Quote:
Originally Posted by Static  The no child left behind act is in its entirety a good idea. But with all good ideas come the bad men running it. It wasn't a total flunk though, Bush is trying to integrate pel-grants to inner city families for kids with protential to take them out of a failing public school into a Private school, religious or otherwise.
There was one line during his Speech that really got to me, but I feel he said this with the knowledge of his timeline as President.
"If American citizens have to budget their money so should their government." (something to that degree)
Honestly though tipsy, a well educated man, or woman I am not sure, such as yourself can see that bush is not to blame for the economy. It is the greed of the rich which has helped, not completely but helped, dig the whole of this economic slump. Such as I said earlier it is Natural progression of human psyche and logic.
We get attacked--- we go to war--- we raise taxes for the war--- the rich business men of this country outsource or completely move to different states. Now this is a summary of the vaguest proportions.
But we must take Enron, standard Oil, and such other Big business' into mind. It is greed like this that sets the Domino effect into motion, the end result is...? The poor get poorer. While the Rich stay comfortable. |
No Child Left Behind failed because it continued to centralize the power behind schools, something that's been happening since around the 60's. Back then, we had 100k+ schools districts, now we have about 15k. Funding is moving more from local levels to state and federal. No Child Left Behind tried to bring accountability, something best done by parents. Best way to do that? Universal voucher plan - and I mean nothing like the **** launched in DC, Cleavland, and the couple other supposedly choice programs. Or, put more simply, what should someone expect by an act both initially sponsored by Ted Kennedy and supported by Bush?
As for the economy, I don't blame Bush at all - I still blame Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke. The economy is unpredictable in a lot of places, but in terms of what happens when the fed tries to mitigate fallout, it's been predicted since Greenspan started that doctrine that a moral hazard will occur - that means, people will stock up on a relatively inelastic part of the market and the price will shoot up and an unsustainable rate. Sound like housing at all?