Parliamentary maneuver or thwarting the will of the people?

What the hell does a fight between public unions and a governor have to do with big business dominance? Originally Posted by pjorourke

Campaign finance, dear PJ, Campaign finance




Expand one, restrict the other and one side will dominate. But I think you knew that so really try and get to whatever point you wish to make.

Texas is a “right-to-work” state. As such, teachers are free to join or not join a union. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Not sure if it would help if they joined a union but it sure as hell couldn't hurt what their students score on their SAT's.

WTF, you think those SAT scores and graduation rates might have anything to do with the influx of illegals from Mexico (that bastion of educational quality)?

WTF, you think those SAT scores and graduation rates might have anything to do with the influx of illegals from Mexico (that bastion of educational quality)? Originally Posted by pjorourke

No, it was probably the following two stats:

• Texas was the only state in the nation to cut average per pupil expenditures in fiscal year 2005, resulting in a ranking of #40 nationally; down from #25 in fiscal year 1999.
• Texas is #6 in the nation in student growth. The general student population in Texas public schools grew by 11.1% between school years 1999 and 2005, with the largest percent of growth seen among low income and minority children.

WTF, you think those SAT scores and graduation rates might have anything to do with the influx of illegals from Mexico (that bastion of educational quality)? Originally Posted by pjorourke

Graduations rates maybe.....but this study might shoot down your myth on SAT's.

VII. CONCLUSION

This analysis has conducted a variety of tests to determine whether immigration into

California and Texas had a true effect on SAT-scores and applications to top universities of
SAT-takers. All of the tests used have shown that immigration definitely did not have a
negative effect on SAT-scores and probability of applying to top universities. It is possible
that an additional analysis with a larger number of states would increase reliability of the

results.

No, it was probably the following two stats:

1. Texas was the only state in the nation to cut average per pupil expenditures in fiscal year 2005, resulting in a ranking of #40 nationally; down from #25 in fiscal year 1999.
2. Texas is #6 in the nation in student growth. The general student population in Texas public schools grew by 11.1% between school years 1999 and 2005, with the largest percent of growth seen among low income and minority children.

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

No it probably wasn't.

1) As shown in the graph below, per pupil expenditures are negatively correlated with SAT scores albeit weakly.

2) Chuck, you think some of that influx of low income minority students might be illegals?

Finally, I'm sure you're one of those that thinks public sector employees should not be protected by the establishment of a union. Well, I can tell you that if those employees couldn't band together to protect themselves, the public sector would suck. I know. I was an employee with no protections in public sector work, and subject to the whims of the department head. I was paid shit, and could have been fired at anytime and replaced with a person whose only qualification for the job was his or her "friendship" (read fucking) with the department head. Is that the kind of public sector you want in this country??? If so, you deserve what you get, and don't complain about it. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Then I suppose you don't have a problem with giving public-sector unions everything they want, including defined-benefit pensions and lavish, heavily-subsidized (or free) health care plans generally not available to private sector workers?

I think the key point is this:

If you support such programs, then you must support the sort of tax structure needed to finance them. A few nibbling little business taxes ain't gonna do it. If you try to tax the hell out of businesses, a lot of them are going to set sail for friendlier climes. If you try to tax the hell out of individuals, you'll send them into open revolt.

Money sent to the states with no accountability over the last two years (as part of the $862 billion stimulus package of 2009) is running out. About all it did in most cases was to let states postpone tough budget decisions. Now there's little appetite for more federal bailouts of states, especially in light of the upcoming year's projected U.S. fiscal deficit of about 11% of GDP. Somebody, somewhere, is going to have to start making tough decisions regarding these matters. The can can't just be kicked down the road indefinitely. That will eventually lead to a destructive fiscal crisis and severe pain for just about everone, public-sector union members included.

Do you see willingness on the part of either party to impose the kind of tax system required to pay for all the promises politicians have made?

Campaign finance, dear PJ, Campaign finance Originally Posted by WTF

If that is the only purpose of public sector unions, it would be cheaper to just fund the Democratic party directly out of the government.

yap, yap, yap

http://www.window.state.tx.us/comptrol/wwstand/wws0512ed/

yap, yap, yap

Originally Posted by WTF

WTF's legendary use of posting links that don't work. Oh well, a good excuse for him not to do research.

WTF's legendary use of posting links that don't work. Oh well, a good excuse for him not to do research. Originally Posted by gnadfly

LOL, I do not know why they do not work. I cut and paste but never check. See if it is working now and get back with me.



http://www.k-state.edu/economics/facsheets/view.pdf

SAT-takers. All of the tests used have shown that immigration definitely did not have a

negative effect on SAT-scores and probability of applying to top universities. It is possible

that an additional analysis with a larger number of states would increase reliability of the results.

If that is the only purpose of public sector unions, it would be cheaper to just fund the Democratic party directly out of the government. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Not a bad idea.

Nice citation WTF -- except it didn't address the question on the floor.

There is no record there of when the bill was delivered -- thus no record of it not being delivered at night and voted the next day. Originally Posted by pjorourke

I have no idea what you are talking about. The House concurred in the Senate amendments. Senate amendments passed on 12/24/2009. House concurred in those amendments on 3/21/2010 at 10:48pm. That's only three days short of three months to read the fuckin' bill.

Maybe you need to read some facts and quit listening to right wing conspiracy radio.

Nice citation WTF -- except it didn't address the question on the floor. Originally Posted by pjorourke

I thinking of running for office

Nice citation WTF -- except it didn't address the question on the floor. Originally Posted by pjorourke

And it looks like a grad student thesis anyway.

And it looks like a grad student thesis anyway. Originally Posted by gnadfly

Nothing wrong with that. Or are you postulating that grad students who are guided by full professors can't do quality work or valid studies?

Nothing wrong with that. Or are you postulating that grad students who are guided by full professors can't do quality work or valid studies? Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

It is very hard to find material on the subject in question, instead of contributing to that research all some seem to be able to do is insist on what they heard on Fox News as gospel.