The Education Spending Lie.

The Education Spending Lie.

Posted in the Seabrook Forum

Elaine

Houston, TX

#1 Apr 16, 2014
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/129667-next-t...

There is no connection between more funding and better education results; but the stagnation in educational quality has come not only with more funding, but increased federal control over education.
Annuit Coeptis

United States

#2 Apr 16, 2014
There actually are studies that document a positive correlation between spending, up to a point, and educational / academic achievement. At a certain point, you start to get diminishing marginal returns, as you might expect, so unlimited funding isn't the answer.
Elaine

Houston, TX

#3 Apr 17, 2014
Can't argue with that. I can't argue with teachers wanting a raise either.

About 10 years ago they tore down my elementary school and replaced it with another building of the same size. The price tag was in the neighborhood $3.5 million. They claimed lower utilities and maintenance; that's fine.

Now it's rated 5 out of 10 on the GreatSchools scale. Nothing to crow about.
Yallarefunny

Houston, TX

#4 Apr 17, 2014
Your graph is a joke. You are telling me that there has not been a significant increase in the amount of students attending school yet our population among the young is growing? I am sorry this doesn't make any since. How can we have the size of schools increasing tremendously and not have a percentage increase in enrollment greater than 5% your graph shows? Clearly your graph is wrong
Elaine

Houston, TX

#5 Apr 17, 2014
Yallarefunny wrote:
Your graph is a joke. You are telling me that there has not been a significant increase in the amount of students attending school yet our population among the young is growing? I am sorry this doesn't make any since. How can we have the size of schools increasing tremendously and not have a percentage increase in enrollment greater than 5% your graph shows? Clearly your graph is wrong
Read the note at the bottom of the chart. The increase in cost is per student. The increase in enrollment is a % increase. You fail at reading graphs. Your lack of comprehension and spelling proves my point.
Yallarefunny

Pasadena, TX

#6 Apr 21, 2014
Elaine wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the note at the bottom of the chart. The increase in cost is per student. The increase in enrollment is a % increase. You fail at reading graphs. Your lack of comprehension and spelling proves my point.
It makes sense to comment on my spelling, which words did I spell wrong? I'll give a good long while to look for misspellings in my previous post. I can definitely read the graph; it is telling me that there has been almost a 180% increase in the cost per student since 1970, while there has been a mere 5% increase in enrollment number since 1970. That is what doesn't make any sense. Obviously, the cost per student has gone up as we must factor in the mere fact that prices have gone up like crazy. Sure they took into account inflation, but inflation is just a small factor in the total price increases. Just read a finance book if you don't understand how prices work. Most thins take inflation into account already. What doesn't make since is how are schools are larger, more students are attending and yet your graph is telling me this increase since 1970 is 5%. That my friend is bogus. Go ahead and check this one for misspellings. I'll even put one right here at THA END!!!!
Deadwood

United States

#7 Apr 21, 2014
Hey, dum$ a$$..Make sense is spelled sense...not since. Also it is total price increase not increases...and what are thins?
Elaine is correct...there is plenty of research out there to support her position...
Yallarefunny

Pasadena, TX

#8 Apr 21, 2014
Deadwood wrote:
Hey, dum$ a$$..Make sense is spelled sense...not since. Also it is total price increase not increases...and what are thins?
Elaine is correct...there is plenty of research out there to support her position...
So who is the dumb-ass? Those aren't misspellings, they are grammatical errors. I didn't spell anything wrong, but of course y'all wouldn't understand things like that.
Lomaxx

Houston, TX

#9 Apr 21, 2014
Yallarefunny:= goat = fubar

You've got more names than fatass~!

Now you can go make up another name, but don't strain yourself!

Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese~
Yallarefunny

Pasadena, TX

#10 Apr 21, 2014
I only post under this name, but thanks Lomaxx
DPTX

Deer Park, TX

#11 Apr 21, 2014
Yallarefunny wrote:
So who is the dumb-ass? Those aren't misspellings, they are grammatical errors. I didn't spell anything wrong, but of course y'all wouldn't understand things like that.
My vote for dumb-ass is cast for you.

You did quite well in illustrating the information provided in the article.

While you are correct that those were grammatical errors, they were also spelling errors, i.e. you misspelled the word for the meaning that was implied. So, in effect, you did not spell several words correctly. You can try to use semantics to justify your ignorance all you wish, but it still shows your illiteracy.

Aside from your literacy skills, it’s obvious that you also have difficulty in understanding math, i.e. percentages are comparisons, not the actual numbers from which they are derived.
No, such things do not necessarily take inflation into account, unless annotated – one should not make silly assumptions, as it only continues to illustrate your lack of a proper education. Of course, that’s one of the points of the article, isn’t it?

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#12 Apr 21, 2014
DPTX wrote:
My vote for dumb-ass is cast for you.

You did quite well in illustrating the information provided in the article.

While you are correct that those were grammatical errors, they were also spelling errors, i.e. you misspelled the word for the meaning that was implied. So, in effect, you did not spell several words correctly. You can try to use semantics to justify your ignorance all you wish, but it still shows your illiteracy.

Aside from your literacy skills, it’s obvious that you also have difficulty in understanding math, i.e. percentages are comparisons, not the actual numbers from which they are derived.
No, such things do not necessarily take inflation into account, unless annotated – one should not make silly assumptions, as it only continues to illustrate your lack of a proper education. Of course, that’s one of the points of the article, isn’t it?
Well, it's obvious he struck a nerve... somewhere.

Ha.
Yallarefunny

Pasadena, TX

#13 Apr 21, 2014
I apparently did Heavy, DPTX came out of nowhere to call me a dumb-ass and use i.e., a few times haha.

DPTX you clearly didn't read anything I posted, but oh well. I already commented on the fact that the graph took into account inflation, but apparently your reading skills are so great you missed that.

I really got to give you props Heavy for putting up with these idiots that post on here.

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#14 Apr 22, 2014
Yallarefunny wrote:
I apparently did Heavy, DPTX came out of nowhere to call me a dumb-ass and use i.e., a few times haha.

DPTX you clearly didn't read anything I posted, but oh well. I already commented on the fact that the graph took into account inflation, but apparently your reading skills are so great you missed that.

I really got to give you props Heavy for putting up with these idiots that post on here.
These idiots are my friends.

Some of them may pretend to dislike me... but you don't spend years talking to people you don't like when you don't have to.

For them to return day after day, month after month, year after year... they can say whatever they want to say... but I happen to know they like me too.
Elaine

Houston, TX

#15 Apr 22, 2014
Yallarefunny wrote:
I apparently did Heavy, DPTX came out of nowhere to call me a dumb-ass and use i.e., a few times haha.
DPTX you clearly didn't read anything I posted, but oh well. I already commented on the fact that the graph took into account inflation, but apparently your reading skills are so great you missed that.
I really got to give you props Heavy for putting up with these idiots that post on here.
This post would give an English teacher a heart attack. Here, I rewrote it for you:

Apparently, i did, Heavy. DPTX came out of nowhere to call me a dumbass and use "i.e." a few times. Ha-ha.
DPTX, you clearly didn't read anything I posted. But, oh well, I already commented on the fact that the graph took inflation into account. Apparently, your reading skills are so great you missed that.
I really have to give you props, Heavy, for putting up with these idiots that post here.

“Trying to bring some sanity ”

Since: Apr 14

La Porte

#16 Apr 22, 2014
Heavy Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
These idiots are my friends.
Some of them may pretend to dislike me... but you don't spend years talking to people you don't like when you don't have to.
For them to return day after day, month after month, year after year... they can say whatever they want to say... but I happen to know they like me too.
Valid point there. Can't argue against that at all

“Trying to bring some sanity ”

Since: Apr 14

La Porte

#17 Apr 22, 2014
Elaine wrote:
<quoted text>
This post would give an English teacher a heart attack. Here, I rewrote it for you:
Apparently, i did, Heavy. DPTX came out of nowhere to call me a dumbass and use "i.e." a few times. Ha-ha.
DPTX, you clearly didn't read anything I posted. But, oh well, I already commented on the fact that the graph took inflation into account. Apparently, your reading skills are so great you missed that.
I really have to give you props, Heavy, for putting up with these idiots that post here.
If you are going to fix my posts at the very least make sure you fix them to perfection. ALWAYS capitalize "I" Elaine. I guess you missed that one after the word "apparently". Good try though Elaine, I'll give you a gold star for effort.
Elaine

Houston, TX

#18 Apr 22, 2014
Yallarefunny wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are going to fix my posts at the very least make sure you fix them to perfection. ALWAYS capitalize "I" Elaine. I guess you missed that one after the word "apparently". Good try though Elaine, I'll give you a gold star for effort.
You got me. I learned something. I hope you did too.
fubar

Corona, CA

#19 Apr 22, 2014
Lomaxx wrote:
Yallarefunny:= goat = fubar
You've got more names than fatass~!
Now you can go make up another name, but don't strain yourself!
Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese~
Nice to see that Fed's right on one account,and that is that you are a completely unprofessional police officer. The fact that you continue to post lies on this forum proves a lack of character on your part. A good defense attorney could use this to prove that you are not a credible witness. You are giving good cops a bad name.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Seabrook Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Clinton bribed Lynch. 12 hr Defiant1 15
List your greatest LP football players and years (Sep '10) 16 hr Same Issues 84
I'm bored! Tell me a joke! (May '13) 22 hr flbadcatowner 22
The Donald's acceptance speech... Fri fubar 5
Little Truth About Breitbart Fri fubar 3
Gilley's Jul 18 Go Dogs 7
Election Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) Jun '16 robert 994

Seabrook Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Seabrook Mortgages