Sorry for some of the random stats...it was a cut and paste.
The primary point is that government spending on education has outpaced inflationary costs, and provided no measurable improvement (that I'm aware of). Throwing money at something isn't always the best way to improve things...witness our healthcare. Why should there be any increase after inflation if it's not providing benefit? Is your comment about real wages not also non sequitur, or is there some link to educational expenses and value?
Again, I'm fine with increased expenses if they're used toward areas that have a demonstrable return in educational value.
Actually, LAX doesn't do this at all checkpoints. I just walked through one with a security drone watching to make sure people didn't go the wrong way.
While I don't disagree in this situation, isn't this the mentality that's caused us to require fifteen safety stickers on a simple ladder? There certainly is such a thing as a user error that is not a faulty design.
I'm not sure about where you live, but it's not the case in Michigan. Just google "detroit edison rate increase denied", and see how often they get their way.
I want my taxes raised to properly fund schools too, there is an excess of dumbasses in this country.
I'm all for paying for good education. But, I'm also against government waste. If you can show areas where the monies spent would provide an educational ROI, I'd jump on that bandwagon.
Data published by the U.S. Department of Education in its annual Digest of Education Statistics shows that per student expenditures are high across the country and they have continued to rise.
$553 billion was spent on public education in 2006-2007. This figure represents 4.2 percent of GDP.
An average of $9,266/pupil is spent in American public schools.
Of the $71.7 billion spent by the Federal government on elementary and secondary education programs in 2007, $39.2 billion was spent on K-12 education. Of this amount 67% was spent on Special Education and Education for the Disadvantaged programs.
Between 1994 and 2004, average per-pupil expenditures have increased by 23.5% when adjusted for inflation.
Between 1984 and 2004, real expenditures per pupil increased by 49%.
Between 1970 and 2005 per pupil expenditures increased three times from $311/pupil to $971/pupil.
Um, no. Even the Forest Service says so on their permits page.
The Forest Service offers many activities such as hiking, biking, skiing, camping, birding, using cabins, driving for pleasure, harvesting mushrooms, and gathering firewood. Many of the facilities and services associated with these opportunities are free. Some do require fees or permits to help maintain, manage and improve the amenities that you enjoy.
This is the typical kind of crap that people wanting more government completely miss. These kind of jackasses are often finding phony problems in order to justify their positions.
Okay, so if you look at it in the opposite direction, is it still to the right? Is there a standard starting point, like when we say the right side of a car, we're assuming the orientation is from the driver's point of view. Facing the vehicle from the front would reverse that.
Why would the video portion be any different than someone snapping a photo through the window? I believe that part is completely legal. The audio, on the other hand...
Not that it would be a good thing, but wouldn't the warming of areas that are currently less habitable due to cold offset some of that? Maybe portions of Canada, Greenland, Siberia?
Reminds me of the time (mid 90s) an interviewer asked me to write code for a bubble sort on a piece of paper. I told him that off the top of my head, I couldn't, but that we could discuss the basic principle behind it, big O, and inefficiency.
He didn't like the answer, and it was one of the rare interviews where I didn't actually get an offer.
I feel for you, having had to deal with precisely the same. But semantically, what does it mean to be "in a state of decline". At nearly 56, I'm in a state of decline, but nowhere near being unable to contribute. Some cases are clear, others not so much. As we all edge nearer to death, it's not always clear where the turning point is.
I'm just piling on here... Dramatic improvements in the management of high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and treatment of heart disease have already extended life for many of us.
As another 55'er, I'll say that I agree with much of your commentary. My family genes don't favor my odds of making it much further than 70. Both grandfathers died of heart disease, high cholesterol runs in my family, Grandmother died from Alzheimer's and my oldest aunt is living with it. Type II diabetes is common in my family as well.
All that said, statins have significantly improved the cholesterol situation. I recently ran a half-marathon, and am watching my diet. And while I question the value, I actively do mental exercises (Lumosity, chess, etc.). So, I suspect my odds are better than my predecessors.
Do I want to live to 100? Sure, but only if I'm not in pain, and don't want the family to take a second mortgage to keep me in a nursing home with feeding tubes.
I'm sorry, but your commentary is just a pile of raw bullshit, that I couldn't help respond. Yeah there are extremists on both sides, and those are not representative of either. Speeking of demented, you've forgotten about Hinkley, and "Squeeky" Fromme, and Sara Jane Moore.
Go learn something, and stop spouting crap you hear on MSN.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry for some of the random stats...it was a cut and paste.
The primary point is that government spending on education has outpaced inflationary costs, and provided no measurable improvement (that I'm aware of). Throwing money at something isn't always the best way to improve things...witness our healthcare. Why should there be any increase after inflation if it's not providing benefit? Is your comment about real wages not also non sequitur, or is there some link to educational expenses and value?
Again, I'm fine with increased expenses if they're used toward areas that have a demonstrable return in educational value.
Sorry for replying twice, but they should just change the signs to read "Welcome to the Hotel California".
Actually, LAX doesn't do this at all checkpoints. I just walked through one with a security drone watching to make sure people didn't go the wrong way.
"User errors are user interface errors."
While I don't disagree in this situation, isn't this the mentality that's caused us to require fifteen safety stickers on a simple ladder? There certainly is such a thing as a user error that is not a faulty design.
I'm not sure about where you live, but it's not the case in Michigan. Just google "detroit edison rate increase denied", and see how often they get their way.
I want my taxes raised to properly fund schools too, there is an excess of dumbasses in this country.
I'm all for paying for good education. But, I'm also against government waste. If you can show areas where the monies spent would provide an educational ROI, I'd jump on that bandwagon.
Data published by the U.S. Department of Education in its annual Digest of Education Statistics shows that per student expenditures are high across the country and they have continued to rise.
$553 billion was spent on public education in 2006-2007. This figure represents 4.2 percent of GDP.
An average of $9,266/pupil is spent in American public schools.
Of the $71.7 billion spent by the Federal government on elementary and secondary education programs in 2007, $39.2 billion was spent on K-12 education. Of this amount 67% was spent on Special Education and Education for the Disadvantaged programs.
Between 1994 and 2004, average per-pupil expenditures have increased by 23.5% when adjusted for inflation.
Between 1984 and 2004, real expenditures per pupil increased by 49%.
Between 1970 and 2005 per pupil expenditures increased three times from $311/pupil to $971/pupil.
I saw the name Fyfe, and couldn't help but correlate it to Barney Fife. Two of a kind.
I've worked around govt. employees for 38 years. It's not a unique situation, it's commonplace.
Um, no. Even the Forest Service says so on their permits page.
The Forest Service offers many activities such as hiking, biking, skiing, camping, birding, using cabins, driving for pleasure, harvesting mushrooms, and gathering firewood. Many of the facilities and services associated with these opportunities are free. Some do require fees or permits to help maintain, manage and improve the amenities that you enjoy.
This is the typical kind of crap that people wanting more government completely miss. These kind of jackasses are often finding phony problems in order to justify their positions.
Okay, so if you look at it in the opposite direction, is it still to the right? Is there a standard starting point, like when we say the right side of a car, we're assuming the orientation is from the driver's point of view. Facing the vehicle from the front would reverse that.
Why would the video portion be any different than someone snapping a photo through the window? I believe that part is completely legal. The audio, on the other hand...
Not that it would be a good thing, but wouldn't the warming of areas that are currently less habitable due to cold offset some of that? Maybe portions of Canada, Greenland, Siberia?
Reminds me of the time (mid 90s) an interviewer asked me to write code for a bubble sort on a piece of paper. I told him that off the top of my head, I couldn't, but that we could discuss the basic principle behind it, big O, and inefficiency.
He didn't like the answer, and it was one of the rare interviews where I didn't actually get an offer.
I feel for you, having had to deal with precisely the same. But semantically, what does it mean to be "in a state of decline". At nearly 56, I'm in a state of decline, but nowhere near being unable to contribute. Some cases are clear, others not so much. As we all edge nearer to death, it's not always clear where the turning point is.
Wow, bad mods today. Whoever marked this Flamebait needs to grow up.
I'm just piling on here... Dramatic improvements in the management of high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and treatment of heart disease have already extended life for many of us.
If you're just doing things to keep you alive, you're not living. The whole point of a bucket list is to live life to the fullest.
Did the same...155mph on the autobahn removes a lot of stress.
As another 55'er, I'll say that I agree with much of your commentary. My family genes don't favor my odds of making it much further than 70. Both grandfathers died of heart disease, high cholesterol runs in my family, Grandmother died from Alzheimer's and my oldest aunt is living with it. Type II diabetes is common in my family as well.
All that said, statins have significantly improved the cholesterol situation. I recently ran a half-marathon, and am watching my diet. And while I question the value, I actively do mental exercises (Lumosity, chess, etc.). So, I suspect my odds are better than my predecessors.
Do I want to live to 100? Sure, but only if I'm not in pain, and don't want the family to take a second mortgage to keep me in a nursing home with feeding tubes.
So I'm intrigued by the name. What were her interrogation techniques? Did she use an Analintruder? Cavity searches?
I'm sorry, but your commentary is just a pile of raw bullshit, that I couldn't help respond. Yeah there are extremists on both sides, and those are not representative of either. Speeking of demented, you've forgotten about Hinkley, and "Squeeky" Fromme, and Sara Jane Moore.
Go learn something, and stop spouting crap you hear on MSN.
I've gotta ask....Is it okay to be at 22 ft, and not 20? Seriously, is that some standard number, or did you pull it out of your anal cavity?
You clearly have no sense of what healthcare, food and shelter cost, or what the military budget is.
Spoken like someone who's never actually made money.