The tax which will be paid for the purpose of education is not more than the thousandth part of what

Yes that is why the GOP is trying to destroy public education.

Cuz someone's interpretation of jesus is all you'll ever need!
🤢

Some folks don't want your help. As sad as that sounds, making them get an education makes them more resentful.

You can have the best programs to help the most people and some folks just don't want it. The proverbial leading a horse to water situation. Dems just don't seem to get this. You can't legislate behavior.

Not to say you shouldn't try. But for heavens sake don't foist it on people or provide it for "free". Not everyone wants a college education (and the associated debt). Put programs in place to help those who want access to them with some type of pay in. We also need to address the spiraling cost of post high school education and offer paths to those who want skills that are in demand but do not want to go to college. The cost of a college education is way out of hand. Not addressing this particular issue is not helping anybody.

Dems just don't seem to get this. You can't legislate behavior.

WTF.
Which Dems? All Dems? Some?
Ya I'm certain that educational programs have been strengthened under the legislation of Democrats throughout the years. KNOWING FULL WELL THAT NOT ALL WILL TAKE PART.

Democrats don't legislate behavior for all to comply, but damned straight they will hold that line & provide education for those who do see & welcome the benefit.

Its not The Dems who have dropped the ball on education resources. People who want it should have it availible.

What exactly is it that " Dems don't get"?

Why lay it on the Dems shoulders when the problem actually lies with those who's goal is to degrade the mission statement of the very tenats of the Democratic Party?

That in itself sounds like those who wish to keep people uninformed.

Dems just don't seem to get this. You can't legislate behavior.
That doesn't even make sense.

Jfc

but you can't make them drink. Simple as I can put it.

You can come up with the most generous programs in the world and some people just won't take (advantage) of them. And sometimes they'll even resent it. You want examples? How about the affordable care act and social security. Two great programs that have done a world of good for most Americans. Now how many times have Reps beaten us over the head coming out against these 2 programs as government give aways and how many Americans support their rhetoric. It's insane that anyone would be against these programs but they are almost constantly one step away from going away.

Dems would do better if they extend a helping hand but be aware a lot of folks don't want it (some for really bad reasons). I'd be in favor of going back to matching grants for a lot of programs. That way if folks want "low taxes" then they live with what they get. Let the rest of folks willing to pay a little bit to get more back be rewarded.

Yea it's harsh, but I'm convinced a lot of people would rather wallow in their own sh-t than climb out of the cess pool. So be it.

Don't have a clue why you think they don't.
Study the history of the Party. Read the basic tenats of the Democratic Party.

Not one thing would support your statement that 'Dems don't get it".
Thats a disingenuous low blow.
It not the DEMS you need to worry about.
They get it alright.

So many people are purposely being kept ignorant. You sound like you're arguing against yourself.

If it's such an obviously good thing then why are so many people opposed to it? Because of some politician? (I wouldn't disagree, I have a lot of disdain for politicians, of all stripes).

I think this pandemic has demonstrated that a lot of folks can easily be manipulated into taking stances against their own interests. You may claim that there's a way to "educate" people out of this dilemma. I counter, the existence of the charlatans and liars refutes the ability to educate all of them; some folks just won't be converted. And unfortunately, these folks have figured out if they're loud, rude and dismissive they can get what they want (even if it kills them).

Again, I say help those willing to help themselves (and not without cost). But, admit you can't "save" all of them. And do you really want to see money go to politicians who vote against "government give aways, then tell all their constituents about all the money they've secured for them? I'm for trying, but I also want to be as far away from the ass hats as possible and make sure if they are going to rail against government help then they'd better damn well practice what they preach. Peace.

I think you kinda nailed it there. Bad people have convinced too many others that the only education they need comes from their version of a religious text. All else is to be shunned.

I still think the option should be available to anyone who wants it. I'm no expert, but I think an educated population will pay for itself exponentially compared to what it costs to let people go to school.

I really don't think I can argue against your last point. If people are against so-called handouts, then they should bloody well pay up. Just like every idiot who refuses a vaccine for stupid reasons, but still think the health care system should save them for free when they didn't need to get that sick in the first place.

Thanks for the interesting thoughts, have a good night!

and they're gonna soon find this one out, too... and that's morality. We used to understand this. We used to understand that morality was a social compact that we all agreed to abide by. But then some people decided their morality was better than others and some people didn't deserve to be treated as human. They broke the social compact. Now they want everyone to abide by THEIR social compact. They're at they point of legislating their social compact into laws upon our bodies and minds, and expecting we'll abide by them. Ha! They've really got a thing or two coming. Not only does their 2nd amendment solution work both ways (unfortunately) but we're smarter than they are and a damn site more stubborn than they are. Will more women flee from red states? I damn sure hope so. I hope we have an underground railway for women, like we had back in the slave days, cause we're gonna need it. I hope it's extended to my friends who are LGBTQ+, to those who are black, Asian, Indigenous, to anyone of any religion who doesn't fit their white bread Xtianist talibangelical religion. Cause we're all gonna have to pull together to fight them tooth and nail to drive them out of OUR country and into Russia, Hungary, Bolivia, Somalia, or wherever it is they feel comfortable belonging. Because one thing's for sure... they sure as hell ain't Died in the Wool Americans!

""Some folks don't want your help. As sad as that sounds, making them get an education makes them more resentful. ""

applies to such a TINY % of people that to do a disservice to a far greater majority is not how this country works.

Either the country gets smarter and smarter or we get dumber and dumber. Which is it going to be?

Republican leaders WANT people to be uneducated for political reasons (just as Franklin is stating) - not for the benefit of our economy, physical or mental health or strengthening families. Poverty due do a lack of education or the threat of being poor most often weakens family bonds. We only hear about the rare successes of growing up poor, we don't hear about the millions of failures from being poor and uneducated, but we see it in the widespread need for welfare, food stamps, social benefits, etc.

And yeah, I think Ben Franklin was a tad smarter than the average Republican. But I don't say that to disparage Republicans by suggesting they are dumb. Btw, disparage means to put down or insult.

where the fact that I had a college education was an impediment; I was one of "those people" (liberal elites). Don't know what school you went to but being "too smart" wasn't a pathway to being one of the popular kids. Yea it's petty but I sure experienced it over the years.

And on the College "contract", I'll challenge you to look at just about any higher education institution. The cost today is way more than it was 50 years ago. Disproportionally so. There was a time in my state where $500 got you into one of the teachers colleges for a semester (without board). Now that won't even cover your technology fee for a semester at some places.

We bemoan the cost of a college education and blame the lack of government support. But we never address any of the other points that contribute to the cost of college. Does every college need a rock climbing wall or kitchenettes in the dorm suite? How can the cost of technology at a college be so high when computer costs have actually declined over the last 50 years (cost less and infinitely more powerful)?!?

There are some real problems with our education system. Government's contribution certainly is part of the problem but by no means the only problem.

Does anyone else smell a republicon hack?

We'll wait.

Straw man argument. Check the poster’s name & profile.

Forcing people to go to college???

Where'd that concept even come from?
Sounds RW...

But if you're not going to college could you be faulted for thinking it isn't fair that the state is subsidizing college to lower the price for those that do?

Of course it doesn't help that those who do go and quit still have to pay back any loans. There are a lot of side benefits to going to and graduating from college. But the cost is outrageous and no one ever questions colleges for charging so much, ensuring kids who start college finish it and those that do finish don't get stuck with a degree that can't pay for their loans.

These are hard questions that I never see anyone try and answer. Instead we blow butterflies up kids asses about how everything will be peaches and cream if the go to college. Most high schools tout their percentage of students going on to secondary education. You almost never hear about the folks who go to work after high school or the ones that drop out.

A lot of our problems are due, IMO, to a total lack of teaching money management skills at the high school and college level.

You say don't foist an education on people for "free," because not everyone wants the associated debt. Those two statements seem to be very contradictory. Make the programs available, but force people to pay for them, thus restricting access to them to many people who don't have the financial resources?

If the government assists with the costs of education, then people can still have access to it regardless of the reasons behind the increase in cost. Sure it's true that some people don't want help, but the rest of your post makes very little sense.

One of the best investments this country could make is in the free education of it's citizens; if they want it. Nothing forced. The dictatorcans know that educated people have a tendency to think for themselves. Ooohh, we don't want that!