Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (14083)	5/10/2001 1:55:31 PM
From: nasdaqian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

even if they spent it, everything over $100k in wages would be returned right back to them. The hell it would. It's spread all over hell and back but not into their control. keep in mind the govt basket of goods is different than joe 6 pack's. j6p could care less if star wars went up in cost another $6 billion b/c it isn't on his grocery list. ;-) Interesting you use as an example one of the principal areas I believe govt has a legitimate role - defense. license plates don't count? ;-) it does, to some extent, produce value. lawlessness and disorder can be extremely ugly. Same as above. The myriad of other "causes" the govt takes on is what my argument is about. >>It redistributes it (we can argue about the places it sends it) and takes a big cut for itself.<< but you pointed out it doesn't keep the money it disperses it to people. those people are typically quite privileged. My point being that it is a very inefficient system which disperses money to very inefficient, nonproductive places. Therefore it is inflationary. Who are these privileged folk that are mooching on us? with govt official self interest as the guide to the disposition the wealth. We seem to agree here. so why doesn't america spend equally on education in poor neighborhoods to reduce this dependence attitude? That would be fine as long as a paradigm other than a public school system is employed. Also, personally, I think the federal govt ought not be involved and that the state level would be the highest.

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (14083)	5/13/2001 4:18:47 AM
From: Dr. Anthony Keyodo	Respond to of 42834

Re:"so why doesn't america spend equally on education in poor neighborhoods to reduce this dependence attitude?" Chicago public schools spend well over $7000 per student per year. In my "more protected" neighborhood $5800 is spent per student per year. This problem as with many others will take more than just throwing money at it to find a solution

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (14083)	5/13/2001 10:33:58 AM
From: Mr. BSL	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

Re:"so why doesn't america spend equally on education in poor neighborhoods to reduce this dependence attitude?" It costs me $2300 a year to send my youngest daughter to private school. The three R's are reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic. The public school in my town costs $6400 a year. The three R's are recycling, racism and reproduction. Not to brag but my daughter, and her classmates, are so far ahead of the public school kids that it is frightening. BTW, her school is located in one of the worst neighborhoods in Southeast CT. FWIW