3 ms·

They don't really address it: tutoring is OBVIOUS, everyone knows that tutoring works. The reason they are applying this measure is because tutoring is not doab

by cauch 3y ago

They don't really address it: tutoring is OBVIOUS, everyone knows that tutoring works. The reason they are applying this measure is because tutoring is not doable. > We don't need to dumb down anything. We need to raise everyone up by investing in education. And we can also give poney to every kids.That's a nice thought but that is so deconnected from reality, which means that you are pushing for something that will never happen and at the same time the unfair situation will stay the same.

cwkoss 3y ago
We can tax corporations and billionaires. Building a functional education system isn't an unrealistic pipe dream, its an imperative for a well adjusted society.
- pjscott 3y ago
  Billionaires aren't the unlimited money piñata that you might hope; their total assets are less than federal yearly tax revenues, and good luck getting even a tiny fraction of that per year. As for corporations, I assume you're proposing raising the corporate tax rate -- but we're already near the revenue-maximizing peak of the Laffer curve on that particular tax, and there's just not much room to get more money that way. (Also, only about a third of the incidence of corporate taxes falls on shareholders, with the rest being split about equally between lower wages for workers and higher prices for customers. It can be surprisingly regressive!)
  - cwkoss 3y ago
    The Laffer curve is a laughably poor model to inform tax policy: - There are many taxes, not a single tax rate - It completely ignores the idea of progressive taxation: rich individuals and giant megacorps can afford to pay higher tax rates without the same issues that would occur by applying those tax rates on lower and middle classes and small business. - It cannot be empirically validated without cherry picking data because it ignores many crucial factors. It's basically just propaganda paid for and promoted by the rich to convince the proles to let them keep more money.
- cauch 3y ago
  I would love that (more money for education), and I'm pretty sure the people who proposed this measure would drop it immediately in exchange for more money for education. But you are obviously not the first one coming up with this idea. Plenty of people have tried and are still trying, and it still does not work (it does not mean we should not try). In the meanwhile, we still need to improve the situation for people who are being the victim of it. This is why this measure has been created while your measure is still far from being reality.
slothtrop 3y ago
> tutoring is not doable Why? It's always appeared available on an opt-in basis as far as I can remember. It should be possible to drastically expand this through various means, outside of standard classroom hours.

by cauch 3y ago

cwkoss 3y ago

We can tax corporations and billionaires. Building a functional education system isn't an unrealistic pipe dream, its an imperative for a well adjusted society.

pjscott 3y ago
Billionaires aren't the unlimited money piñata that you might hope; their total assets are less than federal yearly tax revenues, and good luck getting even a tiny fraction of that per year. As for corporations, I assume you're proposing raising the corporate tax rate -- but we're already near the revenue-maximizing peak of the Laffer curve on that particular tax, and there's just not much room to get more money that way. (Also, only about a third of the incidence of corporate taxes falls on shareholders, with the rest being split about equally between lower wages for workers and higher prices for customers. It can be surprisingly regressive!)
- cwkoss 3y ago
  The Laffer curve is a laughably poor model to inform tax policy: - There are many taxes, not a single tax rate - It completely ignores the idea of progressive taxation: rich individuals and giant megacorps can afford to pay higher tax rates without the same issues that would occur by applying those tax rates on lower and middle classes and small business. - It cannot be empirically validated without cherry picking data because it ignores many crucial factors. It's basically just propaganda paid for and promoted by the rich to convince the proles to let them keep more money.
cauch 3y ago
I would love that (more money for education), and I'm pretty sure the people who proposed this measure would drop it immediately in exchange for more money for education. But you are obviously not the first one coming up with this idea. Plenty of people have tried and are still trying, and it still does not work (it does not mean we should not try). In the meanwhile, we still need to improve the situation for people who are being the victim of it. This is why this measure has been created while your measure is still far from being reality.

slothtrop 3y ago

> tutoring is not doable Why? It's always appeared available on an opt-in basis as far as I can remember. It should be possible to drastically expand this through various means, outside of standard classroom hours.