Thousands rally in Olympia against taxes (UPDATE: Pro-tax rally was bigger)
Hello all, my only post for the day, likely. I happen to be the only reporter working this Presidents Day holiday and I’ll be up covering the “Bite of Blaine” later (clearly this calls for aggressive watchdog reporting).
But for today, this. Whatcom County Republican Party Chairwoman Luanne Van Werven was kind enough to take a photo with her cell phone and send it along from the protest down in Olympia.
Photo courtesy Whatcom GOP's Luanne Van Werven
And here’s the story from Tacoma News Tribune colleague Jordan Schrader:
Thousands of taxpayers protested proposed tax hikes on the Legislative Building steps this morning, promising a reckoning in November if lawmakers and Gov. Chris Gregoire move ahead with the ideas.
“The powers that be have miscalculated the power of our numbers,” said Patrick Connor, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, which lobbies on behalf of small businesses, “and one by one, we will take back the people’s legislature.”
The crowd overflowed the steps. A Washington State Patrol trooper estimated it at 3,000, which sounds about right from my very rough headcount.
Read it all, right here.
*UPDATE* - As of 2:10 p.m. Schrader updates, saying the pro-tax rally was bigger:
A crowd of students, unionized workers and others protested state budget cuts today and made an unusual request - raise taxes.
The rally ran out of room on the Legislative Building steps and filled the area in front, outnumbering the opposing rally that preceded it today.
People waved “Yes on revenue” signs, and speakers used the r-word instead of the t-word when describing their solution to the state’s problems. “There’s less revenue at a time when people need more help,” Leno Rose-Avila, director of Social Justice Fund Northwest, told the crowd.
Full story, right here.
Here’s a photo via Fuse Washington’s Twitter feed of that rally.
Facebook Fan page
February 15th, 2010 at 12:03 PM
Have a great time at the bite (you lucky dog)!
February 15th, 2010 at 12:43 PM
I don’t get to eat any of it, Todd.
February 15th, 2010 at 1:17 PM
What was this protest really about?
It was a protest against the new rulling class, public servants who have become our masters;
Bigger government means more government employees. Those employees then become a permanent lobby for continual government growth. The nation may have reached critical mass; the number of government employees at every level may have gotten so high that it is politically impossible to roll back the bureaucracy, rein in the costs, and restore lost freedoms.
People who are supposed to serve the public have become a privileged elite that exploits political power for financial gain and special perks. Because of its political power, this interest group has rigged the game so there are few meaningful checks on its demands. Government employees now receive far higher pay, benefits, and pensions than the vast majority of Americans working in the private sector. Even when they are incompetent or abusive, they can be fired only after a long process and only for the most grievous offenses.
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/12/class-war
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 15th, 2010 at 1:32 PM
This rally is prior to anyone knowing which taxes are going to be raised, and where the spending cuts are going to fall.
Stay tuned.
February 15th, 2010 at 1:40 PM
Doug - are you saying it was a premature rally or that it’s only a small showing of what’s to come?
February 15th, 2010 at 2:35 PM
Greg, your comment was unapproved for the profanity.
February 15th, 2010 at 2:53 PM
Give me a break!
February 15th, 2010 at 3:03 PM
“The powers that be have miscalculated the power of our numbers,” -anti-tax rally
“The rally ran out of room on the Legislative Building steps and filled the area in front, outnumbering the opposing rally that preceded it today.” -pro-tax rally.
I guess numbers don’t matter. It’s the power of those smaller numbers that I guess can overwhelm the greater numbers?
February 15th, 2010 at 3:03 PM
Sam,
I am suggesting that when the individual impacts of tax increases and spending cuts become known to individuals impacted, a few of them may also join the protests.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:11 PM
See the sidebar for the rules, Greg.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:15 PM
How come you’re banned from the biting part of the Bite of Blaine?
Sounds like fun,
maybe I’ll see you there.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:29 PM
“I guess numbers don’t matter. It’s the power of those smaller numbers that I guess can overwhelm the greater numbers?”
The legislators are carefully counting heads and reading signs so they’ll know what to do about our budget shortfall.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:33 PM
Citizen - I’m not banned, but it would not be ethical for me to partake in the food when I’m there to cover the event.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:38 PM
Or drip something down your shirt.
February 15th, 2010 at 7:00 PM
WHAT?!?!?! You’re not a food critic too?
February 15th, 2010 at 8:03 PM
Just for the record, I am with AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Cut and paste lives!
February 15th, 2010 at 8:12 PM
I might be wrong, but, as I see it, the people at the “anti” rally were people who will pay the bill, and the people at the “Pro” rally were students and others who stand to receive charity from the state at the expense of the people at the other rally.
I think that, in a time of budget deficits, this is going to be a continuing theme, don’t you?
Thank God for balanced-budget requirements.
This year, I hope the democrats balance the budget with gimmicks, as they have in the recent past, since this is an election year.
February 15th, 2010 at 8:25 PM
So, Dave, let me get this straight. If you are a student or are on some level of assistance you don’t pay taxes? Gosh, I thought the sales tax was a regressive tax in that it hits the poor even harder than it hits the rich. I suggest that we all pay taxes and some of us can afford to pay more than others, and perhaps should…….
February 15th, 2010 at 8:33 PM
As a former student and definitely someone who just got off unemployment, let me tell you I DID pay taxes thankyouverymuch. It wasn’t pleasant but I consider it well worth it for a functional government. Now if I were to characterize the anti-tax group as a bunchy of cranky old people . . . that would get AFY winking at me or something.
February 15th, 2010 at 9:43 PM
Did he really say this?!
“This is incredible. There’s so many more of us than the other side,” said Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle. “I think they’re running out of teabags.”
As usual, interesting timing of today’s protest and whatever it is the TP’s got planned for next Sunday.
Don’t they usually show up here by now to rant and post angry mottoes before one of their events?
February 15th, 2010 at 10:04 PM
Davesix, the state has a sales tax. As a student, I can tell you I paid huge amounts of sales tax every quarter through textbook purchases either at the on-campus bookstore or through Amazon. I probably paid more sales tax as a student than I am currently as a graduate, with the exception of the year I bought my car.
So how do students not get taxed in a state with a sales tax?
Or is it one of those ‘the minority has more power than the majority’ things like Patrick Conner implies, and property taxpayers are more important than sales taxpayers, despite them being a 4:1 minority in state revenue compared to sales tax, and a minority of the tax base in terms of sheer numbers compared to sales taxpayers?
February 16th, 2010 at 12:26 AM
I’m confused Sam, I mean I know you can’t get a free bite, but how do you cover a food event without sampling the food at the event? That would be like John Stark going to a restaurant to write a review but not eating because he is going to write a review….Did I miss something? Maybe I’m just a little lagged by my return from Sin City to the real world… I’m also glad to see the money continues to trickle in. How about a big final push folks. I’ll bet each one of us could find one more person to kick in..what do you all think?
February 16th, 2010 at 2:25 AM
For those of us who are older, put ourselves through school and have paid the college expenses, health care expenses for ourselves and our children, and put away money for our retirements (and then lost 1/3 to 1/2 in market reaction to the government’s policy of bailouts and government programs to “transfer the wealth”), tax protesting may be new, but it is heartfelt.
Many middle class taxpayers who work in the private sector find it much harder to attend protests than do students and government workers and union workers (many of whom continue to get paid, whether they are on the job or at a protest). Additionally, I understand that the SEIU government workers union has actually paid people to protest. (I don’t know about this protest.)
And I also heard the administration say the other day that the new “jobs” (read stimulus) program would emphasize jobs in the government sector – when it is the private sector small businesses which are the most productive job creators! Since 2/3 of the original pork-filled stimulus bill has yet to be spent, sending out another such monstrosity, especially to fund government jobs, seems ludicrous to many middle class taxpayers working in the private sector. To add insult to injury, the average government wage is $71,000. The average private sector wage is $40,000.
It’s time to: use repaid TARP money to reduce the debt rather than be used as an administration slush fund; use the 2/3 balance remaining in the original stimulus bill to reduce the debt; stop spending, stop new government programs; and to go through existing government programs and agencies and remove as many as possible (why do we really need a department of energy, for example — what exactly do they do, why, and do we need as big an agency to accomplish the mission).
The place to start is with new, fiscally conservative and responsible (will do what they promise – character does count) representatives to Congress in November. Incumbents from both parties have behaved reprehensively. Time to put up candidates who are cognizant of the electorate’s desires who will follow through on those desires for fiscal responsibility and accountability from their representatives to Congress. (No, I am not advocating a third party — just better candidates)
February 16th, 2010 at 4:42 AM
Time for fact check on average difference between public and private sector pay. (US Dept of Commerce - Bureau of Labor statistics)
Washington State average wages (Evergreen Freedom Foundation study)
$44,210 average private sector wages
$50,625 average public sector wages
$6,415 annual difference between private and public sector employess in Washington State
* Stats include federal employees and military wages too
February 16th, 2010 at 5:44 AM
So lets have another sales tax increase elizabeth!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2011060257_edit16salestaxes.html
We could raise it some more, since it’s a scientific fact that gravity, can never apply to the public sector.
“There’s less revenue at a time when people need more help,” Leno Rose-Avila, director of Social Justice Fund Northwest, told the crowd.
Can we spend some of that mental health tax, to teach the mentally retarded, that what goes up must come down?
February 16th, 2010 at 6:00 AM
Of course then you can vote Peppermint Patty, and Maria Can’t find her well, since anything going throu the Senate, relating to the State, isn’t very important, when you famous for sitting as “least effective” in the Senate for decades!
The sales tax deduction was at the last minute left out of the $85 billion jobs bill released by the Senate Finance Committee Thursday, according to the Seattle Times.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:09 AM
Liz, those numbers would matter if they were sans military wages.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:09 AM
Sam-
Doesn’t surprise me that the “let’s raise taxes” (sorry - “revenue”) crowd was larger. I would be willing to bet that the majority of these folks rely on my tax dollars for their paycheck or some other government provided service.
I provide services as well - to my family. Food, shelter, health care benefits, transportation, etc. When times are hard, as they are now, it becomes more difficult for me to provide the same level of services that my family has become accustomed to. What am I to do? Were I a government entity, I guess I could force my employer, over all objections, to increase my wages so that I can continue to spend as I have in the past. Right. Like that’s going to happen. More realistic would be to inform those for whom I provide that for the time being, we are going to have to make some sacrifices and get by with a bit less that we are used to. Pretty simple - spend less.
It doesn’t take a genius to see that if any household or “normal” business were run in the same manner as government, they would be bankrupt in short order. Why is it that government is the only entity in the world that can increase their “wages” (revenue) at will? Are they not bound by the same general rules of basic economics as the rest of us? It sure doesn’t appear that way.
When federal, state, and local taxes are combined, my personal tax load is well into 5 figures and I work somewhere close to 1/3 of the year just to pay that tax burden before I ever put a single dollar in MY pocket (and let’s not forget about trying to put a few coins away for retirement). And yet somehow that’s not enough. People are fighting mad and I don’t blame them one little bit. Unfortunately, it has become crystal clear that our government is going to do what they want, when they want, regardless of the will of their constituents. They are going to dig ever deeper into our pockets not because they have to, but because they can.
So, since our government obviously isn’t listening to those for which they work, here is my personal plan to wave a single digit salute to Olympia:
1. Cut discretionary spending to an absolute minimum. Less sales tax paid.
2. Purchase my gas/cigarettes/liqour on any one of several indian reservations in the area. Less taxes paid.
3. Shop on the internet where possible to avoid local taxation.
4. Dispute my property tax assessment. Even if I only get it lowered by 2%, that’s 2% less I’m giving to the government.
In short, I am going to take every possible action to ensure that as little of my hard earned money as possible is put in the hands of government agencies that have proven time and again that they couldn’t balance a checkbook with a degree and a calculator.
Thanks for letting me rant.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:32 AM
Oh, The things you can learn from the board.
Protesters don’t work,
unless they’re the ones opposed to taxes.
Students don’t pay taxes,
they’re exempt!
The unemployed don’t pay taxes either,
they’re exempt!
Who pays taxes?
Trolls and the downtrodden put upon by the Liberal Elite Socialists.
This theme will be repeated everyday for those that haven’t absorbed it by now.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:51 AM
whatever? Or?
underwhelming? Isn’t that where the trolls live, citizen?
February 16th, 2010 at 7:58 AM
Could be,
it’s just as lonely a place as the overwhelming.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:08 AM
“Time makes more converts than reason.”
Trolls Vote too!
It’s pretty clear citizen, Is it the Check, or the Balance that confusing your party too?
“…In a sense we have come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check which has come back marked “insufficient funds.” But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this check — a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to open the doors of opportunity to all of God’s children. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood…”
February 16th, 2010 at 8:08 AM
So Interested, “lost 1/2 to 1/3 due to bailouts…”?? As I sat at a computer in Brindisi fall before last and checked my diminishing portfolio, the bailout was just being talked about; but I had already lost a huge chunk of change on Shrub’s watch and the country was truly headed for the tubes, and the free fall just kept on keepin’ on.
By the time Obama got a chance to staunch the flow, admittedly listening to Bush’s brain trusts, I was down a good 1/3 on paper and stuck with an inherited home in Vegas that went from a value of $600,000 down to a pitiful $200,000. In fact the biggest loss of wealth has been the housing market and that had only to do with Wall Street and the (can’t use the real descriptor here)insanity of Republican economic policy and deregulation over more than a decade.
Now my portfolio is surely edging back into old familiar and welcome territory and the house is creeping back as well. Though I was never so insanely ignorant to believe that one year of Obama could turn around 8 years of Bush or the last 3 Republican administrations out of 4, the reality is the reality, no matter how you try to obfuscate the obvious.
I also listen daily to a lot of Republican dunderheads drone on about how the debt has been grown, etc. But facts can be so inconvenient.
% federal spending–1962-2001
Administrations –Dem 6.96
Rep 7.57
% Growth on Non defense spending
Dem 8.34
Rep 10.08
Yearly deficit 1962-2001
Dem 36 bill
Rep 190 billion
National debt 62-2001
Dem 0.72 trillion in 20 years
Rep 3.8 trillion
Obama inherited a financial fecal storm and the abject ignorance that tries to blame he and the Dems for decades of being dragged into the toilet by Republican greed and lack of foresight is patently absurd, disingenuous and just plain essence of the bovine.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:13 AM
To be clear, I have No Party.
I float from factoid to factoid just like a good academic should.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:16 AM
Oh and Rocket, thanks for illustrating just how confused the public is about what the problem is and how we got here. First read my post above and then ponder just what a patriot you are by your knee jerk reactionary approach to taxation–basically do all you can to cut off your nose to spite your face…
February 16th, 2010 at 8:18 AM
LB you could at least credit the quotes you gather out of context…so that we might read the full text which usually shows you to be an obfuscator extraordinaire..
February 16th, 2010 at 8:28 AM
And Shaun?
Speaking of housing, you seem to be a short, in your mystic cords of memory?”
What Party, controlled the President, the House, and the Senate in 1993?
Oh, I forgot, about the major housing apprasial system, and financing “schrub” changes, from the Massachuettes Democrats?
But Barney always loved Freddy, more than Fanny!
February 16th, 2010 at 8:30 AM
More Whitewash Shaun?
A New York Times article published during the 1992 U.S. presidential campaign reported that Clinton and his wife had invested and lost money in the Whitewater development project.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:32 AM
Stan,
I think there is a valid point to controlling government costs, the comparitive compensation between the private sector and the public sector, and the issue of fair taxation between those that are net beneficiaries of tax revenues and those which are net payers of tax revenues.
It does not appear that many folks who have benefited from the governments largesse even want to have a civil conversation about fairness.
You are technically correct in that government employees do indeed pay taxes (Unless you are the Treasury Secretary), but this is simplistic. Governments cannot subsist simply by having their employees pay their taxes. Government could not exist without taxing the private sector. In fact as long as the private sector pays their taxes, government could exist even if their employees were exempt from paying taxes.
One does not have to look far to see, that we have a problem, and it will not get any better, not refusing to analyze the issue civilly and fairly.
Oregon took the route of placing a tax ballot before the public that basically said, were are going to only tax 10% of the population more. These types of taxes are easy to pass, because 90% of the taxpayers get a free ride.
While easy to raise taxes ONLY on the rich, the truth is the rich can simply move, and in the tow highest income tax states, California and New Jersey, the facts are indesputable now, they are moving, which now means these states are going to have to come back and tax the other 90%, and the rich 10% are now gone, gone, gone.
Witness Greece, where the public unions took over the political process an simply voted themselves more and more money and more jobs.
10% of labor force worked for government, 50% of the GDP was government spending, and the average annual bribes to government officials to simply do their job is $2,500 a year.
I do not wish to suggest that we are Greece, but Greece did not happen all at once but was a gradual increase in government employee unions involvement in the political process, which enabled them to control government spending upon them.
At no time did the government unions in Greece ever admit that they had it better than the private workers paying the bulk of the taxes.
But they did, and it bankrupted their country.
There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that broadly speaking we have a problem. I think it is better to analyze whether we have similar problems, rather than simply hollaring that it is not true, when there is plenty of evidence that suggests otherwise.
Do we have a problem locally, the truth is I don’t know, but I am not afraid of investigating the issue with an open mind. We have a crisis of trust, that is making governing increasingly difficult, and honest inspection of all government spending would go a long was towards rebuilding government trust.
Expecting government to grade it’s own performance is too much to ask, but that does not mean we should ignore the issue.
Greece refused to even honestly look at their government employee spending which caused their country to go into bankruptcy and a deep recession. Refusing to address this issue also caused 30% of their economy to go underground and stop paying taxes.
Is it an unfair perception that government employees are treated better than the other 90% of workers in the private sector; I don’t know. I do believe that ignoring the perception has far worse consequences than ignoring the issue, or making government workers compensation packages sancrosact from debate of analysis.
The sister newspaper to this one, the Anchorage Daily News, ran an excellent Op-Ed article this morning and it can be found at the link below.
Link: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/148107
We should not fear asking important and fair questions.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:42 AM
And Shaun?
Your Vegas Property, was never worth 600K, you just thought it was.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/business/19appraise.html?pagewanted=2
February 16th, 2010 at 9:04 AM
Shaun-
Your original post had very little to do with the blog topic, but we can let that slide.
Since when does handing over 1/3 of your income in the form of taxes qualify you as a patriot?
The problem really is quite simple. The government (in this case I’ll refer specifically to state government, since that is what we are talking about) spends more than they bring in. It is entirely too easy for them make up the difference by bleeding the taxpayer for more money, instead of “living within their means”.
Do you realize that there are darn near 200 different agencies/commissions/organizations that fall under the umbrella of Washington state government? Seems there should be plenty of places where the budget can be trimmed up.
But if not, that’s OK. The patriots will be more than happy write a check.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:07 AM
Well LB that was the appraisal right before the down turn, and since it isn’t a loss until you cash in, (in housing as well as the markets) you are correct about that. We just weren’t ready to act immediately and then the bottom fell out. But identical 4 bed, 3 baths, with pool next to Spanish Trails were going for that at the time.
As for who had control in 1993 you are correct and by the end of Clinton’s term the deficit was a surplus. But all the idiots in the loyal opposition could talk about was cigars and trysts.
But I do appreciate it when I can fathom you…
February 16th, 2010 at 9:14 AM
Rocket 1, sorry to confuse you there but I was just following the thread inspired by the topic so I don’t need you letting anything slide.
1/3 is a chunk, and I’m ready to give up the Bush cuts to help the return to sanity as well. The leftovers are more than I ever imagined having access to. Just me, but I have benefited greatly by my participation in this U.S, economy and don’t myopically believe it was not at the expense of those lower on the wrung or that I don’t owe a debt to this land of ours for the income which came as a result of living here.
We do need a state income tax.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:18 AM
Speaking of contributions–so Diablo, Interested, Someguy and Rocket, have you guys ponied up for the Friendly Visitors Fund or are you leaving it up to taxpayers and the rest of us?
February 16th, 2010 at 9:24 AM
Greece isn’t in bankruptcy.
The argument is whether to default on loans made by Germany especially,
since The Greeks seem to feel that the banks made a ton of money on their grief.
The Euro is at risk of a half-dozen EU players pulling away and will need to be propped up.
Iceland is facing the same vote,
they aren’t bankrupt either.
More words!
Write more words!
That’ll cement your argument!
February 16th, 2010 at 9:32 AM
Put your tinted 3-d glasses back on folks, Citizen is about to devastate with inconvenient facts and analysis.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:40 AM
The secret to any good 3-D experience is to choose your image carefully.
This tax-no tax garbage surfaces everyday in some form or another.
So adding action to the cause is the least I can do.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:43 AM
And Iceland’s goin back fishin, for tuition!
February 16th, 2010 at 9:54 AM
LB, LB, LB, they are the Tea Dunky thing party not the ..you know…Have you been asleep for the last few weeks or what…
February 16th, 2010 at 10:00 AM
This is hard for me, being mathematically challenged.
$2,500,000,000 billions is our stated deficit.
The governor has made some cuts reportedly $45,000,000 millions .
That leaves $2,550,000,000 billions of deficit.
Her scissors need sharpening.
An old saw, “if at first you don’t succeed try, try, try again. That maxim worked very well for Gregoire’s election to office, so it should work just as well for her to prune the deficit
February 16th, 2010 at 10:28 AM
By your math, cuts increase the deficit?
February 16th, 2010 at 10:28 AM
Thanks AFY!, for the link to the Reason article!
WOW, talk about UNSUSTAINABLE…
Has anyone else here read it?
This quote was particularly disturbing, though the entire article should disturb us all:
“Michael Hodges’ invaluable Grandfather Economic Report uses the Bureau of Labor Statistics to chart the growth in state and local government employees since 1946. Their number has increased from 3.3 million then to 19.8 million today—a 492 percent increase as the country’s population increased by 115 percent. Since 1999 the number of state and local government employees has increased by 13 percent, compared to a 9 percent increase in the population.”
Any wonder why we are broke and the people are angry?
From the richest country on earth to the BIGGEST DEBTOR in history in my short lifetime. Looks like Capt. Hazelwood is at the helm!
February 16th, 2010 at 11:04 AM
Read it in full and was sick.
No question at all why folks are broke and PO’ed.
Anyone think it’s going to get any better in the near future? Not likely.
As far as making a contribution, see me in May or so when I’m done paying my taxes and actually have a few bucks of my own.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:09 AM
We’re still the richest country onceproud, but thanks to Bush and the now Party of No which was the Party of Yes to every hair brained to downright evil fluid dream to cross the mind of Dick Cheney ,we are up to our keisters to the Chi Coms. But our assets are intact which is why they loan to us. By the By it was a Republican administration that started us down the path to borrowing from China.
As we have come to expect more from our tax dollars, ergo our government, of course it has grown as well.
Also Hodges is a worshipper of Friedman of the Chicago School of Economics which is just more of the Austrian School. Can you say Ron Paulian economics and the Tea Party? Just more people who are clueless citing people who are clueless who are pretending to have found the long hidden cliff notes of a Constitution and history they slept through most of in school.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:12 AM
1946 sure was an ideal time…
No interstate system to maintain, No DOT, No FAA
Social security wasn’t yet a teenager, and Medicare didn’t exist at all, tough cookies to senior citizens
No department of Health, and the FDA was less than 10 years old.
Only 48 states in the U.S.
Minimum wage of $4.43 per hour in 2010 dollars
Racial segregation, housing discrimination, gender inequality,
only 50% of the population had completed high school, compared to 85% today.
Even fewer ever attended college then, while today at any time nearly 5% of our total population is attending college.
Nuclear fallout was blanketing everything downwind of Nevada, and anyone could dump toxic waste anywhere, as there were no pollution restrictions to increase costs by requiring safe disposal.
Yup, it was a great time, 1946, because all of that useless stuff didn’t exist and didn’t cost us money or require public employees to operate. I’d rather go back in time to where people paid next to nothing and got nothing back, instead of today where people pay and get a lot of services and protections in return.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:13 AM
Well Rocket it is a personal choice to donate. So May when?
Besides granny who needs a visit will probably be dead by then, but hey it isn’t your granny.
Also if this can make a Tea Partier sick, I’ve got to get some copies to hand out all over town. I love to see you guys wretch. Me, I didn’t even work up a burp. It’s as if you guys just sailed in on a boat, dumped your tea over the side and discovered the world.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Doug Karlberg’s excellent post included a description of the history of Greece’s financial problem which squares exactly with an email from a man from Greece to Charles Payne. Charles spoke about the Greek situation on his radio program over the weekend, and the following is a section from the email to him:
“Greece has more public servants than all of France! All parents in Greece want their children to get an education and get them into a public sector job.
The amount of strikes in Greece is incredible. The banks and public servants work until early afternoon. Blanks close at 1:30 daily.
The world has changed and Greeks still believe that they all deserve a BMW and a month of every year at the summer house.
Haris - Greece”
Before we get to this standard of entitlement and inability to extricate ourselves from a financial debacle, it is time to face reality, cut spending, eliminate unnecessary programs and balance the budget.
By the way Shaun — the deficit reduction accomplished by the end of the Clinton administration was because of the cooperation between Clinton and the 1994 turnover from Democrat to Republican majorities in both houses of Congress for the balance of his time in office. Although I don’t believe that they had the bullet proof super majority enjoyed recently by the Democrats.
I’m thinking that perhaps many people do not realize, or perhaps want to admit, that it is Congress that actually controls the purse strings. The president proposes but it is Congress that disposes (or is supposed to — the administration seems to have appropriated the TARP repayment funds that were supposed to be used to reduce the debt).
A reminder — the Democrats took over the majority in Congress in both houses in 2006 and then a bullet proof supermajority last year — beginning two years prior to the end of the Bush administration. Plenty of overspending blame to spread around to both parties.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:15 AM
Bikerbob, I salute you. You or Todd want to share any research back channels?
February 16th, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama!
All we had to do was make banking boring — and all the finger pointing would go away!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/opinion/01krugman.html
February 16th, 2010 at 11:35 AM
For those who may be interested, here is an excellent article about the cause of the banking crisis:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo125.html
The Government-Created Subprime Mortgage Meltdown
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
February 16th, 2010 at 11:37 AM
Shaun- wikipedia. But use its cited sources instead of what is actually written; wikipedia is written using reliable information sources, but is not a reliable source by itself. Google is also good for searching for a topic from a specific reliable source/website, i.e. “site:usgs.com volcanic emissions” results in hits about volcanic emissions from only the USGS site, which is an authority on such things as opposed to, say, blog hits that would result without a site-specific search that aren’t reliable and have no sources.
Also, wolfram alpha is a very powerful online calculator that can also pull up statistics and use them in calculation. It’s great at doing currency conversions through time (i.e., “0.40 1946 dollars” gives back $4.40 2010 dollars)
February 16th, 2010 at 11:55 AM
“A reminder — the Democrats took over the majority in Congress in both houses in 2006 and then a bullet proof supermajority last year”
Huh?
You must not be talking about the herd of kittens that are Democrats.
Or the mechanism called a veto that requires another 67 to overrun.
I’ll give ya a hint,
The letter D in front of any fine politician means anything but determined,
direct or demanding.
As far as bullets go,
the Senate is full of Red Ryders pretending to be cannon.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:59 AM
Wow quoting an E-mail from abroad!
The last time anyone pulled that trick it was a lady from Denmark grousing about Socialized Medicine.
Well I just got an e-mail from my friend in Germany and that Fine Fat Frau says,
Nien,
we’ll not foreclose on the Greeks under any circumstances.
Proof enough?
February 16th, 2010 at 12:12 PM
Dude, DiLorenzo is a blatant Austrian school economist. It has no credibility. It’s like whenever Pat Robertson attributes natural disasters to divine punishments; just as religion is not seen as an accurate explanation of natural disasters, Austrian economics is not regarded as an accurate explanation for the economy.
It’s sad that he’s an economics professor, since he can’t understand what the CRA does. Quick lesson: Before the CRA, it was common practice to give loans out based upon “redlining”, which looked at the area a loan applicant lived in instead of their financial situation. It was common practice to deny loans to people based upon the neighborhood they lived in, even if they had perfect finances. Obviously just because someone lives in a poor neighborhood doesn’t mean they have bad credit. Being poor doesn’t even mean they have bad credit. Heck, micro-loans are big business overseas and make profitable loans to people in abject poverty that don’t even have running water and live in a shanty. CRA forced banks to make loans to low-to-moderate income people by a flat quota. Obviously not the best system (flat quota is based upon what, and that never changes?), but banks could still deny people loans if they had bad credit. They could still deny people loans if their payments were going to be some huge percentage of their income. There wasn’t anything in the CRA that forced banks to make sub-prime loans to anyone, much less poor people.
Besides, the vast majority of foreclosures and defaults were done by developers flipping moderate-to-high end homes, with the expected sale of the home upon construction being the sole method to pay back the construction. Inner City America didn’t bring down the financial system, the magnitude of loans simply isn’t large enough to have such an impact. Do you really think foreclosures in the lettered streets of Bellingham would bring the entire real estate system in Bellingham to its knees? An entire block goes for what some of the individual condos on boulevard are trying to go for. Then why would you think that about the U.S. as a whole? In reality, foreclosures and defaults in Inner City America was an effect of the financial meltdown, not the cause.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:16 PM
So you folks simply do not understand economics, and are blissful in your ignorance is that it?
You cannot see how unsustainable, having the government consume such a HUGE portion of the GDP is for future generations- YOUR CHILDREN?
Some folks seem to think that because ‘W’ irresponsibly increased spending that justifies what is going on today. If over 60% of Americans get more in ‘benefits’ from government than they pay in taxes, that means the rest of us are footing the bill for EVERYTHING else. How could that be kosher? Bush wasn’t a ‘Conservative’, and no ‘Conservative’ I know supports what he did with the budgets, the economy, and the bailouts. DEBT IS EVIL, no matter who is generating it. Debt means you cannot control your impulses!
I know personally that I have succeeded at great personal sacrifice. Chose to study, instead of partying, to save rather than consume, and spend vacation time at home, instead of blowing money traveling all over the world. To drive older cars, and NEVER bought a new one even though I could afford to pay CASH for any model I desired. Why should I pay for folks who choose to live beyond their means and gambled their money instead of saving or investing it? I ALREADY pay far more than my fair share, and over a dozen times more than what our social contract, the Constitution, demands of me.
Here is a short story by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., that perfectly describes where we are heading:
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html
Why is it you cannot be honest with yourselves and understand that using the government to steal from me to pay for things you want but don’t want to WORK FOR isn’t right? Look in the mirror! Look up the term: Moral Hazard.
What is going to happen is that folks with choices will simply drop out of the system, or leave the country which will leave us a country of dependent folks that have been conditioned to hold out their hands for ‘assistance’ , and none will be forthcoming because the PRODUCERS have fled the system.
Don’t kid yourself about the ’special status’ of the USA. China, India, and Russia are gunning for our share of the markets and soon we will not be able to do anything to stop them.
I feel sorry for folks who to look to others to pay the bill they themselves have generated.
Good-luck to you ALL- you will need it.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:17 PM
bikerbob -I did tell you I am mathematically challenged - try this and if I’m still off please put me out of my misery….corrected to $2,455,000,000
February 16th, 2010 at 12:46 PM
Onceproud, try as you might to wish it, Our position in the world is secure and will be a lot more secure when we stop declaring war on every criminal to commit a heinous act by attacking an entire country unrelated to the scumbags we’re after.
I do get economics that’s why I reject yours.
All capitalism is theft. You enjoy the good life because you’re standing on someone else’s back.
Everybody works, except the real criminals of the world and everyone.
Your “fair share” has always been leveraged by others. Unless you’re a billionaire, your lifetime tax contribution won’t even pay for one mile of freeway.
And that is just the short version of why I find your point of view so objectionable.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:46 PM
You haven’t paid your fair share, Onceproud. Sales tax revenues for WA are $15.4 billion (http://www.ofm.wa.gov/reports/budgetprocess.pdf). Sales tax rate that goes to the state is 6.5%. $15.4/6.5%= $237 billion. population of washington = 6.55 million, so one would have to spend over $36,000 in non-food, non-rent, non-mortgage, non-insurance items every year to pay a ‘fair share’.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:48 PM
I guess I didn’t finish that ” Everybody works….” sentence. Disregard and /or discuss amongst yourselves.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:01 PM
“Having the government consume such a HUGE portion of the GDP ”
The government doesn’t consume,
it spreads.
Government spending stimulates economic activity.
You act like tax money disappears down a dark hole.
Well some does,
but most debt gets bought up by American investors and most spending increases the well being of those same folks.
Even 7% of GDP isn’t worrisome in the grand scheme of things.
You may want to examine how we use taxes before you rail against them.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:27 PM
Also, Onceproud, you made those life choices. They were right for you. Bravo, but You sound as if you regret them.
But you couldn’t have lived such a frugal life without a whole lot of people farther down the food chain paying for your fair share.
Folks who chose another path may or may not have done it all on credit.
But the credit scams and the housing finance scams are what got us here and that didn’t come from people who believe in helping all of us along and creating less of a gap between the filthy rich and the destitute. You know the dreaded socialists who believe in a social safety net and a little slack for the elderly and/or in need of health care.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:30 PM
Some more pictures of both rallies:
http://blog.thenewstribune.com/photo/2010/02/15/pushback-2010-anti-tax-rally-in-olympia/
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 1:34 PM
Some video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M7Tu6I3n8A
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 1:40 PM
These figures do not reflect pay increases that were given to federal employees in January 2009 and January 2010.
The upper end of approximately $670 million that taxpayers may have paid to D.C.-area workers when they missed work due to snow last week is based on the daily aggregate cost of all benefits and wages paid to the more than 340,000 federal employees who work in the Washington metropolitan area, according to the Office of Personnel Management.
If only the average annual salary of $79,197 is used to make the estimate, taxpayers paid federal workers about $445 million not to work when the government declared snow closures…
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/61406
And you wonder why people protest higher taxes!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 1:56 PM
BikerBob, I’m thinking your math might be a little off.
The 15.4 billion you quoted as revenue for state sales tax was for TWO years, or about 7.7 billion per anum. The population numbers are pretty close (I came up with 6.7 million).
After doing the math, the individual sales tax load for each Washington resident is ~$1150/yr. Or, about $17,675 in taxable spending annually ($1472/mo.). You could purchase a new car and cover over two years worth of “fair share” just on that one purchase.
Now, I can’t speak for Onceproud, but I’m damn certain that I’ve paid more than my share for some time now.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:59 PM
It is important that everyone understands who the takers (feeding at the public trough) are, go to the link and you can see the long list:
Each of these groups employs full-time individuals who are now dedicated to convincing legislators to reach into your pocket to pay for their priorities. They also have an army of paid lobbyists and employees (some of them receiving tax dollars) that can show up at legislative hearings to push for higher taxes.
http://www.libertylive.org/blog_main/post.php?post_id=1821
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 2:18 PM
Ah yes, thanks for that correction, it is for two years, so I was off by a factor of 2.
$17,675 of taxable spending per year is still a tall order, though. It’s on par with the pre-tax income of a minimum wage earner in Washington. Most people’s major expenses (insurance, shelter, food, etc.) do not have a sales tax, so it’s pretty much car purchases that cause significant yearly contributions to sales tax revenue.
Do people who claim to pay their fair share buy a new car every two years? What things does one purchase other than a new car that amounts to $17,675 in taxable spending on an annual basis in order to reach the average tax burden?
February 16th, 2010 at 2:25 PM
If anyone thinks this current tax increase is a solution you better think again:
Two of the retirement plans the state administers are deemed “at risk.” They are plans that cover older teachers and public employees (Teachers’ Retirement System Plan 1 and Public Employees Retirement Systems Plan 1). They are funded at 77 percent and 72 percent, respectively. Other state plans, including those that cover people working now, are funded at above 100 percent but the Office of the State Actuary warns the bad economy will put pressure on those plans, too…..
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/414516_pensions22.html
Right now we are trying to overcome a 2.8 billion dollar hole but the pensions hole may be twice that. The tax increases will never end unless we change our ways!
If it is anything like the public employee’s pension funds in New Jersey where there one can pay out 100k during their working lifetime retire and reap millions in retirement benefits, the question remains is the millions free, the answer of course is no, so who has to pay it, the future tax payers, it ain’t right and it ain’t fair unless we think being a public employee also means you get to win the lottery when you retire!
The answer is not more taxes, it is cutting cost, the biggest cost of government is public employees wages and benefits, did you know that some public employees even got raises last year!
Here the deal, no new taxes, no service cuts but lets just cut public employees pay/benefits across the board by 10% (BTW Madam E with benefits public employee’s are making at least 30 to 40% more than the private sector on the average so a 10% cut would still leave them with over 20 to 30% more), by cutting the public employees pay/benefit by 10% would not only get rid of the 2.8 billion dollar hole we currently have but also allow for a substantial tax rebate which would create jobs and thus create tax revenue and not fire one government employee!
And BTW a 10% pay/benefit cut for public employee would only amount to about the cost of a couple cups of coffee (maybe a latte!) a day for each employee!!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 2:46 PM
One state retiree, 49 years old, paid, over the course of his entire career, a total of $124,000 towards his retirement pension and health benefits. What will we pay him? $3.3 million in pension payments over his life and nearly $500,000 for health care benefits — a total of $3.8m on a $120,000 investment. Is that fair?
A retired teacher paid $62,000 towards her pension and nothing, yes nothing, for full family medical, dental and vision coverage over her entire career. What will we pay her? $1.4 million in pension benefits and another $215,000 in health care benefit premiums over her lifetime. Is it “fair” for all of us and our children to have to pay for this excess?
http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/public/20100211.html
Does anyone not think things like this are also happening in our state?
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 2:57 PM
“And BTW a 10% pay/benefit cut for public employee would only amount to about the cost of a couple cups of coffee (maybe a latte!) a day for each employee!!”
It is also equivalent to over 5 weeks of pay loss. How bout you don’t get paid for one month of the year and get told it’s “only a couple cups of coffee!”, huh? That’s management material right there.
February 16th, 2010 at 3:02 PM
I see, scared to look deep into the mirror; suit yourself.
I notice none of the naysayers had anything to say about our social contract. When we are taxed to pay for things that are not provided for in the Constitution, we are being violated, and right now at LEAST 90% of what the folks in DC ’spend’ our collective taxes and borrowed funds on are not to be found in that document. If you feel like you are getting a good deal YOU PROBABLY ARE, but folks like me are NOT.
No complaints about you folks who consume and buy new cars, as I believe in freedom and making your own choices about what is to be done with the fruits of your labor. I do have a problem with giving taxpayer money to ‘money experts’ BANKERS who took huge risks with the comfort of know they would have the ultimate golden parachute- the faith and credit of the US of A.
Actually, I have no regrets at all, because I am one of the ones who, doesn’t get any support from the collective, other than using the public rights of way in the conveyances of the day, who is about to remove themselves from the feeding system. I have been fortunate enough to use my brains instead of my body to earn my way through life, while making my own schedule so it has been painless enough on that end; my choices in youth rewarded by being able to retire in my 40’s; and I have enough-STUFF. More than I need, but I will share the rest with my offspring so they don’t end-up wards of the state, if they decide to remain in this country. My capital is going elsewhere, and will employ people who don’t live in this country. It’s not happening tomorrow, but probably this year. I like the sunshine and the place I choose will have plenty of it.
We are about at the stage when the doctor looks down at his desk and says, “Uncle Sam, I hate to tell you this, but you only have a short time to put your affairs in order.”
I encourage all of you who think the rest of us should pay your way through life to apply for, and collect EVER SINGLE public benefit that you possibly can so you can hasten the suffering and make Uncle Sam’s demise much shorter and less painful; you will never understand freedom, so you might as well be comfortable in your slavery.
Cheers
February 16th, 2010 at 3:18 PM
AFY, you’re just arguing for what I’m wanting, more equity, less gaps….
February 16th, 2010 at 3:22 PM
Hey bikerbob, thats a little political tax talkin lingo, which means it is about as true as when they say it about tax increases!
Alright, but on the average (after the cut) you still be getting more than 20 to 30% of what the average private sector employee gets, don’t ya know!
Did you hear about the Native American tea party?
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/mt-indian-tribe-holds-tea-party-rally
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 3:32 PM
It’s amazing what government workers are made to do!
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/02/monkey_spankings_at_the_morgue.php
AFY!!thehelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 4:05 PM
They don’t eat their salary,
they spend it in our local economy.
You act as if State workers abscond to Vegas with their earnings.
You or I take our money and circulate it in the local economy,
well, so do they.
Jeez. get a grip willya.
Per capita state spending is down,
not up.
Hey, I’ll let you in on another secret,
Union Workers?
They do the same thing.
February 16th, 2010 at 4:37 PM
Wow, all those ProudAmerican words and they boil down to one weak phrase - G’Bye suckers, I got mine!
February 16th, 2010 at 4:39 PM
My man I’s ain’t against union per say, having been a member of too different ones (trades). But there does seem to be a disconnect between the leadership and the membership just as there seems to be a similar breakdown between our political leaders from both parties mind you and the voters today!
I am for balance, if one side takes too much it does impair the other, we are in a recession, unemployment in the private sector is double digit, that isn’t the case for government, while the private businesses cut, government has been getting bigger(I think if you check it out you will find that the State of Washington overall spent more last year than the one before, and the same for the year before that and the same for the year before that, etc and most of it is for wages/benefits), while private sector gets layoffs the public gets raises, I’s always like it when they say they are freezing spending but the cost actually go up, it is amazing ain’t it!
I don’t believe those in the private sector should be treated better than those in the public nor the other way around, the public sector in this state with benefits, average over 70k, while the private average is towards 40k, I don’t think that is right, even if it was the other way, I wouldn’t think it was right.
And this thing about pensions, a lot of private sector people will say what pensions? when it comes to them? While the public sector will get back many times over what they put into theirs! And the ones who are saying what pensions, are the ones paying for those of the public sector in reality!
IMHO, we have gotten to a point in this country if the benefit/pay reflects anything it reflects a point of view by some people in the public sector that they are better than the average private sector employee.
And that is a thought that has no foundation of truth.
I have always been an advocate that public/private pay/benefits should be in line with each other and it is very skewed today as it use to be the other way before, methinks! It does need to be realigned and continuing to do exactly what we have been doing will only make it worst.
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 6:17 PM
We do agree that public-private salaries and pensions and perks should be equalized.
I think Public Service should be more than a career to become rich on the taxpayer dime and the Service part should be emphasized.
But public spending - however skewed towards the Haves - eventually makes the economy hum.
Money doesn’t really make a person feel superior,
does it?
Maybe it does.
I don’t think any public sector employee should be paid above the median income of the neighborhood they serve.
Leather chair or not.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:35 PM
The Constitution is a guide not a finished product and denying 200years of history to angrily declare I don’t love it and I’m leaving it, sort of just wasted my day…..But OP lots of luck with your new world vision and recipe for lifelong frustration…….Me thinks you’ve been binging on Tea
February 16th, 2010 at 8:43 PM
I think OPA is operating under the serious moral hazard of grossly underestimating what he’s received from the social contract in America. School. An economic system that enabled him to prosper. Roads. Food distribution systems. Police/fire protection. Drinking water. Sewer systems. You didn’t have to worry about peasants with pitchforks taking your property away. You have property rights and have acquired wealth because we’re part of a society with a government that protects them. Your view might be different if you grew up in Somalia.
Despite what you seem to imagine, you’re not alone here in working, saving, creating jobs, making conservative financial choices. Some of us seem a little more aware of the gifts we’ve been given.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:38 PM
Frankly, I am far more concerned about Shaun’s comment that the constitution is a “guide”.
The difference in our nation/democratic republic from those governed by kings, tyrants, dictators, military juntas, etc., is that our freedoms were set up and guaranteed by a constitution which set up the framework of our governing system and its primary laws, and also such laws passed by Congress which are constitutional, as determined by our constitutionally directed supreme court, if there is a difference of opinion.
Our constitution and our laws are not “guides”. I am hoping that he simply misspoke….
February 17th, 2010 at 6:33 AM
Interested Says:
February 16th, 2010 at 10:38 PM
Frankly, I am far more concerned about Shaun’s comment that the constitution is a “guide”.
–
EXACTLY, and I don’t think he misspoke. Our government has been allowed to break the social contract because so many people simply don’t understand that in this country the government isn’t allowed to take from one to give to another.
Things are not even bad YET.
The irony is that the person you folks elected President is ’supposed’ to be a Constitutional Scholar; that just proves how poor a Harvard education is, OUR that this guy feels he can violate it at will.
Sure glad I voted didn’t vote for ‘W’, and I did vote for Ron Paul, and cannot be blamed for this mess.
If lifelong frustration is expecting a Constitutionally bound government, then it seems staying in this country wouldn’t help either by the attitudes expressed here and in dozens of other papers around the country.
It seems most of you have been conditioned to accept your bonds of slavery, and are angered when others point them out to you.
At this point the only way to ‘win’ is to no longer ‘play’…
–
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
February 17th, 2010 at 7:03 AM
So what’s the difference between a ‘guide’ and a ‘framework’?
February 17th, 2010 at 7:07 AM
The truth is, you aren’t free.
Oh sure you aren’t anybody’s slave.
But we all play by rules and restrictions that allow freedom only within a framework or guide for behavior.
No one tells you what you must do,
but we all tell you what you must not do.
And paying taxes is one of those.
February 17th, 2010 at 8:05 AM
The Constitution is amendable, therefore it is not a finished product, rather a framework.
The Constitution, written in the 18th century, was interpreted to support all sorts of travesties over the years. Slavery, the internment of American citizens because they were of Japanese descent, withholding the right to vote from women and citizens old enough to die for their country but not vote, withholding basic civil rights of minorities and still today it is used to keep civil rights from those of different and naturally occurring sexual persuasion.
Misunderstanding your country’s history and legal system may allow some to rail about living under it’s framework, but it doesn’t make them correct or their anger justified.
Many of the rights some feel came with the Constitution were actually amendments to the original document or not there at all. The 1st amendment separated Church from State, among other things. The 10th which is the Bill of Rights so many like to site was not part of the original document and many of the rights some seem to think it allowed it did not. The 14th gave some but not all of the Bill of Rights to states, The 15th described above, that allowed minorities to vote, to name a few.
No where in the Constitution does it say it is a free country. The right to privacy is not in the Constitution but the 9th amendment addresses it in some contexts. The freedom of choice and religion is not absolute.
Freedom of speech is not absolute, it took amendments to better define that no federal and then later state can impede freedom of speech, it can be and is suppressed in many other arenas. Like on this blog for example.
A lot of people like to lump the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address together, but it only makes them appear uneducated.
Even the so called right to “No Taxation Without Representation” is not in the Constitution why the and was not addressed until the 23rd amendment, yet even today that is not absolute. Ask DC citizens about that.
It is the fact that it is only a framework that confuses so many and amuses those who have taken the time to review the documents history.
And nowhere in the Constitution is found the concept of God, the Creator or Lord. the so-called freedom of religion is not absolute either.
All this why we do have Constitutional scholars and those scholars can arrive at and argue differing positions and still be partially right each and every one.
To assert it is a hard and fast document and that any one point of view is the final word is absurd.
February 17th, 2010 at 8:09 AM
Interested, I did not misspeak, but you did. See my post above or just Google What is Not in the Constitution for a big eye opener sure to rock your misinformed world.
February 17th, 2010 at 9:51 AM
There is nothing I love more than an honest debate about our constitution, the more I study it and the founding fathers that create it, the more I admire it & them.
I would like to share a good article I came across in the LA times a while back about the bill of rights.
“We may disagree, but these and many other issues that we care about — that define our lives — are debated and contested based on those words written so long ago.
Given the nature of modern political discourse, too often driven by partisanship, power-seeking and punditry, one wonders if we would be able to craft a constitution or a bill of rights today.
Indeed, can we even manage to address the controversial issues that do face us? How many Madisons are out there willing to compromise or reverse positions for the good of the country?”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-estrincroddy15-2009dec15,0,6328460.story
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 17th, 2010 at 9:59 AM
We’re still crafting it AFY,… that is the beauty of it. We have an acquiesce me thinks? A good friendly Aaarf! to you.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:06 AM
I should ad I share your frustration but not your cynicism. I think it’s the same as it ever was. And things eventually get sorted out and people who once operated on bad facts and myth can learn and change. That’s why there is still a small dregs of a hope for the Tea Partiers.
We just like to be self centered and think everything is about 2010.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:12 AM
To much sciense!
Example: the expenditure method:
GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports), or
In the name “Gross Domestic Product,”
It really get’s gross if you ever passed a math class!
February 17th, 2010 at 10:19 AM
Who was that Woodrow Wilson?
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html
February 17th, 2010 at 10:24 AM
There were two great debates at the Constitutional Convention, and when reading this document, the debates give the words of the Constitution meaning.
The first debate was whether to have a limited central government, or not. The choice was made(barely) to have central government, but in this choice the compromise would have never ever been reached with anything more than a “limited” central government.
I suspect if the Founding Father were alive today, that they would be stunned to see 300,000 in Washington DC alone going to work in the Federal government, with out changing their words in the Constitution.
The second debate was over citizens rights. Leaving the convention, power and government had been neatly divided up amongst the participant, but the citizens got nothing.
Two people refused to sign the Constitution because of no rights granted to citizens.
After the politicians went home for a little Town Hall action and their newly proposed Constitution, its was clear that without a clear Bill of (Citizens) Rights that civil war was a serious possibility.
Remember that the common citizen had been fighting and dying to bring this country to life and the politicians had gone into a hall in Philadelphia and forgotten this.
A deal was cut, and the Bill of Rights was added immediately after the Constitution came into being.
What most people revere in our Constitution, is actually the Bill of Rights, and not the original Constitution.
The risks to the citizens of letting to mall a group of people have too much power, was immediately evident, when the Constitution came out of the Convention without a citizens Bill of Rights.
Periodically in times of great crisis, States have called a Constitutional Convention, rather than rish armed revolution.
We are clearly in a dangerous time with so much to be upset with our government for, that I think we should call for a Constitutional Convention, and renew our vows.
Citizens only; No political parties and no special interests, and no politicians.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:27 AM
So the right to assemble stops at the Capitol steps.
And people redressing their government are only to speak individually.
And the nature of each citizen is to eschew their own ’special interest’.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Doug’s correct!
Just look at education spending, and how uneducated we are!
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/downchart_gs.php?year=1910_2015&view=1&expand=20&units=b&fy=fy11&chart=20-total&bar=1&stack=1&size=m&title=Education Spending Chart&state=US&color=c&local=s
February 17th, 2010 at 10:40 AM
Yes citizen?
“Individual, NO 1.”
“Let facts be submitted to a candid world…” Thomas Jefferson
Washington State Constitution
PREAMBLE
We, the people of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this constitution.
ARTICLE I
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1 POLITICAL POWER. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:55 AM
The only problem is everyone writes in their own rights as if they were in the Bill of Rights. And clearly the Bill of Rights does not grant all that some believe. It is a living document and that is it’s beauty..
February 17th, 2010 at 11:26 AM
I’m afraid that I don’t respond well to bullying such as “sure to rock your misinformed world”.
Assertiveness and aggressivness are two different things. I have noticed that aggressive persons, when others disagree with their opinions, often begin to label and call names to try to silence those others. I have also only recently become aware of political progressives and have noticed that they also often use this tactic to silence opposition. I am assertive and not easily silenced. I try very hard not to bully.
I did google your “What is Not in the Constitution”. No new information for me there. I don’t belong in your box.
I continue to stand by my assertion that the Constitution is not a “guide”. Guides are recommendations. The constitution is not a recommendation. I am not saying that it cannot be amended — as it has been over the years. Each amendment must be ratified by 3/4 of the states in order to become a part of the Constitution. But the original Constitution remains intact, with the amendments as additions. And the entire document, with its amendments, remains the supreme law of this land. All other laws enacted by Congress are held to its standard.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:32 AM
Taxpayer dependents wanting to increase their payroll and benefits outnumber the private sector workers who more likely than not took time off from their jobs to attend. Is anyone surprised?
The dependents want more, the providers are exhausted from paying more.
We need less government, not more.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Guides are the means to an end.
Finding big fish,
learning moral imperatives and getting home in one piece in your car are all the purview of guides.
Building a government isn’t a single-document exercise - and it was never meant to be.
Guess what?
Black people are really 100% human,
you need not own property to vote
and woman aren’t actually chattel.
Too bad our guide never told us any of that.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:54 AM
Shaun - You are wrong about virtual schools.
Online public schools can be part of the solution for our nation’s education system. Half of all high school students are expected to get some or all their education online by 2019 according to a 2008 Harvard Professor’s study. Online public schools across the country are growing at a phenomenal rate, and are staffed with certified teachers, many with masters degrees. Online schools save money overall because the student/teacher ratios can be much higher. Online K-12 schools are fully funded by the states than have them but require no funding from local property taxes, so the property tax money received by local districts can be used to support fewer students at the traditional schools. Like spokes on a wheel, use the “brick and mortar schools” as instructional remote sites to the online public school. A full curriculum often is much more extensive than can be offered by traditional schools because it serves a much wider student population. Because a high percentage of online students perform all their work at home, less transportation and building infrastructure is needed to be funded. For those who want or need the traditional education, with direct teacher face-time and delivered at a set pace, they would get it, For students who just need a computer terminal for one or more courses and can’t stay at home, and perhaps want a teacher for occasional support, they would get it. While some traditionalists would lament the loss of some social interaction, and the elimination of snow days, there are some major benefits to online schools. Online students work at their optimum pace, are not subjected to bullying, sexual attacks, and negative peer pressure. Online schools can reduce drug and alcohol use, and dropout rates, and make it easier for those who have dropped out, to return. Online schools allow for student mobility during family trips, illnesses, and emergencies thus helping them keep up to speed. Online schools also are a partial solution to violent urban schools. The curriculum works well for advanced students as well as those needing special assistance, and can be designed to allow advanced students to take more classes. Online schools also can incorporate some of the very advanced course material from schools such as MIT’s Open Courseware high school program. With online schools, there are fewer distractions, and much of the course material is interactive. Grading and feedback in some courses often are instantaneous. Online chat sessions and webcast lectures help students connect with the teacher and other students. Online public school may not be for everyone, but it more closely allows “funding the student” than what currently is institutionalized. Many teachers also benefit because many can administer their classes from home. This certainly is a paradigm shift in how to look at education. Once a quality online school system is in place, rural areas with can combine their natural environment with top notch educational opportunities. I’m experienced with online high school because my boys attend Washington Virtual Academy. We’ve done homeschooling and traditional schools, and an online school works best for us.
Here are some resources if you want background.
Florida Tax Watch Report - http://www.inacol.org/resources/docs/FLVS_Final_Final_Report(10-15-07).pdf
INACOL National Primer for K-12 Online Learning - http://www.inacol.org/resources/docs/national_report.pdf
Keeping Pace: A Review of Policy and Practice in K12 Online Learning - http://www.kpk12.com/
20/20 Costs and Funding of Virtual Schools - http://www.inacol.org/resources/docs/Costs&Funding.pdf http://www.inacol.org/resources/docs/Costs&Funding.pdf
February 17th, 2010 at 11:58 AM
Interested, All right, maybe that was harsh. How would you prefer I say I believe you are misinformed? I tend to employ a lot of humor sarcastically, that’s just me an acquired taste. You can counsel me.
How do you account for Supreme Court decisions that go against your understanding of the Constitution?
Guide, Schmide, let’s change that to framework. It is a framework that includes ways and reasoning to change and morph and reflect the reality of modern life and mores. It’s the basic rules of the game, but far from the last word.
I think some read too much into it.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:59 AM
Shaun - You are wrong about virtual schools.
Online public schools can be part of the solution for our nation’s education system. Half of all high school students are expected to get some or all their education online by 2019 according to a 2008 Harvard Professor’s study. Online public schools across the country are growing at a phenomenal rate, and are staffed with certified teachers, many with masters degrees. Online schools save money overall because the student/teacher ratios can be much higher. Online K-12 schools are fully funded by the states than have them but require no funding from local property taxes, so the property tax money received by local districts can be used to support fewer students at the traditional schools. Like spokes on a wheel, use the “brick and mortar schools” as instructional remote sites to the online public school. A full curriculum often is much more extensive than can be offered by traditional schools because it serves a much wider student population. Because a high percentage of online students perform all their work at home, less transportation and building infrastructure is needed to be funded. For those who want or need the traditional education, with direct teacher face-time and delivered at a set pace, they would get it, For students who just need a computer terminal for one or more courses and can’t stay at home, and perhaps want a teacher for occasional support, they would get it. While some traditionalists would lament the loss of some social interaction, and the elimination of snow days, there are some major benefits to online schools. Online students work at their optimum pace, are not subjected to bullying, sexual attacks, and negative peer pressure. Online schools can reduce drug and alcohol use, and dropout rates, and make it easier for those who have dropped out, to return. Online schools allow for student mobility during family trips, illnesses, and emergencies thus helping them keep up to speed. Online schools also are a partial solution to violent urban schools. The curriculum works well for advanced students as well as those needing special assistance, and can be designed to allow advanced students to take more classes. Online schools also can incorporate some of the very advanced course material from schools such as MIT’s Open Courseware high school program. With online schools, there are fewer distractions, and much of the course material is interactive. Grading and feedback in some courses often are instantaneous. Online chat sessions and webcast lectures help students connect with the teacher and other students. Online public school may not be for everyone, but it more closely allows “funding the student” than what currently is institutionalized. Many teachers also benefit because many can administer their classes from home. This certainly is a paradigm shift in how to look at education. Once a quality online school system is in place, rural areas with can combine their natural environment with top notch educational opportunities. I’m experienced with online high school because my boys attend Washington Virtual Academy. We’ve done homeschooling and traditional schools, and an online school works best for us.
Here are some resources if you want background.
Florida Tax Watch Report - http://www. inacol.org/resources/docs/FLVS_Final_Final_Report(10-15-07).pdf
INACOL National Primer for K-12 Online Learning - http://www. inacol.org/resources/docs/national_report.pdf
Keeping Pace: A Review of Policy and Practice in K12 Online Learning - www .kpk12.com
20/20 Costs and Funding of Virtual Schools - http://www. inacol.org/resources/docs/Costs&Funding.pdf
February 17th, 2010 at 12:11 PM
So Randy, are you going to be able to live off your kids in the end?
Less government is not going to be your friend then.
But some people face that void now, ……especially now.
Has anyone ever thought about how self centered the anti-tax movement is at this time when the taxes paid are rolled back taxes and so many are out of work and can’t wait for small business to invest and expand.
If the roads aren’t being built neither is much of anything else. A lot of people rely on the trades.
Since all that you have provided to the government and it’s dependents in your life wouldn’t pay for a quarter mile of Free way, or if it did you are a lucky multi millionaire, then where is the big gripe and the exhausted worker?
And why aren’t you directing your anger at the exploitation you suffer as a worker rather than going after all that stands between you and oblivion if you lose your job or are injured and can’t work.
You paint with a really broad brush and sloppily in my humble opinion.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Brave New World Randy, just can’t help but believe some humanity will be lost just because I have seen how much has already been lost since everyone went on-line.
But that’s not my worry, my grand children will deal with that potato.
February 17th, 2010 at 1:12 PM
Mr. Shaun,
the last time I had a submission held up for moderation,
I simply cut and pasted it into another post and corrected the offending word.
Saves the time,
keeps the idea
and modifies the objection.
February 17th, 2010 at 1:55 PM
Thanks for the links Liberty Bell!
The one on education truly illustrates how there is no connection between spending and educating our young people.
The Government spending Vs GDP is simply horrifying and shows an absolutely UNSUSTAINABLE trend.
Unfortunately I don’t think Americans will wake-up before the point when we can no longer dig our way our of this mess. The US will default on our debt, the boomers won’t get the benefits they were promised, and a crashed dollar will wipe-out the life’s saving of most Americans.
Not a pretty future for the USA, OR our children, but some folks just REFUSE to see the forest for the trees…
http://www.mises.org
A comprehensive education on economics awaits you there, and it is all ABSOLUTELY FREE.
February 17th, 2010 at 2:21 PM
Randy, virtual school may work in places like the Australian Outback, Montana’s north-central region, or Canada’s Northwest Territories/Nunavut, because there is a comparative advantage to internet classrooms vs. brick and mortar school because the school’s attendance area is measured in thousands of square miles, and where the logistics aren’t flat-out impossible, they are wholly impractical. That’s an extreme rural environment.
At the other extreme is the dense urban environment. Individual schools may cover an area measured in city blocks instead of equivalents to New England states. There students get out of the house, physically interact with hundreds of people per day, and develop something commonly referred to as a life. That is a comparative advantage over internet classes that shouldn’t be overlooked, and a reason why it not only shouldn’t be singularly preferred, but why it would be best to develop it side-by-side with physical classrooms so the weaknesses of each are covered by the strengths of the other.
February 17th, 2010 at 3:23 PM
Ciz, I don’t know what happened to the post, but I responded that I think it went deeper, though I can’t figure out how, I would object if I could, but them’s the table breaks I guess.
February 17th, 2010 at 4:17 PM
Conversely bikerbob, on-line schools could allow students to complete their coursework more quickly, take more in-depth coursework beyond their ‘grade-level’, and they would have time to interact with other children, whom their parents approve of. They won’t have to ask permission to use the bathroom either;-)
I know a child who completed a whole year of High School in less than three months at the Alger Learning Center.
Schools now seem a lot like prisons where our children are forced to associate with children who are disruptive or violent, and can’t or won’t behave in a socially acceptable manner. Imagine being able to keep your child away from all the bad influences that they have a public schools. No drug dealers, no bullies, no PTA, or school bureaucracy to deal with, sounds like the best of both worlds.
Why not give ALL parents the choice of accessing Internet school under their supervision, OR public schools? It could save the state a lot of money it doesn’t seem to have…
February 17th, 2010 at 4:37 PM
“Imagine being able to keep your child away from all the bad influences…”
Um, I’d actually *like* my children to be exposed to everything, bad and good. I had an interesting schooling: middle school in a small, homogeneous South Dakota town with ~100 kids in my class, followed by freshman year at a high school in inner-city Tacoma with more people in my grade alone than there were students in my previous school district. I’d rather any progeny of mine go through Tacoma and get exposed to the diverse people (and yes, even the problems) in the world instead of being isolated in a homogeneous environment, particularly one that their parents exclusively try to create for them.
“Why not give ALL parents the choice of accessing Internet school under their supervision, OR public schools?”
It’s called home school.
February 17th, 2010 at 4:45 PM
What are they going to do when they finally have to go out among the people, bad or otherwise.
Do you think homeschooling is going to give them a firm basis in reality upon which to base decisions?
February 17th, 2010 at 5:33 PM
You have different aspirations for your children than I have for mine, as I would never put mine into harm’s way intentionally. Children thrive in a loving & secure environment, not in institutions.
I am not comfortable traveling through parts of Tacoma myself in a locked car, so I would never let a child attend school there at for any reason Do you take your boat out half a mile and throw your kids in the lake to teach them to swim too?
I was talking about a complimentary system to our current public school structure. I am aware of home-school and if I had another child they would never set food in a public school because I value their health, intellectual development, and their physical safety far to much to risk putting them in with the general population of inmates.
February 17th, 2010 at 5:40 PM
Home schooling,
like a religious ‘education’,
should be reserved only for those over 18 so they can make the choice to be socially restricted on their own.
And not be subjected to the fear and ignorance of their parents.
February 17th, 2010 at 6:04 PM
Wow. OPA must have barbed wire around his survivalist compound.
You know what you’re talking about is exactly ‘home schooling’ - no standards, internet based, kids can stay locked up in their house where they’re ’safe’, just like those indoor only cats. Never associating with people who think differently…
February 17th, 2010 at 6:56 PM
Parents don’t put their children in harm’s way by sending them to public school. Besides, Children usually find their own paths into harm’s way.
Which do you think is going to be better equipped to survive, a child who has lived in a bubble or one who has had interactions with a variety of people before?
When one turned the sailboat over hot dogging, I made him right it himself and paddle it home even though I could have towed him….it’s a family legend told from differing points of view. He got a tow anyway. He also never hotdogged with any boat but his own again. And he learned first hand how to right a sailboat. He was already a good swimmer, but he picked that up on his own.
Viewing children as inmates or less than human and fretting over your children mixing with diversity is so 1960’s, been there done that.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:05 PM
I don’ think of them as inmates, the public schools treat them that way. Institutions dehumanize you to make you more easily managed. Can’t have 500 INDIVIDUALS in the same place, it’s just too hard to manage. Can’t you remember when you were in public school? Haven’t you seen the stories about pre-teens being arrested for some idiotic school policy, or suspended for touching each other? Didn’t you know that schools often recommend children be put on Ritalin, simply for being normal children? Read some of the work of John Taylor Gatto, to understand MY perspective; and I’m not a church-goer either.
Sounds like you think homeschooling is something akin to living in the David Keresh Compound at Waco. A child that isn’t institutionalized to acquire their education, isn’t sequestered in the home! Most I personally know personally acquire it while sailing all over the world with there parents. At every stop there are new people to interact with, new geography to navigate, different types of food, and new sets of rules to acknowledge and follow. Along they way there are many opportunities to learn about all the many stars one can see with no city lights to overpower their faint luminance. Seeing far more types of critters in their natural habitat than most people accumulate in their entire lives. They are exposed to more real-life joys and challenges than most folks could imagine. Learning self-reliance and the importance of doing things the correct and safest way, and even how to navigate across oceans. They get to watch adults problem-solve in real-time and even sometimes assist in the actual correction. I could give countless other examples….
I wonder why home-schooled youngsters consistently perform better academically than those in public schools? I cannot ever remember hearing about a home-schooled criminal in the news, can you?
I do know that while I attended public school here in B’ham, there was NOTHING I didn’t see in the school besides prostitution. Guns, knives, drunk teachers, violent teachers, fights, bullying, extortion, drugs, theft, drugs, drugs, sexual harassment, and even rape were know by me personally to have happened on the school grounds of Whatcom Middle, or Sehome High schools. That was back when most students actually had some fear of repercussions for bad behavior so as to stay disciplined, and respect their teachers.
If you knew personally that that stuff went on in the public schools here when you were in school, and would choose to put your child into that environment, I would question your good judgment.
I do think I understand where all your assumptions come from though, you probably watch TV. I don’t; I READ literally thousands of pages every month it makes you process information differently than passively watching a talking head on TV, often in a semi-hypnotic state.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:35 PM
Here is something to remember.
The home schooled student referred to in the link below murdered his home schooled girlfriend’s parents.
http://www.cumberlink.com/articles/2005/11/20/news/news03.txt
February 17th, 2010 at 11:43 PM
“Guns, knives, drunk teachers, violent teachers, fights, bullying, extortion, drugs, theft, drugs, drugs, sexual harassment, and even rape were know by me personally to have happened on the school grounds of Whatcom Middle, or Sehome High schools… If you knew personally that that stuff went on in the public schools here when you were in school, and would choose to put your child into that environment, I would question your good judgment.”
I would question your good judgment in ‘knowing’ that kind of stuff was going on and not taking a stand against it. You personally knew about rape taking place in a middle school? C’mon. The main point of putting my hypothetical children through a school like Tacoma would be to learn what to take a stand up against, and what stuff is the small stuff in the real world. Seems ‘you personally’ let a lot by.
February 18th, 2010 at 5:35 AM
My God, where exactly some people went to school at “IS” questionable?
Is that kind of like the pedophiles, with that Teachers Union Membership?
It, never happens, is just part of that sex ed class!
http://www.krem.com/home/Gym-teacher-arrested-for-sex-with-teenager-83476922.html
February 18th, 2010 at 5:42 AM
Just join the WEA, and ask for more money, it’s always the place where the pedophiles practice.
And you don’t need another Study!
VOTE WEA, Just look where Letourneau’s daddy worked, a State Legislature!
Letourneau first met Vili Fualaau when he was a student in her second grade class at Shorewood Elementary School in Burien, Washington.[ She became his teacher again when he was in the sixth grade, after she had become a teacher of a combined fifth and sixth grade class that he happened to be in. She began a relationship when Vili was 12 years old.She became pregnant by him in the same grade, when Vili was 13 and she was 35. Her husband became aware of the situation when he read their letters to each other in February 1997 and revealed it to family members,. His brother then reported the relationship to local child protection services.
February 18th, 2010 at 5:55 AM
Columbia Elementary, where your Police Chief, and Mayor are left behind, send more money?
“The last that was seen of Mikey was me seeing his back walking into that yard,” Rood said. “And me thinking “Oh crap! I should call him.’”
Police divulged few other key details of their investigation, but Carroll and Mayor Mark Asmundson called a news conference to assure their town that the crime was an isolated event, and that there is no danger that a random killer is stalking the streets.
“This community is a safe community,” Carroll said.
February 18th, 2010 at 7:29 AM
Bad stuff happens everywhere…Home, Private School anywhere. That doesn’t mean we shutter our kids and hide in fear.
February 18th, 2010 at 7:38 AM
Would you suggest these other measures to keep children safe:
Keep your children out of church so they won’t be molested
Avoid institutions of higher learning or they’ll be gunned down.
Don’t leave children alone with their parents if the parent had a relationship that ended badly.
No carnival rides for anyone under the age of 21.
Remove the child from the home of any adult who consumes alcoholic beverages.
We already have enough silliness to go around without adding new levels
February 18th, 2010 at 8:57 AM
OnceProud - so just to clarify, you think I’ve been dehumanized because I attended public school?
February 18th, 2010 at 9:08 AM
I’s has the evidence;
I’s when and graduated from public schools, as many of me new found friends will testfy herein what a disaster I’s has turned out to be!
Case close!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
February 18th, 2010 at 9:23 AM
I don’t know AFY, you seem like a specially educated kind of guy to me.
February 18th, 2010 at 2:47 PM
Sam, how could I possibly comment on your personal school experiences? If you read closely, I pointed out how schools dehumanize students for convenience. Student numbers, sorting by size and last names, group showers, making everyone do the same things regardless if it happens to be whats best for the individual student, hair cut rules, dress codes, you get the idea; I consider all those things dehumanizing. Many of the same things were done to the Jews in the Holocaust.
The fact that the inmates generally run the institution is a big part of it, as I was bullied CONSTANTLY until I after reached puberty. Teachers cannot watch everyone all the time. On the bright side, it made me so tough that classmates who had 50lbs on me avoided picking on me the rest of my school career because they knew I would cause them pain or injury if attacked, and warned others of the high price for messing with me as well;-)
BTW bikerbob, one of the FIRST things you learn when you are institutionalized is not to RAT on the other inmates as it is dangerous to your health… The ‘Hoods’ as they were called then, had their own kind of ‘justice’ and it was always violent. Back then kids were never tried as adults no matter what offense they committed.
BTW, anyone catch today’s headline:Lower Merion School District sued for cyber spying on students
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/84715297.html?cmpid=15585797
More dehumanizing behavior by public schools.
February 18th, 2010 at 3:58 PM
OP, I’m sorry you had it so hard, truly… your tale is a reminder that it is not a perfect system and sometimes it breaks down. No wonder you feel so strongly.
February 18th, 2010 at 4:19 PM
Ya, that AFY’s a real Wise Guy!
February 18th, 2010 at 5:02 PM
Thanks Shaun!
It’s all water under the bridge as they say, and I am much stronger for getting through it all and it is probably why I have been so successful in the ‘real’ world.
I had my 30th HS reunion last year and saw one of the guys who terrorized me back then and the first thing he said is one of the reasons he showed up was to apologize to me, he was sorry and ashamed. He was one of the one’s I couldn’t take on. He hit me so hard once I didn’t even THINK of hitting him back. I told him all was forgiven long ago, but I appreciated his coming to apologize.
Maybe my experience is why I am such a stickler for the rules.
February 18th, 2010 at 6:51 PM
You do realize though that your experience is not the norm, right?
February 19th, 2010 at 7:45 AM
I realy don’t think I can agree with that Shaun, after all Bellingham is an ‘All American City’. If you talked to current students and got honest replies I bet most of the stuff I saw and experienced still goes on; it’s built into the structure
Anytime you have an institution that, upon seeing it has failed to achieve it’s purpose-educating young people- but only sees asking for more money as the solution, you have a broken structure.
Have you read any of he writings of, John Taylor Gatto?
This one is short, but provides a nice summary:
http://www.educationrevolution.org/iquit.html
March 11th, 2010 at 12:38 PM
LB - you know, I’m quite sure, that a certain word you used in a post here is not allowed. Thus, your post has been removed. Please refrain from such posts in the future.