3 ms·

The Bay Area is bigger than the HN bubble. There are some desperately poor school districts.

easytiger 12y ago
The federal government spent $683.7 billion in a year on defense alone. maybe they could spare a few million for the children. Relying on private finance to help schools simply will make matters worse from a big picture in a similar way to how Africa became addicted to overseas aid
- PhantomGremlin 12y ago
  Sigh. Did you spend one nanosecond of time doing any research before firing off your oh so pious comment about sparing a few pennies to save the children? A very quick google found me ed.gov, which is the US Department of Education. Here is an exact quote [1]: ED currently administers a budget of $67.3 billion in discretionary appropriations (including discretionary Pell Grant funding) and operates programs that touch on every area and level of education. The Department's elementary and secondary programs annually serve nearly 16,900 school districts and approximately 50 million students attending more than 98,000 public schools and 28,000 private schools. Department programs also provide grant, loan, and work-study assistance to more than 13 million postsecondary students. So it turns out that the federal government is already spending more than "a few million for the children". And in case you slept thru civics 101 class, the very next paragraph from the ed.gov website points out: That said, it is important to point out that education in America is primarily a State and local responsibility, and ED's budget is only a small part of both total national education spending ... [1] http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html
  - dang 12y ago
    Personal attacks are not allowed on Hacker News.
    - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
      Sorry. I did read your admonition a few days ago, and I should have apologized then. I will be much more careful with the tone of my postings going forward.
  - easytiger 12y ago
    And yet, there are impovrished schools. How is that possible?
    - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
      It's easy. The money, whether it is for defense or for education is, by and large, squandered. Here's an example of excessive education spending in Oregon [1]: A guy was a college professor in Oregon for 16 years His final salary was $62,000 per year He currently gets a pension of $214,000 per year How is that possible? Simple. He was, among other things guaranteed an 8% a year return in his retirement account. All courtesy of the Oregon taxpayer. This kind of thing is endemic to public spending, whether it is in Oregon or in California or at the Federal level. Education or Defense, it doesn't matter. The billions simply disappear. That's why, fundamentally, "a few million for the children" won't make a difference. At all. [1] http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/03/oregon_losing_money_match_game.html http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/03/oregon_...
      - easytiger 12y ago
        This is my point. That line was in a satirical tone. I see the american education system doesn't cover that. Throwing money at a few schools will just mask the fundamental underlying organisational, logistical and philosophical failings of the system.
  - pessimizer 12y ago
    Nobody actually thought that less than a penny was being spent on schools. What they were saying was that money that was currently being used for defense should be shifted to other things. If you really wanted to attack the commenter, you could have compared rates of growth since 1980 in both defense and education, or compared defense/education spending ratios of other countries to our own, or anything other than what you did: posted the DoE's budget, a count of the number of students, schools, and school districts in the US, and a mention that most school financing is funded by local taxes as if it were something you didn't know was common knowledge.
    - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
      So, someone is allowed to say "maybe they could spare a few million for the children". But when I point out that the federal government is already spending $67.3 billion, that's not enough of a counter-argument. That's "common knowledge", so I needed to provide extensive additional information to refute his statement? I think we'll have to "agree to disagree" about this one.

The federal government spent $683.7 billion in a year on defense alone. maybe they could spare a few million for the children. Relying on private finance to help schools simply will make matters worse from a big picture in a similar way to how Africa became addicted to overseas aid

PhantomGremlin 12y ago
Sigh. Did you spend one nanosecond of time doing any research before firing off your oh so pious comment about sparing a few pennies to save the children? A very quick google found me ed.gov, which is the US Department of Education. Here is an exact quote [1]: ED currently administers a budget of $67.3 billion in discretionary appropriations (including discretionary Pell Grant funding) and operates programs that touch on every area and level of education. The Department's elementary and secondary programs annually serve nearly 16,900 school districts and approximately 50 million students attending more than 98,000 public schools and 28,000 private schools. Department programs also provide grant, loan, and work-study assistance to more than 13 million postsecondary students. So it turns out that the federal government is already spending more than "a few million for the children". And in case you slept thru civics 101 class, the very next paragraph from the ed.gov website points out: That said, it is important to point out that education in America is primarily a State and local responsibility, and ED's budget is only a small part of both total national education spending ... [1] http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html
- dang 12y ago
  Personal attacks are not allowed on Hacker News.
  - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
    Sorry. I did read your admonition a few days ago, and I should have apologized then. I will be much more careful with the tone of my postings going forward.
- easytiger 12y ago
  And yet, there are impovrished schools. How is that possible?
  - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
    It's easy. The money, whether it is for defense or for education is, by and large, squandered. Here's an example of excessive education spending in Oregon [1]: A guy was a college professor in Oregon for 16 years His final salary was $62,000 per year He currently gets a pension of $214,000 per year How is that possible? Simple. He was, among other things guaranteed an 8% a year return in his retirement account. All courtesy of the Oregon taxpayer. This kind of thing is endemic to public spending, whether it is in Oregon or in California or at the Federal level. Education or Defense, it doesn't matter. The billions simply disappear. That's why, fundamentally, "a few million for the children" won't make a difference. At all. [1] http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/03/oregon_losing_money_match_game.html http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/03/oregon_...
    - easytiger 12y ago
      This is my point. That line was in a satirical tone. I see the american education system doesn't cover that. Throwing money at a few schools will just mask the fundamental underlying organisational, logistical and philosophical failings of the system.
- pessimizer 12y ago
  Nobody actually thought that less than a penny was being spent on schools. What they were saying was that money that was currently being used for defense should be shifted to other things. If you really wanted to attack the commenter, you could have compared rates of growth since 1980 in both defense and education, or compared defense/education spending ratios of other countries to our own, or anything other than what you did: posted the DoE's budget, a count of the number of students, schools, and school districts in the US, and a mention that most school financing is funded by local taxes as if it were something you didn't know was common knowledge.
  - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
    So, someone is allowed to say "maybe they could spare a few million for the children". But when I point out that the federal government is already spending $67.3 billion, that's not enough of a counter-argument. That's "common knowledge", so I needed to provide extensive additional information to refute his statement? I think we'll have to "agree to disagree" about this one.