-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
Manafort...convicted felon...
- Thread starter ahsay
- Start date
- Status
ahsay
Active Member
That explains why they voted for him. I think the wise philosopher F. Gump said it best, "stupid is as stupid does."
DeletedUser35712
Why be smart when you can be stupid? Because if you're stupid, you don't have to think as hard about things in life.
DeletedUser27889
I wasn't attempting to put any hidden meaning into my post. Everything else aside, every policy issue aside as that would turn this debate far too long, his general demeanor and tearing apart of the country is what I was referring to in all posts I've made. He goes on national TV and on twitter saying there is a witch hunt against him and everything is 'fake news'. Similar to when he was running and he virtually asked his supporters to shoot Clinton. 'Second Amendment people could act against Hilary Clinton.' Then were all supposed to pretend were stupid and didn't know what he meant. People didn't like Obama, people didn't like Bush. No other president has gone out of his way to divide this nation on a daily basis. This attitude and his supporters fervor towards him makes me genuinely concerned that if/when evidence amounts to an impeachment he will call on his supporters to take up arms or cause other forms of civil unrest. And some, I can only imagine how many, will be glad to heed that call. Can you tell me you don't have that same fear? His version of patriotism, as it is seen as by his believers, appears closer to treason to everyone whose not, or at least myself. I didn't agree with many things Bush did, I did not think for a second if Bush were to be impeached he would rather take the entire country down with him.
I will say this Razorback. I have NEVER been able to read or see a rational person supporting Trump, who remains calm and appears to be able to convey their thoughts with consideration and forethought. Typically anything having to do with Trump when talking with his non supporters tends to end in 'But Hilary/but the emails. THE PIZZA SHOP libtard snowflake don't tread on me, build the wall I'm out.' I think that's part of the problem, it doesn't seem the opposition is even willing to talk about anything like you do and do so without personal insults. I will give credit where credit is due and it isn't easy to remain composed when so many different people (at least here) are debating your personal choices or opinions. 'Ferguson and Welfare Queens' was, literally, the answer I got when I asked a relative why they voted Trump. Ironically from a woman who had been on disability for over 20 years herself.
BruteForceAttack
Well-Known Member
Let me just say this, whoever you support, doesn't matter, just get your butt off and vote, and do something so that your family and friends do the same.
Last edited:
DeletedUser35712
You'll find some calm Trump folks, although the rational thing... Um... That's going to be real tough to find. Now, if you supported Trump for economical reasons last year, I would give you some credit. However, with the tariffs and whatnot, I don't see a rational reason to support Trump this year. You can be calm, but that's not necessarily rational. Rationality means evidence-based thinking.
ahsay
Active Member
Like.....????????????????????????????? Did you just misplace your frontal lobe?
He hired Flynn who plead guilty. He hired Price who resigned because of defrauding taxpayers. He hired the swamp that is now being drained. His incompetence is harming the nation.
Cohen has now implicated Der Combover in the bribery scandal, a felony. That's impeachable. Your boi...he going down. No one would've guessed it'd happen so soon. Pence 2018
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, none of what you sent shows anything about transitional species. The first line from the first article says, "Paleontologists view Archaeopteryx as a transitional fossil between dinosaurs and modern birds." The key word negating all else in the sentence is the word 'view'. From Merriam-Webster: View - an opinion or judgment colored by the feeling or bias of its holder. It is quite a leap in logic to view a fully formed species bearing physical characteristics with other fully formed species as the transition from one to the other. All you have is a bald bird that seems to have sucked at flying. Probably why it went extinct.
Not a transition to an eye, just a bacteria that has light sensitive proteins. From The Scientist magazine,
"About a decade ago, researchers found that certain plant photoreceptors contain protein modules called light, oxygen, or voltage (LOV) domains, sequences roughly 110 amino acids long that absorb blue light. Since then, these domains have been identified in nearly 100 bacterial species."
These proteins are what give plants the ability to grow toward and follow the sun. Cool, but that's a far cry from an eye, dude. Certainly not a transition to an eye. It does nothing to do support the theory of evolution.
So we got a fully formed fish, with fleshy fins and internal bones.
"The Sarcopterygii or lobe-finned fish constitute a class or subclass of the bony fish. Osteichthyes, popularly referred to as the bony fish, is a diverse taxonomic group of fish that have skeletons primarily composed of bone tissue, as opposed to cartilage. The vast majority of fish are members of Osteichthyes, which is an extremely diverse and abundant group consisting of 45 orders, and over 435 families and 28,000 species."
How is this a transitional hand or the beginning of toes? Why don't we see any progression toward hands over the vast number of generations of this ancient fish?
So what you're saying is the earliest fossils show that both lizards and fish had small bones that could sense vibrations, some species had really tiny bones, coupled with holes. I would suspect that those species with the smallest bones (more sensitive to vibrations) coupled with the holes (more sound getting to the bones) would be the ones that avoided extinction the longest.
The article about the Archaeopteryx clearly states there were other creatures prior to, and contemporary with, Archaeopteryx that also had wings. The significance of Archaeopteryx is it being one of the oldest fossils with feathers, which is why is was, for a time, called the 'first bird'.
No. What you describe is a genetic dead end. Where's the mate?
These are all perfect examples of what I'm saying. Once you hold the view (an opinion or judgment colored by the feeling or bias of its holder) that evolution is true, it all seems to fit. Otherwise it's a whole bunch of people making shit up then shoehorning whatever they can find to support it.
No real facts. No real evidence. But convinced as hell they're onto something. So, they write proposals, get grants, publish articles, speak at conferences, all to hawk their latest 'discovery' to their peers, waiting to hawk their latest 'discovery'. Just a big, intellectual circle jerk of theory and conjecture. Spending gobs of money over 160 years of study with little to show for it.
Kinda like the Mueller investigation. When you're looking for evidence of something that didn't happen, how long should you be allowed to search? How much money should you be allowed to spend? How many lives should you be allowed to upend, before someone calls a stop to it? You can't find evidence for something that didn't happen. At what point do you simply admit you're wrong?
I get it. The theory of evolution is attractive to those trying to explain our existence in the absence of God and they want to believe it's true. Just as the theory of Russian collusion is attractive to those trying to explain the surprising loss of Hillary to Trump and they want to believe. They soothe the soul and help you make sense of the world around you. The longer you can keep the investigations going, the longer you can live in your chosen narrative. So, "They just need more time. They're getting closer. Shouldn't be long now."
DeletedUser26965
I don't know how evolution got thrown into this but I had to laugh at that, nice reversal. Clearly even a cursory look at humans and human history will reveal it's the beliefs in gods/supernatural that has been the most common/attractive explanation for the existence of anything, even existence itself, in the absence of any and all evidence and there's no question people have found such beliefs to be comforting. Regardless I'm pretty certain most believers accept the theory of evolution these days, well at least the educated ones, they just have trouble with the whole macro part of it.
Regardless, if anything, I would liken the Trump mass hysteria to religious fervor, like ISIS going loony because the kufar are in their holy lands lol.
DeletedUser35712
It's misleading to say that there are "fully formed species", as species evolve and their genetic makeup does not remain completely stable, and are subject to change, and it's fair to make the point that if one species has nearly all the similar features including bone and skeletal structure, and whatnot to another species, that you can say it could potentially be a transition species.
But the light sensitive protein is the start of the eye. The evolution of the eye starts with the bacteria with light sensitive proteins, and then some organisms evolved to have photoreceptor cells. Then these cells become clustered together. Some organisms started developing pits for these cell clusters, and those pits then developed a protective wall of transparent cells. Some of those organisms evolved to develop another protective wall to concentrate light into the photoreceptor cells, which we can say for sure is an eye.
These fish, unlike the modern ray-finned fish, are able to grab onto surfaces and walk on the sea floor. Maybe you could be semantic and call it a limb or appendage. However, these fish were the first to walk on the land for a little bit, and many of those fish populations evolved to become amphibians, and the amphibians evolved to have parts of their body that fit that definition of the hand.
You also in this point do not understand that evolution is not about every organism trying to reach a more advanced stage, but rather some populations evolve and some don't because they don't have the selective pressures.
Not necessarily. If their environment and selective pressures were not stressful enough to wipe out the populations that had jawbones that detected vibrations, they could survive.
It had the most defining characteristic of the bird, which was feathers, although it was more related to dinosaurs as it had teeth, long bony tail, similar skull and skeletal structure, and hyperextensible second toes.
There is no bias to the theory of evolution. It's just that it is the most satisfactory explanation based on a careful analysis of fossil data, carbon dating, genetics, etc. It is based on the work of many scientists peer-reviewing each other's work on academic journals to see if such results adhere to the strictest objectivity, and have robust procedures.
One popular misconception about evolution is the idea that it only applies to individuals within a species, but it's rather the genetic makeup of populations that is the driver behind the mechanism. When you have a population of organisms that cannot mate with the other populations, you have a new species. Obviously, mates can be found in the populations.
I don't believe in evolution, as my acknowledgement of the subject is based on the best scientific evidence out there, and my views can change if satisfactory contradictory evidence comes in the way. Belief implies an irrational support of an idea that is not based on objective evidence, and people usually never want to change their beliefs.
That is a misrepresentation of how science works. The loftiest goal for every scientist is to try to contradict the existing status quo of knowledge because that gets them a Nobel Prize and being written down in the history books as the most revolutionary man in the world. Alfred Wegener destroyed the geologists of the era with the idea of continental drift, and is forever remembered in every single textbook on geology. At the time, the geologists thought the Earth's mountains were formed by contractions from early Earth. Albert Einstein blew away the establishment ideas of Newtonian physics by realizing that gravity alters space-time. Science is not based on a belief and finding evidence for it. As Karl Popper would say, such a definition would fit into the idea of pseudoscience. Science is based on finding evidence through a specific procedure that eliminates as much possible, and then deriving a conclusion based on that given evidence.
To give a good scale, the Nixon investigation took 3 years for them to find stuff. It's only been two years, and yet the FBI, CIA are on their toes looking for evidence, even though it's the Republicans who are investigating this.
You know, there's really no evidence of Trump's campaign team with Russia, except for the
Flynn Thing
Manafort Thing
Tillerson Thing
Sessions Thing
Kushner Thing
Wray Thing
Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius "Russian Law Firm of the Year" Thing
Carter Page Thing
Roger Stone Thing
Felix Sater Thing
Boris Epshteyn Thing
Rosneft Thing
Gazprom Thing (see above)
Sergey Gorkov banker Thing
Azerbaijan Thing
"I Love Putin" Thing
Lavrov Thing
Sergey Kislyak Thing
Oval Office Thing
Gingrich Kislyak Phone Calls Thing
Russian Business Interest Thing
Emoluments Clause Thing
Alex Schnaider Thing
Hack of the DNC Thing
Guccifer 2.0 Thing
Mike Pence "I don't know anything" Thing
Russians Mysteriously Dying Thing
Trump's public request to Russia to hack Hillary's email Thing
Trump house sale for $100 million at the bottom of the housing bust to the Russian fertilizer king Thing
Russian fertilizer king's plane showing up in Concord, NC during Trump rally campaign Thing
Nunes sudden flight to the White House in the night Thing
Nunes personal investments in the Russian winery Thing
Cyprus bank Thing
Trump not Releasing his Tax Returns Thing
the Republican Party's rejection of an amendment to require Trump to show his taxes thing
Election Hacking Thing
GOP platform change to the Ukraine Thing
Steele Dossier Thing
Sally Yates Can't Testify Thing
Intelligence Community's Investigative Reports Thing
Trump reassurance that the Russian connection is all "fake news" Thing
Chaffetz not willing to start an Investigation Thing
Chaffetz suddenly deciding to go back to private life in the middle of an investigation Thing
Appointment of Pam Bondi who was bribed by Trump in the Trump University scandal appointed to head the investigation Thing The White House going into cover-up mode, refusing to turn over the documents related to the hiring and firing of Flynn Thing
Chaffetz and White House blaming the poor vetting of Flynn on Obama Thing
Poland and British intelligence gave information regarding the hacking back in 2015 to Paul Ryan and he didn't do anything Thing
Agent MI6 following the money thing
Trump team KNEW about Flynn's involvement but hired him anyway Thing
Let's Fire Comey Thing
Election night Russian trademark gifts Things
Russian diplomatic compound electronic equipment destruction Thing
let's give back the diplomatic compounds back to the Russians Thing
Let's Back Away From Cuba Thing
Donny Jr met with Russians Thing
Donny Jr emails details "Russian Government's support for Trump" Thing
Trump's secret second meeting with his boss Putin Thing
Yeah, Trump's campaign team didn't even interact with Russia at all. The Mueller Investigation is a fake, and some pizza store is smuggling some children for Hillary's pedophile ring.
In all seriousness, it would be awesome if this investigation could lead to the prosecution of Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein. Bernie and Jill have collaborated with the Russians to make leftism sound good. Especially Bernie.
Last edited by a moderator:
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
I never said those days were better, but I am giving more credit to parents and their ability to make appropriate choices for their children's future than you apparently do. In fact, I believe parents are far better suited to the task than some gov't bureaucrat sitting in the Dept. of Education building in DC who's never met my children.
Before the Industrial Revolution, local schools taught the basics of reading, writing, arithmetic and American history. Their goal was to create educated Americans, not to prepare them for the workforce or to teach other skills. Things like farming, ranching, cooperage, or any other trade or skill was taught by the parents, or the person you chose to apprentice under.
I'd love to watch you try to sell that bit of drivel to any parent spending thousands of dollars a year to send their children to the private schools of their choosing. Schools that teach topics that are important to the parent and will teach them through a world view the parent supports and agrees with. A school that prepares their children for the path they, the parents and the child, think is best. Wow, imagine if every parent had that choice?
I said nothing of the sort. I chose those 2 examples to show the breadth of gov't regulations in industries where is has no active role producing or delivering the product. I agree with the vast majority of Gov't regulation, including the quality standards on canned creamed corn.
My point is that the Gov't does not need to be involved in the production or delivery of educational services in order to ensure a safe and quality education. I will further argue, the profit motive, coupled with free and fair competition among schools and teachers, will do more to increase the quality and variety of schools and the education received, than any gov't program or regulation could ever do.
You're implying way too much into my words and you're getting it wrong. I don't do coded language. I mean what I say and I say what I mean. If I didn't explicitly write it, don't make shit up just to argue with me.
You're right. It is very un-nuanced. In my world view ones inability to accept, and/or deal with, objective reality is a sign of mental illness. Gender Identity Disorder is one in a long list of other identity disorders that fall under the broad category of Body Dysmorphia. Body Dysmorphia is any time your perception of your body does not line up with the objective reality of your body. It covers everything from the bodybuilder who, no matter how big he gets, can never see himself as anything other than the scrawny kid that started lifting years ago. It also includes the 5'-11", 17 year old Anorexic girl who at 95 pounds still thinks she's too fat to be seen in a bathing suit.
It would be cruel of me to agree with that 17 year old girl, struggling with anorexia, and support her decision to go on another diet to lose another 15 pounds in an attempt to finally feel good about herself. No, I'd get her the treatment she needs. From a competent mental health professional, not from Jenny Craig.
It would also be cruel of me to agree with that 17 year old boy struggling with GID and support his decision to undergo hormone treatments and permanent body disfigurement in an attempt to finally feel good about himself. No, I'd get him the treatment he needs. From a competent mental health professional, not with a plastic surgeon.
Whatever happened to "First do no harm?"
DeletedUser13838
That is not at all what I said. The surpreme court of the United States has sole responsibility for deciding what is and what is not constitutional. Not me and not you. Before making poorly informed ad hominem attacks in a debate forum, please read the US constitution, in particular Article III Sections 1 and 2 as well as the Suremacy Clause. The supreme court has not ruled that the department of labor et al is unconstitutional, thus it is constitutional (until the supreme court rules otherwise). The fact that you believe there is no constitutional authority is completely irrelevant.
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
This post starts with
How exactly is that NOT about your orange clown? If it ain't about the orange clown, why did you make the post? Manafort has some importance to the world outside of his brief tenure with the Rump roast campaign?
As an employer you are only responsible for the actions of your employees on the job. You are also responsible for your handling of the employee in the wake of any personal wrondings that may come to light.
Urban Meyer bears no responsibility for the fact that Zach Smith beat his wife. He is not being suspended 3 games because Zach Smith beat his wife. He being suspended 3 games for screwing the pooch in his handling of Zach Smith when it came to light Zach Smith was a wife beater. His handling of the aftermath is all he can be and should be held accountable for.
Cheeto didn't create the swamp, he inherited the swamp. The transition team had 6 weeks to put together the new administration and appoint over 2,000 positions, almost 1,400 of which also require Senate confirmation. 90% of the people were either already in gov't or had worked in previous administrations, Senate offices, etc. The swamp creatures are what's available on short notice so you do the best you can during the vetting process.
Businesses in California can no longer ask applicants if they’ve been convicted of a crime. Employers can no longer include the question, “Have you ever been convicted of a crime?” on their applications. Managers cannot ask about a person’s criminal background during the interview process and they cannot conduct a background check on the applicant until after they’ve offered a person the job.
Then, after they've settled into the job and you take stock of their performance and attitude and decide if they're a keeper. I suspect that may be a bit too rational, realistic and business 101 for you though, because well ... Trump and all.
Oh, and speaking of Senate confirmation, where the hell are they on this? Why are they not being held responsible for confirming these people? Sure, I can understand some Republicans giving them a pass, but what about the never-Trumpers or all the Democrats?
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
I'd say it's a stunning record of high standards and not suffering fools lightly. It's the sign of a man in charge.
There is a phrase in business that says, "Hire slowly, fire quickly." Trump did not have the luxury to hire slowly during the transition, so now he's churning his staff to remove those who should not have a seat on the Trump bus.
I also suspect there may have been a few long time gov't hacks from outside the Executive Branch he gave positions to in order to either remove them from their previous positions thereby removing potential opposition, or so he could eventually fire them to get them the hell out of Washington, politics, and government. Too 3D chess for you?
Last edited:
DeletedUser35712
So government factual research on optimal learning strategies < parent's feelings? I am not trying to invalidate the parents' choices, but rather suggest that the government needs to set certain standards for education to make sure the children integrate into the workforce.
That was a blunder, didn't mean to say that schools taught the majority of skills, but them knowing the 3 R's was good enough at the time.
Why are we talking about me as a parent when that was irrelevant to the conversation? How do you know I am even a parent in the first place? Why are you trying to insult me when I have responded to you in a more calmly manner and didn't use any insults unlike the previous posters?
Who cares about what some parent says about me saying that they don't know the future of the workforce?
I misinterpreted your statement and I apologize for that mistake.
That's not a good comparison. Obviously, the evidence in the scientific literature shows the best way that one treats anorexia is to get rid of the mindset through therapy. However, the evidence in the scientific literature for gender dysphoria shows that the best treatment is through counseling, and then going through surgical procedures if absolutely necessary:
https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria/what-is-gender-dysphoria
These guys on the treatment team are all qualified professionals with med degrees, not some quack plastic surgeons looking for a quick buck.
As for the bodybuilder example, not a good comparison to gender dysphoria.
I highly doubt that one could even maintain a free market in the education system without government interventions. Going from one school to another shopping for the best education for the best price like other services in a free market hypothetical situation is not going to work out perfectly, as the child will have to give up friendships and make tons of new ones, along with other complications with moving schools. I would argue that these complications as a whole, would simulate a rigid market force similar to the job market, where monopsonic and monopolistic forces will happen. I would love to see a free market for education, but it seems like one can infer from the economic literature on similar markets with similar constraints that such a plan would be incredibly difficult to implement.
Now on the topic of variety, it sounds like that's going to be the case. However, rising quality is going to be incredibly contentious of a point.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vouchers/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-sch...kees-experiment-suggests-an-answer-1517162799
https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/education/do-school-vouchers-work.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/05/12/520111511/the-promise-and-peril-of-school-vouchers
DeletedUser35712
But a lot of economists have left the White House because Trump has a silly worldview that trade wars are good and winnable.
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
Could it breed and produce live young who could breed and produce live young? Then yes, it was a fully formed species. Kinda how it works, dude.
You could say it could potentially be a transitional species, if you believe in evolution. You could even be willing to believe the theory that it's a transitional species without any proof. I'm not.
That is the prevailing theory. Now, show me the proof the theory is true. You can't. There is none.
That is the prevailing theory. Now, show me the proof the theory is true. You can't. There is none.
No, you don't understand that there has never been any evidence of this. Ever. There is zero evidence that selective pressures has ever resulted in any species evolving into any other species. We've not even been able to achieve it. Any breed of domesticated dog can still breed with any wolf and they will produce live young who can breed and produce live young. Chihuahuas, Pitbulls, Dachshunds, Great Danes, Shar Peis, breeds that bear no resemblance to each other, yet all the same species. Species clearly has nothing to do with a similarity of features.
Then where are the modern species with these traits? How does this is any way support the theory of evolution? If - conjecture, i.e, making shit up.
Okay, it was a weird creature. How does this prove evolution?
Yet none of it is more than an unproven theory, which at its core starts with the belief, there is no God.
That is the prevailing theory. Now, show me the proof the theory is true. You can't. There is none.
Be-lief - noun
- an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
- something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
synonyms: opinion, view, conviction, judgment, thinking, way of thinking, idea, impression, theory, conclusion, notion - a religious conviction.
synonyms: ideology, principle, ethic, tenet, canon; More
- something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
- trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
Love how you make scientific endeavor a completely self-centered field about Nobel Prizes and being written down in history books.
From LiveScience,
"The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge through observations and experiments to either support or disprove a specific theory. "Empirical" means "based on observation or experience," according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research."
Two great examples of the Scientific Method at work. They developed theories contrary to the status-quo, they tested their theories, and proved them. Now, they are seen a as scientific fact. Kudos to them.
Did you know that the Biblical account of Noah's flood is completely consistent with plate tectonics and the fossil record? In fact, catastrophic plate tectonics can easily explain the geologic mechanics behind a worldwide flood event and explains the existence of oceanic fossils in sedimentary rock as high as 15,000 feet on the Tibetan plain. * Free Tibet
It is the Mueller Investigation and one of the complaints of many Republicans is that the investigation team is stacked with Democrats and other known anti-Trump folks. With what's been coming out about the Justice Dept., I do believe the FBI and CIA are on their toes looking for evidence. Yet they have none. Can we shut this one down when it hits 3 years? 3 1/2 years? No, of course not, you'll need to keep beating this (drum?/dead horse?) right through the Trump re-election campaign.
There's no evidence of Trump's campaign team ever colluding with the Russians.
We know these guys had ties to Russia going into it. Hell, with Tillerson, his personal ties to Vladimir Putin is one of the reasons why he got the job. Head of Exxon-Mobil, has good relationships with virtually every world leader in every country Exxon-Mobil does business. The man looked great on paper, too bad he couldn't do the job.
I won't even comment on this list of nonsense. The worst thing there is the DT Jr. meeting with the Russians who lied their way in. By all accounts, as soon as the Trump team figured out they had no dirt on Hillary they were quickly and politely shown the door. No one's going to jail for that, maybe a fine, definitely not an impeachment.
What is with you about pizza and pedophelia? You should maybe talk to someone about that.
I really think you should remove Villager from your screen name. It kinda obscures the truth, don't you think?
ahsay
Active Member
And yet...you did comment. Wow...you lie like a true Trumpet.
ahsay
Active Member
A man in charge doesn't hire, criminals and incompetents. Yawn...this is way too easy. Can we get the A-team up in here? Dealing with a bench warming wannabee is boring me.
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
Let me revise the sentence you completely misunderstood.
"I never said those days were better, but I am giving more credit to parents and their ability to make appropriate choices for their children's future than the credit you apparently give them."
Figured I'd save you the trouble.
Yet the suicide rate doesn't change even after fully transitioning and neither does the mental illness. I'm sure all these people mean well and want to do good for the patient, but their chosen modality does not work. It does not help the patient.
The problem with all of these voucher systems is the parents have no financial skin in the game. I would design the program such that the taxes a parent pays each year for schools they must pay directly to their child's school. The rest (i.e. the vast majority for most) is paid by vouchers. It costs the parent the same, but it forces them to make that payment instead of having all of it handled behind the scenes out of sight, out of mind.
- Status