Congratulations Texas! (Houston, Denton, North Richland Hills: insurance, crime, house)

[jek74]

Originally Posted by jeremy2788

Exactly, what did they cut some 5 billion dollars? And they can't even return that to normal funding levels.

Sorry capadre, more money does not equal better schools. Studies have shown that parochial schools spend less per student then public schools and produce far better results. Why is that the left believes every single problem in this country can be solved with more money. Let me ask you guys something. If we had spent more money in Iraq, would we have produced a better outcome? Yeah, chew on that for awhile.

[jek74]

Originally Posted by jeremy2788

My point was, what is the difference between a state that has money and won't spend it compared to a state that doesn't have money and can't spend it? Either way, the residents will suffer.

The thing with Texas is, we always brag about how much money we have, but yet we always hear of how our education sucks and how our infrastructure sucks because we won't make investments in them, but Baby Jesus, how we can throw every bit of corporate welfare towards companies that would still have insane profits without such incentives! What is the point??

I mean, come on, when we have to entice companies to come and stay here with every bit of incentive under the sun, what does that REALLY say about us?

Well, CA doesn't have money and they still spend a fortune on their schools and their schools suck. And where I'm from in Chicago, we had one of the highest education budgets in the country and also had one of the highest high school drop out rates. Whoops...back to the drawing board.

[milrtime83]

How can anyone complain about a surplus with a straight face? Just because there is extra money this year doesn't mean it needs to be spent somewhere immediately. The state is about $300 billion in debt. Maybe some of it could go towards reducing that...

[PedroMartinez]

Google who has the best education system in the world. You'll find that the answer is Finland. ( Finland's Education System Best In World - Business Insider ). They have held that distinction since 2000 ( Why Are Finland's Schools Successful? | People & Places | Smithsonian Magazine )

In 2006, Finland spent $7,500 per student while the U.S. spent $8,700 per student ( The Finnish miracle - Academics & Activities | GreatSchools ). At the time, Texas was spending $9,825 per student ( PolitiFact Texas | State Sen. Wendy Davis says Texas ranks 44th in education spending per student ).

You can see that in 2008 and 2009, the US spent a greater percentage of GDP than Finland. ( Expenditure per student, primary (% of GDP per capita) | Data | Table ) Why do we rank 17th? ( US 17th In Global Education Ranking; Finland, South Korea Claim Top Spots )

I get sick of this belief that the more money we throw at education, the better our education system is. You could have a computer that is less than 3 months old on a student's desk, but if that student doesn't care about learning because his parents don't give a crap, that student will perform poorly regardless if they are driven to school in a limo.

The "we need to spend more on education" argument is only there to keep the "parents need to be more active in their children's education" argument from making the headlines. Once again, it's the idea that the government needs to be responsible for everything.

[swopoe]

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

I get sick of this belief that the more money we throw at education, the better our education system is. You could have a computer that is less than 3 months old on a student's desk, but if that student doesn't care about learning because his parents don't give a crap, that student will perform poorly regardless if they are driven to school in a limo.

The "we need to spend more on education" argument is only there to keep the "parents need to be more active in their children's education" argument from making the headlines. Once again, it's the idea that the government needs to be responsible for everything.

My gosh, yes. A million times yes. Give a kid the world, and if they don't care or their parents don't care, it just doesn't matter. My mother and my mother in law are former public school teachers, and boy do they have stories to tell about students and parents who just don't care. As a mother of three, it makes me so sad and so sick at the same time.

[EasilyAmused]

Originally Posted by swopoe

My gosh, yes. A million times yes. Give a kid the world, and if they don't care or their parents don't care, it just doesn't matter. My mother and my mother in law are former public school teachers, and boy do they have stories to tell about students and parents who just don't care. As a mother of three, it makes me so sad and so sick at the same time.

And this is why private schools have better performing student bodies overall. The parents care, the kids care,or the kids are forced to care by the parents or faculty,and they attend the school with like minded families.
Even the the better public schools can't claim the same consistency, as they have so many different types of students.

[jerbear30]

What is the purpose of running that kind of surplus at the state level? Why not use that money where it is needed? 1/4 of all Texans are uninsured--the highest level in the nation.

[OducksFTW!]

Maybe use that surplus to build a railway that links up the major cities? Anyone with me? Or maybe improve Houston (the biggest economical center) and pay for more rail that would connect the suburbs?

Anyone?

But maybe this state is too cheap for all of that, I would rather hear about a new infrastructure project benefiting Texans than the bragging rights of having a surplus.

Or is that thought process to liberal and hippie?

[EasilyAmused]

No, pressing for infrastructure is more towards Constitutionalism. Infrastructure was one of the few things the government was supposed to handle..
Having taxpayers pay for other's health insurance is more hippie and progressive.

[OducksFTW!]

Originally Posted by EasilyAmused

No, pressing for infrastructure is more towards Constitutionalism. Infrastructure was one of the few things the government was supposed to handle..
Having taxpayers pay for other's health insurance is more hippie and progressive.

You're right.

Poor people that can't afford health care deserve to die. I'm not paying for them, that would be Communism! And old folks that have their healthcare coverage runout, ehh the hell with them too!