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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (238592)	3/16/2002 2:04:25 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Fact: California's energy utilities were not deregulated, only re-regulated. I also don't believe things were considered "just fine" prior to the bungled regulations you and others like to call "de-regulation." But look to Pennsylvania for something akin to de-regulation...worked great! Dan B

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (238592)	3/16/2002 2:39:19 PM
From: DavesM	Respond to of 769670

While the way California deregulated electricity, made the crisis worse - there really was a shortage of electricity supplies in the west in the summer of 2000. California needed to import as much as 15% of its power during summer months from the Northwest this is not the fault of deregulation. During the summer of 2000, I've read that power imports from the NW fell by as much as 4,000MW (a serious drought in the northwest). Nor was it the fault of deregulation that a number of new proposed plants had not received permitting from the CEC. re: public schools and vouchers. California offers Cal Grants to residents going to college. The Grants use STATE money, and are given to students to help pay tuition at both public or PRIVATE institutions. I doubt that Stanford or USC could provide the quality of education they provide today, without State and Federal Grants. Why are these good, and vouchers bad?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (238592)	3/16/2002 4:20:29 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

How come everyone who faces reality and tries to come up with a workable solution is labled an apologist? I think vouchers are facing reality.......as much as throwing more money at schools without some fundamental changes that result in a classroom conducive to learning. The threat of vouchers is good, in and of itself. The simple fact that you and others bemoan them and characterize them so negatively without any concrete proof or facts of their impact is some recommendation. Maybe in the long run we need a little of both to actually see some results other than hyperbole. FACT: California's energy situation was just fine before deregulation. Rather than argue this as a fact, consider that it was passed unanimously and is a non-issue to me. You may not feel this way. ASSERTION: California's energy situation was fouled up after and because of deregulation. It was partial de-regulation, which kept it from responding to the market in a normal way. Real de-regulation would have allowed long term contracts to mitigate price spikes.Davis had warning and dragged his feet which worsened the situation. Then, however you look at it, all hell broke loose. FACT: California's public schools need help. And have for quite a while. More money has been applied and yet scores have dropped since 1964 (A FACT). That's nearly 40 years of experimenting with public school/teacher's union solutions. I'm surprised that Davis thought that "think-tank" would be a perjorative word. Think tanks drove changes in education and we can see the results and the graph is not pointing up. The reluctance to hold anyone accountable is frustrating enough to consider vouchers but you disagree. My wife taught and related the lack of administrative and union support on a regular basis. This is fact to me but you may believe otherwise. She is retired from teaching and her friends still working do not report progress. Social promotions and dumbing down the curriculum has not worked but is the sleight of hand I have come to detest. ASSERTION: School vouchers would divert money away from the public schools, interferring with if not eliminating the possibility of their improvement. Like I said, I know vouchers will not be implemented in a revolutionary fashion, but over time. For some desperate parents it is their ONLY hope. I think you know that some inner city blacks are in favor of having this choice. For the rest we CAN and will still have private schools (you know, the ones that all the politicians send their kids to) as an option. If you care to debate any of the specific issues or my 'partisan' claims, let's go. It's your choice (funny, I don't remember 'choice' being in the Republican lexicon) Glad you acknowledge choice is not proprietary.