Kasz216 said:
richardhutnik said:
Kasz216 said:
richardhutnik said:
Little by little, the implosion of the middle class, and the sliding into third-world status appears to be happening for America. You try to keep up minimums of what had been norms for maintaining middle class lifestyle, and it folds. Money won't be there at this point. Create a system where you can't raise taxes and keep costs down, and go into the debt spiral. At this point it is flush. Look for end of Pax Americana to happen. Neo-Cons can take down the GOP at this point. Social conservatives can also do the same with their push for the drug war, which won't be sustainable, so it gets ended and they they don't have a home. Then we can pull the plug on the welfare state and have people pour out on the streets. Mutual aid societies? HA! You will get mutual defense societies, and those who were now booted out, the 47% (you know, the types who won't take responsibility for themselves) seen as vermin, and gun them down.
You will have massive unrest and you can elect a charismatic leader who will take a cannon to the mob the way Napoleon did. I expect Fox News to position this as favorable, explaining that it were subhumans being shot down anyhow.
|
I find it weird how you constantly find ways to blame the people that haven't been in power for everything. I mean, we are talking California here. Granted they had Arnold but basically his whole govonorership was everybody being mad that he even attempted to carry out his campaign promises.
|
The problem of the implosion is larger than either party. Yes, I vent about the impact to the GOP, but the problem is larger. What do you think happens to a nation that doesn't sufficiently fund education and allocate properly?
Take all this as signs of cracks appearing in the system.
|
Your initial premise is flawed
Note the second graph is using real cost... so inflation etc is covered. While the first is adjusted by PPP.
Our education problem isn't really a funding problem.
Allocation? Maybe. I'd place it more on execution myself.
|
The second graph is the most misleading graph I have ever seen and should not be used as the basis of an argument.
For starters, your costs are a displacement figure, whereas your benefits are a derivative, purely used to show an extreme bias towards the cost. If you added cost as a derivative as well, you'd see it's just as flat as the benefits.
Secondly, the graph uses two completely separat measurements on the same graph, with the assumption that, for example, $80k is wirth the equivalent of a 30% IMPROVEMENT in Achievement EVERY YEAR.
It's nothing more to appeal to the brainless mass who see this and say "OMG Education spending out of control!!!"
