection to choose from, but of course that's only one part of the solution. The other part is to free the teachers from their administrative- and litigation-fearing shackles and let them do their job.
Throwing more money at something never makes it better. Until you can fire a teacher for being bad at their job you will not have good teachers (and this is very hard to do). Youll simply have better paid bad teachers.
Elementary / Secondary. And in our school the only kids with cars were the children of teachers. The starting salary for a teacher is in the high 20's that is the poverty level for a family of five. Two teacher together *starting* make over 50K and work only about nine months. Im sorry they are not rich (and thus if you teach in a rich area the kids will have nice things) but they are far from poor (thus if you teach in a city the kids will not have nice things). Given the hours and demands of teachers they are paid just fine. I would be all for paying thme more if we grew the class size and got rid of the bad teachers..
Sorry I should have put sarcam tags in, I thing sitting down and reading with a kid it a great way to encourage them. But youre also right science experiments, critical (and lateral) thinking games are also a great idea..