If anyone had any doubt that the U.S. Senate Republicans opposition to federal loans to save the U.S. domestic auto industry was just an excuse to break the United Auto Workers (UAW) and kill the middle class, the decision by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and his GOP cronies to scuttle the hard fought negotiations that would have provided a $14 billion loan package is proof of that.
Apparently, the loss of some 3 million jobs and a national depression are worth killing a group that primarily backed Democrats to McConnell and company. According to the AP, Senate Republicans killed a deal that had already passed the House because the UAW declined to arbitrarily cut wage cuts to "bring their pay into line with U.S. plants of Japanese carmakers. The UAW refused to do so before its current contract with the automakers expires in 2011." "Republicans insisted that the carmakers …bring wages and benefits in line with those paid by Toyota, Honda and Nissan in the United States."
Since when do foreign companies carry so much weight in U.S.? This comes just a year after the UAW agreed to an historic contract that created a two-tier pay stem that dramatically reduced wages for new workers; to as low as $14 an hour. The UAW also agreed to return to the bargaining table as a condition to get the loan. It makes no sense to arbitrarily agree to such a ridiculous demand.
Judy over at LivingBlue offers an excelent analysis of the $400 billion in subsidies and giveaways at taxpayer expense a foreign manufacturer got in a southern, non-union state while denying a $14 billon loan to a U.S. manufacturer and 3 U.S. million workers.
The solution should be for the Japanese plants to organize to lift all workers up to a decent, living wage and benefits, but the foreign companies make that extremely difficult. They locate in rural, conservative areas like Kentucky that are hard to get to by organizers and that are grateful to have any job that's off the farm. That's why there are so many meat packing plants in rural settings. Then there are the trained union busters.
According to the AP, "Hourly wages for UAW workers at GM factories are about equal to those paid by Toyota Motor Corp. at its older U.S. factories, according to the companies. GM says the average UAW laborer makes $29.78 per hour, while Toyota says it pays about $30 per hour. But the unionized factories have far higher benefit costs."
Good for them. Of course, the foreign auto makers have less so-called "legacy costs." A legacy cost is a retiree like my dad who worked all of their lives to enjoy a decent retirement. Yet, a minority of Republicans put politics and power before the country and people. There's a reason they go their ass kicked in the last election.
Maybe the next time we are in a massive war like World War II, we can ask the foreign manufactures if they would please make our tanks, armored vehicles, weapons, vehicles and aircraft. Let's hope the Chinese never call in their debt we owe them; they have more people than we do, all the money and now all the manufacturing. Instead of Detroit being the "Arsenal of Democracy" that honor can now can go to Beijing.
This decision to screw the worker and the country is in sharp contract to the $700 billion no-strings attached giveaway to the banks and the finical industry.
Auto Banks
$14 billion loan $700 billon free
Require oversight, like a car czar No oversight
Auto CEOs hand to submit a plan None required
Required employee concessions None required
Scrutinized mode of transportation Phoned it in
32 comments:
This is such a load of crap that I don't even know where to begin. Let's start with this. We don't have the money to bailout the car companies. But we will anyway when they file for bankruptcy.
I agree we should not have bailed out the financial institutions, but they aren't all loans. They were stock purchases.
I don't know what you have against Americans that live in the south, but they aren't all toothless ex farmers. Your comment that it's too hard for organizers to find the rural areas tells more about the lack of intelligence of the organizers than it does about the people (American people) that live there and work there.
You don't solve a financial crisis by driving another company into the same morass that the big 3 are in by getting a union in that will drive wages up, drive expenses up, and drive prices up.
Do you want jobs back in America? Lower the business tax rate. We now have the second highest tax rate for businesses around the world. That's why companies are going out of the country. It makes more business sense.
You have combined hatred for America and your disgust for the free market system and your class warfare and your bias against southerners all in one piece.
Those who vote against the men and women of the UAW and any union for that matter are unAmerican in my book. They are voting to undermine those who build our cars, build our buildings and teach our children.
The unions gave us and continue to give us the middle class, those people who can afford to buy the goods and services and enroll their children in our universities.
Without these unions our country cannot compete in the world markets. We will not have the educated masses that provde us the engineers, the designers, the researchers and the medical sector.
You who posted before me may a pox be on your home for posioning the minds of those you touch.
Hmmm, hatred and personal attack comments. Not to mention irrationality. I am in the middle class. I am not part of a union (Thank God). I have one child in a University and another that will be attending in two years.
Unions only make up about 15% of the population. The unions have been losing membership for over 20 years. Yet the country continues to grow. You liberals like to blame Reagan for busting the unions in the 80's. Had he busted them, they wouldn't still exist. So there is one lie of the left.
The unions have given us a Big three that's now in danger of going bankrupt. Someone on here likes to say that unions are the greatest democracy. That is wrong. It's socialism. It's failed and it's corrupt and now it's driving the auto companies out of business. Need proof? Toyota makes cars in the south. They don't have the union obstruction on the level that the Big three do and yet they are thriving.
It's fun to watch you speak and see the exact opposite of what you say coming true.
I wonder if you ever answered my question on another thread where I asked you who the non working men and women are. I doubt it, but I'll look to see what sort of drivel you came up with.
As I expected blusie, Guru or Dargo or whomever you are or as I suspect you're all one and the same, you didn't answer the question about who the non working men and women are. I suspect the question was just too hard for a liberal to answer.
I have found the perfect example of a liberal Democrat. Governor Blagojevitch or whatever his name is. Even his fellow liberals are calling him insane as they try to strip him of his governorship without a trial.
Guess what I am only one poster, I do not post under several names.
I do not belong to a union I have three children my oldest in a doctor, my middle child a college graduate and has completed one year of graduate school and my youngest is still in undergraduate studies.
Your basic lack of economics and the auto industry is nothing short of stunning.
You seem to have a very lazy attitude, not bothering to read enough to educate yourself about the problems our counrty is facing.
If you think Un-American is hateful, you may be shocked at the opinion I will keep to myself.
Question to Not Anoymous, did you used to post as Macabre Sunset, your attitude matches his.
You have to admire someone that says another doesn't read enough to educate themselves about the problems of our country, but spells it "counrty" . Let me guess. You were edgeukated at publick skools.
I notice you still have answered my question to the topic that you brought up.
Sorry, I don't believe you. I believe that you, guru and dargo are all the same person. Your saying different is not credible.
Speaking of the "counrty" here's some information for you:
Some unreported stats about the 2008 election:
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, MN, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:
- Number of States won by Parties: Democrats - 20; Republicans - 30
- Square miles of land won by Parties: Democrats - 580,000; Republicans - 2,427,000
- Population of the counties won by Parties: Democrats - 127 million; Republicans - 143 million
- Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by Parties: Democrats - 13.2; Republicans - 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
From the attachment, notice that only in the states of Alaska and Oklahoma where all counties were won by McCain/Palin.
Not Anonymous, I see the 101st Fighting Keyboarder's distribution list is still active and still WRONG. That little missive was going around in the 2000 election also, not just 2008. But don't let the facts get in your way.
Also, Olson didn't write it.
Come back when you're not so gullible.
I do make typo's from time to time.
What does that last post have to do with anything?
I believe it was bluzie that said public education was the great equalizer and that guru said that there was no doubt that public education was the best form of education in this country. So I pulled up the research that I suggested one or the other of them look at before commenting. I doubt that they did that. They would prefer to believe the propoganda from the public schools. So for your perusal, here is what I found just from googling Public school vs homeschool. I have no doubt that neither of them will check it out, but if there is anyone else reading this blog, you might find the facts interesting.
I've even started with the socialization argument they try to present because we all know that socialization is more important to liberals than actual education.
Public education vs. Home education
Socialization:
Dr. Thomas Smedley believes that homeschoolers have superior socialization skills, and his research supports this claim. He conducted a study in which he administered the Vineyard Adaptive Behavior Scales test to identify mature and well-adapted behaviors in children. Home learners ranked in the 84th percentile, compared to publicly schooled students, who were drastically lower in the 23rd.
When most home educators and school administrators speak of successful socialization, are they referring to the same thing?
Education researcher Dr. Michael Mitchell found that being popular, aggressively competitive, materialistically driven and self-confident are traits promoted in conventional schools.
Pride is also promoted in the public schools. It is often repackaged as self-esteem in programs such as "Here's Looking at You, 2000," in which education researcher Dr. Amy Binder reports that students are instructed to believe that they are "the most important person in the world."
The mass socialization conducted within schools has brought about a proliferation of delinquent behavior within this nation's youth, reports education researcher, Dr. Michael Slavinski. He notes that student bodies are increasingly riddled with violence, drugs, promiscuity, emotional disorders, crime, contempt for authority, desperate behavior, illiteracy and peer dependency - just to name a few.
Today, parents are not as surprised to see reports of fifth-graders having sex in class; hear about school shootings; find drugs or condoms in backpacks; receive phone calls from the police and principals; or witness defiant, apathetic and unrecognizable tones in their children's voices.
"Live and let learn," say many parents. Most home educators are fine with this, as long as their children's learning comes from mature, seasoned and embracing adults who have the children's best interests at heart - above political or economic agendas. They believe that such training shouldn't come from peers either, which amounts to the blind leading the blind.
When the Direct Observation Form of the Child Behavior Checklist was administered by education researcher Dr. Larry Shyers to identify 97 problematic behaviors in two groups of children, traditionally schooled students exuded eight times as many antisocial traits than their homeschooled counterparts. This lies in direct contrast to claims by public school advocates that exposure to campus life leads to proper socialization.
A nationwide survey conducted by The Barna Group shows that 80 percent of Christian families send their children to public schools where their faith is attacked. Based on the study's findings, it appears that their kids are the ones being "evangelized" by the religion of secular humanism.
Performance:
The nationwide grand mean in reading for home schoolers was at the 79th percentile, and the 73rd percentile for language and math. This ranking means home school students performed better than approximately 77% of the sample population on whom the test was normed. Nearly 80% of home schooled children achieve individual scores above the national average and 54.7% of the 16,000 home schoolers achieved individual scores in the top quarter of the population, more than double the number of conventional school students who score in the top quarter.
In 1997, a study of 5,402 homeschool students from 1,657 families was released. It was entitled, "Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America." The study demonstrated that homeschoolers, on the average, out-performed their counterparts in the public schools by 30 to 37 percentile points in all subjects. A significant finding when analyzing the data for 8th graders was the evidence that homeschoolers who are homeschooled two or more years score substantially higher than students who have been homeschooled one year or less. The new homeschoolers were scoring on the average in the 59th percentile compared to students homeschooled the last two or more years who scored between 86th and 92nd percentile. i
This was confirmed in another study by Dr. Lawrence Rudner of 20,760 homeschooled students which found the homeschoolers who have homeschooled all their school aged years had the highest academic achievement. This was especially apparent in the higher grades. ii This is a good encouragement to families catch the long-range vision and homeschool through high school.
Another important finding of Strengths of Their Own was that the race of the student does not make any difference. There was no significant difference between minority and white homeschooled students. For example, in grades K-12, both white and minority students scored, on the average, in the 87th percentile. In math, whites scored in the 82nd percentile while minorities scored in the 77th percentile. In the public schools, however, there is a sharp contrast. White public school eighth grade students, nationally scored the 58th percentile in math and the 57th percentile in reading. Black eighth grade students, on the other hand, scored on the average at the 24th percentile in math and the 28th percentile in reading. Hispanics scored at the 29th percentile in math and the 28th percentile in reading. iii
These findings show that when parents, regardless of race, commit themselves to make the necessary sacrifices and tutor their children at home, almost all obstacles present in other school systems disappear.
Another obstacle that seems to be overcome in homeschooling is the need to spend a great deal of money in order to have a good education. In Strengths of Their Own, Dr. Ray found the average cost per homeschool student is $546 while the average cost per public school student is $5,325. Yet the homeschool children in this study averaged in 85th percentile while the public school students averaged in the 50th percentile on nationally standardized achievement tests.iv
Similarly, the 1998 study by Dr. Rudner of 20,760 students, found that eighth grade students whose parents spend $199 or less on their home education score, on the average, in the 80th percentile. Eighth grade students whose parents spend $400 to $599 on their home education also score on the average, in the 80th percentile! Once the parents spend over $600, the students do slightly better, scoring in the 83rd percentile.v
The message is loud and clear. More money does not mean a better education. There is no positive correlation between money spent on education and student performance. Public school advocates could refocus their emphasis if they learned this lesson. Loving and caring parents are what matters. Money can never replace simple, hard work.
The last significant statistic from the Strengths of Their Own study regards the affect of government regulation on homeschooling. Dr. Brian Ray compared the impact of government regulation on the academic performance of homeschool students and he found no positive correlation. In other words, whether a state had a high degree of regulation (i.e., curriculum approval, teacher qualifications, testing, home visits) or a state had no regulation of homeschoolers, the homeschooled students in both categories of states performed the same. The students all scored on the average in the 86th percentile regardless of state regulation.vi
Homeschool freedom works. Homeschoolers have earned the right to be left alone.
In a study released by the National Center for Home Education on November 10, 1994. According to these standardized test results provided by the Riverside Publishing Company of 16,311 homeschoolers from all 50 states K-12, the nationwide average for homeschool students is at the 77th percentile of the basic battery of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. In reading, the homeschoolers' nationwide grand mean is the 79th percentile. This means, of course, that the homeschool students perform better in reading than 79 percent of the same population on whom the test is normed. In the area of language arts and math, the typical homeschooler scored in the 73rd percentile.
These 16,311 homeschool students' scores were not self-selected by parents or anyone else. They represent all the homeschoolers whose tests were scored through the Riverside Publishing Company. It is important to note that this summary of homeschool achievement test scores demonstrates that 54.7% of the students in grades K-12 are achieving individual scores in the top quarter of the population of students in the United States. This figure is more than double the number of conventional school students who score in the top quarter.
In 1991, a survey of standardized test scores was performed by the Home School Legal Defense Association in cooperation with the Psychological Corporation, which publishes the Stanford Achievement Test. The study involved the administering of the Stanford Achievement Test (8th Edition, Form J) to 5,124 homeschooled students. These students represented all 50 states and their grades ranged from K-12. This testing was administered in Spring 1991 under controlled test conditions in accordance with the test publisher's standards. All test administers were screened, trained, and approved pursuant to the publisher's requirements. All tests were machine-scored by the Psychological Corporation.
These 5,124 homeschoolers' composite scores on the basic battery of tests in reading, math, and language arts ranked 18 to 28 percentile points above public school averages. For instance, 692 homeschooled 4th graders averaged in the 77th percentile in reading, the 63rd percentile in math, and the 70th percentile in language arts. Sixth-grade homeschoolers, of 505 tested, scored in the 76th percentile in reading, the 65th percentile in math, and the 72nd percentile in language arts.
The homeschooled high schoolers did even better, which goes against the trend in public schools where studies show the longer a child is in the public schools, the lower he scores on standardized tests. One hundred and eighteen tenth-grade homeschool students, as a group, made an average score of the 82nd percentile in reading, the 70th percentile in math, and the 81st percentile in language arts.
The Bob Jones University Testing Service of South Carolina provided test results of Montana homeschoolers. Also a survey of homeschoolers in Montana was conducted by the National Home Education Research Institute. Dr. Brian Ray evaluated the survey and test results and found:
On average, the home education students in this study scored above the national norm in all subject areas on standardized achievement tests. These students scored, on average, at the 72nd percentile in terms of a combination of their reading, language, and math performance. This is well above the national average.
In North Dakota, Dr. Brian Ray conducted a survey of 205 homeschoolers throughout the state. The middle reading score was the 84th percentile, language was the 81st percentile, science was the 87th percentile, social studies was the 86th percentile, and math was the 81st percentile.
Further, Dr. Ray found no significant statistical differences in academic achievement between those students taught by parents with less formal education and those students taught by parents with higher formal education.
In South Carolina, the National Center for Home Education did a survey of 65 homeschool students and found that the average scores on the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills were 30 percentile points higher than national public school averages. In math, 92 percent of the homeschool students scored above grade level, and 93 percent of the homeschool students were at or above grade level in reading. These scores are "being achieved in a state where public school SAT scores are next-to-last in national rankings.
In 1990, the National Home Education Research Institute issued a report entitled "A Nationwide Study of Home Education: Family Characteristics, Legal Matters, and Student Achievement." This was a study of over 2,163 homeschooling families.
The study found that the average scores of the homeschool students were at or above the 80th percentile in all categories. The homeschoolers' national percentile mean was 84th for reading, 80th for language, 81st for math, 84th for science and 83rd for social studies.
The research revealed that there was no positive correlation between state regulation of homeschools and the home-schooled students' performance. The study compared homeschoolers in three groups of states representing various levels of regulation. Group 1 represented the most restrictive states such as Michigan; Group 2 represented slightly less restrictive states including North Dakota; and Group 3 represented unregulated states such as Texas and California. The Institute concluded:
...no difference was found in the achievement scores of students between the three groups which represent various degrees of state regulation of home education.... It was found that students in all three regulation groups scored on the average at or above the 76th percentile in the three areas examined: total reading, total math, and total language. These findings in conjunction with others described in this section, do not support the idea that state regulation and compliance on the part of home education families assures successful student achievement. x
Furthermore, this same study demonstrated that only 13.9 percent of the mothers (who are the primary teachers) had ever been certified teachers. The study found that there was no difference in the students' total reading, total math and total language scores based on the teacher certification status of their parents:
The findings of this study do not support the idea that parents need to be trained and certified teachers to assure successful academic achievement of their children.
Statistics also demonstrate that homeschoolers tend to score above the national average on both their SAT and ACT scores.
For example, the 2,219 students reporting their homeschool status on the SAT in 1999 scored an average of 1083 (verbal 548, math 535), 67 points above the national average of 1016. In 2004 the 7,858 homeschool students taking the ACT scored an average of 22.6, compared to the national average of 20.9.
According to the 1998 ACT High School Profile Report, 2,610 graduating homeschoolers took the ACT and scored an average of 22.8 out of a possible 36 points. This score is slightly higher that the 1997 report released on the results of 1,926 homeschool graduates and founding homeschoolers maintained the average of 22.5. This is higher than the national average, which was 21.0 in both 1997 and 1998.
State Department of Education Statistics
Several state departments of education or local school districts have also gathered statistics on the academic progress of homeschooled children.
Tennessee
In the spring of 1987, the Tennessee Department of Education found that homeschooled children in 2nd grade, on the average, scored in the 93rd percentile while their public school counterparts, on the average, scored in the 62nd percentile on the Stanford Achievement Test. Homeschool children in third grade scored, on the average, in the 90th percentile in reading on another standardized test, and the public school students scored in the 78 percentile. In math, the third grade homeschooled children scored, on the average, in the 87th percentile, while their public school counterparts scored in the 80th percentile. In eighth grade, the homeschooled students scored, on the average, in the 87th percentile in reading and in 71st percentile in math while their public school counterparts scored in the 75th percentile in reading and the 69th percentile in math. xix
Alaska and Oregon
Similarly, in 1986, the State Department of Education in Alaska which had surveyed homeschooled children's test results every other year since 1981, found homeschooled children to be scoring approximately 16 percentage points higher, on the average, than the children of the same grades in conventional schools. In Oregon, the State Department of Education compiled test score statistics for 1,658 homeschooled children in 1988 and found that 51 percent of the children scored above the 71st percentile and 73 percent scored above the 51st percentile.
North Carolina
In North Carolina, the Division of Non-Public Education compiled test results of 2,144 homeschool students in grades K-12. Of the 1,061 homeschool students taking the California Achievement Test, they scored, on the average, at the 73rd percentile on the total battery of tests: 80th percentile in reading, 72nd percentile in language, and the 71st percentile in math.
The 755 homeschool students who took the Iowa Test of Basic Skills scored at the 80th percentile in the total battery of tests: 81st percentile in reading, 77th percentile in language, and 77th percentile in math. The remaining students who took the Stanford scored, on the average, in the 73rd percentile in the whole battery. xx
Arkansas
In Arkansas, for the 1987-88 school term, homeschool children, on the average, scored in 75% on the Metropolitan Achievement Test 6. They out-scored public school children in every subject (Reading, Math, Language, Science, and Social Studies) and at every grade level. For example, at the 10th grade level public school children scored an average of 53rd percentile in social studies, while homeschool children scored at the 73rd percentile. In science, an area in which homeschoolers are often criticized for lack of facilities, the homeschoolers scored, on the average, 85th percentile in fourth grade, 73rd percentile in seventh grade, and 65th percentile in tenth grade. The public school students, on the other hand, scored much lower in science: 66th percentile in fourth grade, 62nd percentile in seventh, and 53rd percentile in tenth. xxi
Arizona
According to the Arizona State Department of Education, 1,123 homeschooled children in grades 1-9, on the average, scored above grade level in reading, language arts, and math on standardized tests for the 1988-89 school year. Four grades tested were a full grade level ahead. xxii
Nebraska
In Nebraska, out of 259 homeschooled children who returned to public or non-public schools, 134 of them were automatically placed in their grade level according to their age without testing. Of the remaining who were given entrance tests, 33 were above grade level, 43 were at grade level, and 29 were below grade level. Approximately 88 percent of the returning students were at or above grade level after being homeschooled for a period of time. This survey was the result of the responses of 429 accredited schools. xxiii
Local School Districts Statistics
1. In 1988, 30 homeschooled children in Albuquerque, New Mexico, participated in the state-mandated testing program (Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills) and scored on the average in the 83rd percentile for 3rd grade, the 85th percentile for 5th grade, and the 89th percentile for 8th grade. This group of homeschoolers scored 20 to 25 percentile points higher than the local public school students taking the CTBS in 1987. xxiv
2. In a 1980 study in Los Angeles, homeschooled students scored higher on standardized tests than children in the Los Angeles public schools. xxv
3. In South Carolina, the Greenville County School District stated, "Kids taught at home last year outscored those in public schools on basic skills tests." In that county, 57 out of 61 homeschooled students "met or exceeded the state's minimum performance standard on the reading test" of the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills. The homeschool students' passing rate was 93.4 while the public school counterparts passing rate was 83.9 percent. Furthermore, in math, the homeschooled students passing rate was 87.9 percent compared to the public school students' passing rate of 82.1 percent. xxvi
4. In Nevada, according to Washoe County School District's data, homeschooled students scored higher than their public school counterparts in first through seventh grade. All children were tested with the Stanford Achievement Test, and homeschoolers consistently scored higher in reading, vocabulary, reading comprehension, math concepts, math comprehension, math and math concepts and application.
The most extreme gap between the public school children and the homeschooled children was in the area of vocabulary. For example, fourth graders in public school scored in the 49th percentile while the homeschooled fourth graders scored in the 80th percentile.
Conclusion
These statistics point to one conclusion: homeschooling works. Even many of the State Departments of Education, which are generally biased toward the public school system, cannot argue with these facts. Not only does homeschooling work, but it works without the myriad of state controls and accreditation standards imposed on the public schools.
i Dr. Brian Ray, Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America, National Home Education Research Institute, Salem, OR, 1997.
ii Lawrence M. Rudner, Ph.D., Director of the ERIC Clearing House on Assessment and Evaluation, Home Schooling Works: The Scholastic Achievement and Demographic Characteristics of Home School Students in 1998, published by the Home School Legal Defense Association, Purcellville, VA 20134, www.HSLDA.org. ERIC is sponsored by the National Library Services of the U.S. Department of Education.
iii Dr. Brian Ray, Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America, National Home Education Research Institute, Salem, OR, 1997
iv Id.
v Rudner, Home Schooling Works: The Scholastic Achievement and Demographic Characteristics of Home School Students in 1998
vi Dr. Brian Ray, Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America.
vii Klicka, Christopher, The Right Choice: Home Schooling, Noble Publishing, p.135-136.
viii "Study Shows Homeschoolers Ahead in Achievement," The Grapevine: Montana Home School News, January, 1991 newsletter, Seeley Lake, MT, p. 6.
ix Statistics compiled by the National Center For Home Education, P.O. Box 125, Paeonian Springs, VA 22129 in 1990.
x Dr. Brian Ray, "A Nationwide Study of Home Education: Family Characteristics, Legal Matters, and Student Achievement," National Home Education Research Institute, Seattle, WA, 1990, p. 53-54.
xi Id. p. 53.
xii "PA Homeschooled Students Score High!" article which appeared in "Pennsylvania Homeschoolers" newsletter, Fall 1990, Issue #33, Kittanning, PA p1.
xiii Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, TX.
xiv Jon Wartes, "Report From the 1988 Washington Home School Testing," February, 1989. This report is the result of the findings of the Washington Home School Research Project conducted by 13 public school educators and home schoolers.
xv Brian Ray, Education and Urban Society, vol.21 No.1, November, 1988 16-31 (Newbury Park, CA).
xvi "Home Schoolers Excel," The Home School Court Report, Vol. 3, No.1, January-February, 1987.
xvii "Home Schooling: An Idea Whose Time Has Returned," Human Events, September 15, 1984.
xviii Christopher J. Klicka, "Homeschooled Students Excel in College."
xix Office of the Commissioner, Tennessee Department of Education, Home School Student Test Results: 1986 and 1987, (Nashville, 1987).
xx "North Carolina Home School Nationally Standardized Achievement Test Results 88-89 School Term," (Raleigh, Office of the Governor, Division of Non-Public Education, Dec. 1, 1989).
xxi "Standardized Test Results," Update, (Little Rock, Arkansas Christian Home Education Association, Sept. 1988), Vol. 7, No. 1. This newsletter reported on test results compiled by the Arkansas Department of Education of 760 home schooled students.
xxii Arizona Department of Education, Students Taught at Home 1989 Average Grade Equivalents, compiled by Steve Stephens, State Testing Coordinator, July 1989. For earlier statistics for Arizona home schoolers success on standardized tests see article by Patricia Lines, "States Should Help, Not Hinder, Parents' Home Schooling Efforts," Education Week, May 15, 1985.
xxiii "Grade Level Placement of Rule 13 Students Returning to Approved or Accredited Schools" Dateline: Education, June, 1989.
xxiv Teaching Home Magazine, "Albuquerque Home Schoolers Score High," Portland, OR, April/May 1989, p.21.
xxv Roy Weaver, "Home Tutorials vs. Public Schools in Los Angeles," Phi Delta Kappan, (December, 1980), pp. 254-255.
xxvi "Home-Taught Students Surpass Public School Peers at Basic Skills," statistics taken from The Greenville News, (Greenville, S.C. August 3, 1990).
Try starting with some facts. First, unlike the no-strings attached and no oversight giveaway to the finical industry, the auto bailout is a loan. We can take a small part of the $700 billon giveaway and lend it to the auto companies. In fact, that looks like what is going to happen.
I never said Americans that live in the south are all toothless ex- farmers. One of the reason why Japanese automakers in the south build plants in the rural areas is not so organizers can’t find them, it’s because they can better control access to the plant, the parking lots and the workers.
Unions are not the reason the Big 3 are in trouble. Lower the business tax? Are you serious? By the way, do you have any reference to the claim that the U.S. has the second highest tax rate for businesses around the world? I know this, we will never win a race to the bottom, nor should we even try. We offer more than a low tax rate. We can never lower taxes below that of the Philippines, Bangladesh or Solomon Islands, and why the hell would we want to?
I hate America? Great argument. I must hate America because I don’t agree with you.
Your words: The UAW also agreed to return to the bargaining table as a condition to get the loan. It makes no sense to arbitrarily agree to such a ridiculous demand.
My response: I don't trust the union. They'll come back as a condition to get the loan? Sounds like extortion to me. But notice they aren't agreeing to any reductions or cut backs. They only agree to talk. Their talk is cheap.
Your words: They locate in rural, conservative areas like Kentucky that are hard to get to by organizers and that are grateful to have any job that's off the farm. That's why there are so many meat packing plants in rural settings. Then there are the trained union busters.
My response: They locate in rural areas like Kentucky that are hard to get to by organizers? After being called out on this comment, you now change it to "because they can better control access to the plant." Make up your mind. Which lie are you going to go with?
Your words: First, unlike the no-strings attached and no oversight giveaway to the finical industry, the auto bailout is a loan.
My response: First, I'm assuming you mean "financial" instead of the finical that you've used twice now. I was not in favor of the bailout of the financial industry. It gave too much power (dictatorship really) to the Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson (a Democrat, by the way) and to the incoming Treasury Secretary. If you'll remember, the Republicans blocked this at first. But they caved to political pressure and passed it the second time around but just barely. This was a Democrat bill along with President Bush. The complaint among Republicans was that it was not allowing the free markets to work. The promise from the Democrats was oversight where they claimed there had been no regulation and oversight in the past.
Second, I don't care if you call it a loan or a bailout. When did the United States of America become a bank? Let Ford, GM, Chrysler go to the banks and get the loans. After all, that's where the $750 billion dollar bailout was supposed to go in the first place. To the financial institutions to free up credit. Are you now suggesting that the Democrat bailout didn't work to free up any credit markets so that the big three could go and borrow money?
Third, the reasoning behind the "loan" is that people wouldn't buy cars from a company that is in bankruptcy. INteresting note here. Airlines have gone bankrupt and people still fly their aircraft. Delphi went bankrupt and GM still used them for their cars. When you file bankruptcy, you either file one way and reorganize or you file the other way to write off your debts. Those written off debts are ultimately paid for by the American Taxpayer.
Your words again: They locate in rural, conservative areas like Kentucky that are hard to get to by organizers and that are grateful to have any job that's off the farm. That's why there are so many meat packing plants in rural settings. Then there are the trained union busters.
My response: Saying that they are greatful to be off the farms, implies that they are hicks that don't know any better. This is a slight against the American Farmer. This is a slight against southern people in Kentucky... pardon me "like Kentucky". You made it abundantly clear that you hate the American Farmer and southern Americans. You also say that's why meat packing plants are there. What sort of an idiot do you have to be to not know that it makes sense to have the meat packing plants near where the meat is? You do realize that meat isn't created in the city don't you? I know it's wrapped in cellophane when you buy it at the store, but it started out as cattle. Where are the cattle? They are on the farms and ranches. Where are the farms and ranches? In the country. In the south. Out west. Maybe in your world you don't realize that you're eating Bossie for dinner, but whether you slaughter the cow in your barn or you buy it off the shelf at Kroger wrapped in cellophane, it started out as Bossie the cow, or Elsie.
Gee, maybe I should give you a heads up on ham and bacon. You do know they too came from the farms don't you?
You liberals complain about corporate welfare all of the time, but now you're willing to throw billions of dollars down the drain for three companies that have failed in business. The American people are not a banking institution. The only thing you're going to accomplish by throwing money at them from taxpayers wallets is you'll be nationalizing the auto industry. Goodbye free market and hello socialism. Hmm, where did I hear about that from before? Oh yeah. Barack Obama said it when talking to Joe the Plumber.
Don't worry, you'll get your bailout. If Bush doesn't give it to you from the $700 billion that was supposed to be for the financial institutions, once the liberals have taken over all three branches of government they'll pass it.
Oh and another thing. This would have passed in the Senate had four Democrats not also voted against it.
We have a $10 Trillion debt. We're about to have a $1.6 Trillion deficit. So much for deficit spending. Hey, I know. Blame it on Bush. It's worked for Granholm in Michigan with all of the brain dead liberals. They believed her. I'm sure that if you blame Bush for the rest of eternity, the sheeple that vote Democrat will believe you.
What, no more emails from the 101st Fighting Keyboarders, Not Anonymous?
I know, I have endured countless instances of hatred and personal attack comments, as well as irrationality. I, unfortunately, have never been in a union. I was in the military for most of my working life, but I have seen the need for them in my civilian career. The way companies treat loyal employees is nothing short of criminal. I’m glad you have children in college. Soon, only the rich will be able to afford college.
Actually, the percentage of union membership is just 12 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. It has fallen steadily from 20 percent in 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available. That’s when Reagan’s assault on unions began that is still going on. Unions have increased wages for everyone and created the middle class. They have also improved working conditions for every worker, especially miners.
Unions have nothing to do with the Big 3’s troubles. No, not “Someone on here likes to say that unions are the greatest democracy.” I have said repeatedly that unions are the most democratic thing in the workplace. The majority of workers have to petition for a union, they vote for their leaders and they vote for a contract. Tell me what is more democratic?
You think Toyota is thriving? You haven’t been right about anything on this rant.
According to Bloomberg, “ Toyota Motor Corp., Japan's largest automaker, may report an operating loss of at least 100 billion ($1.1 billion) in the fiscal second half as a global recession and a strengthening yen crimp sales, the Asahi newspaper said.
Losses in the October-March period may reduce the automaker's full-year profit by 80 percent or more, forcing the company to lower its earnings forecasts, The maker of Corolla cars last month forecast the biggest drop in profit in at least 18 years as a global slump cripples auto demand Toyota said on Nov. 6 it expects operating profit to plunge 74 percent this fiscal year to 600 billion yen, which is also down 63 percent from its previous forecast.
Sales in the U.S., traditionally the company's most profitable market, plunged the most in 28 years last month as the recession forced consumers to cut spending. Auto sales in the U.S., the world's largest auto market, fell to the lowest annual rate in 26 years last month. Toyota's sales slipped 34 percent.”
Here’s the link:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=a7q7XlNrJ.P4&refer=asia
So, what union are you blaming that on?
I know Dargo already called you out on the ridiculous “unreported stats about the 2008 election,“ but it doesn’t take much to show how full of crap you are. A simple check would have told that Democrats won 28 states and Republicans won 22.
Your words:
Losses in the October-March period may reduce the automaker's full-year profit by 80 percent or more, forcing the company to lower its earnings forecasts, The maker of Corolla cars last month forecast the biggest drop in profit in at least 18 years as a global slump cripples auto demand Toyota said on Nov. 6 it expects operating profit to plunge 74 percent this fiscal year to 600 billion yen, which is also down 63 percent from its previous forecast.
My response: Notice you said "may" and "expects". The big three have been down for nearly 15 months. Interesting that this started just 9 months after the Democrats took control of Congress, but that's another topic for another time.
Your words: According to Bloomberg, “ Toyota Motor Corp., Japan's largest automaker, may report an operating loss of at least 100 billion ($1.1 billion) in the fiscal second half as a global recession and a strengthening yen crimp sales, the Asahi newspaper said.
My response: Again, you use the term "may". This is not definite yet. I would consider it likely that the American market would show a decline. We nearly had a meltdown in the economy on Sept. 18 and 19. However, again, the big three have been down for nearly fifteen months. Not "may" but "have". What's the difference? By your own words, the unions get more for their employees at the big three than they do with the foriegn automakers.
I heard on a program somewhere tonight that unions are just 7% of the work force. I'm willing to go with your number of 12%. I do know that it has been dropping. As for Reagan attacking the unions that's just not true. When the traffic controllers went on strike, they did so illegally. Reagan gave them a time frame to get back to work or lose their jobs. They didn't end their illegal strike, so he fired them when he said he would.
You can cite a miltary record all you like, although I don't know why you did in these comments. I didn't ask you about your military history or lack thereof. I always wonder when someone has to submit their resume' unsolicited. You've also claimed to be a writer, but all of the writers I know either know how to spell, or at least use spell check. There may be an occasional mistake, but not the consistent mistakes and grammatical errors that you display in your writing.
Regardless of the resume' you put out it doesn't impress me. You have shown that you hate any American that disagrees with you. You display this with your lack of tolerance for others, their opinions and Americans in certain industries and your hatred for those that live in different parts of the country than you live. I believe that you are a welfare whore. You take the taxpayers money without regrets. You can claim you're something else all you like, but that's my opinion of you based on things you say, and your constantly trying to convince anyone and everyone of your work history. You could be my next door neighbor, but I suspect that you are actually someone that collects welfare and are very worried whenever someone that actually works for a living stands up and says I'm tired of you freeloading on my dime. So save your breath when trying to convince me of your supposed military history, work history or even your personal life. You can't change my opinion because you have no way of proving yourself. I'm not interested in looking up some stranger online and I really don't care if you're the CEO of a company, retired, blue collar or the welfare queen I suspect you are. I've been talking the issue. Not personality...or lack of a personality.
I stand by my comment that public education is the best form of education in this country, and I agree with bluzie that public education is the great equalizer. It educates every single child, and it unlocks the potential of every child. Any child will excel with one-on-one instruction. Both of my parents worked, even though he was a UAW member. There was no way my parents could have home-schooled me. With the decline in wages and good paying jobs, there is no way most kids have a parents who can stay home.
I've disagreed with a few times and he doesn't hate me. Maybe CG is just intolerant of anonymous douchebags.
CG...SHAME ON YOU!
Wow. I guess when you’re always wrong on the issues, and you can’t win an argument with facts you have to stoop to calling someone a welfare whore. What the hell is a welfare whore, anyway? Well, its no secret who I am, but you, on the other hand, are a cowardly troll hiding behind anonymity. But thanks for the compliment. It means I’m kicking your sorry ass.
I never cited my military record, nor did I submit my resume “unsolicited.” I talked about my experience with unions. But I’m proud of my military service, and a cowardly troll like you will not change that. I don’t recall saying I was a writer, but I am; and a much better one than you. Like I said in another thread; if it makes you feel superior to point out those alleged mistakes, knock yourself out.
Are you seriously saying Toyota is “doing fine,” like you claim? Nice try at spin. Well here’s a fact that is happening right now, and there is no “may” or “expect” about it.
“Sales in the U.S., traditionally the company's most profitable market, plunged the most in 28 years last month.”
“In response, the company is also cutting output. Toyota, which opened its seventh North American auto assembly plant last week, said it plans to further reduce production at factories in the U.S. and Canada.
The company is eliminating nine days of output by extending an annual holiday shutdown at its Georgetown, Kentucky, facility and closing the location for two additional days in January, the company said Dec. 5.
Holiday shutdowns are also extended at a plant in Fremont, California, that Toyota shares with GM and at plants in Cambridge and Woodstock, Ontario, the company said. “
I know you hate the Big 3, American companies and American workers, but your beloved foreign company is having the same problems the Big 3 is having. But don’t worry, the Japanese government has always helped them with health care for employees- Japanese employees that is - tariffs on imports and manipulation of the yen, so if they ever came close to failing they will not have to jump through any hoops to get help.
Well, my number for union membership has a source, yours, as usual, does not. Originally you said 15 percent. The decline in unions has a lot to with wages declining. But here is a link: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm
“As for Reagan attacking the unions that's just not true?” Wow, talk about spin. I don’t consider 48 hours a reasonable time frame to get back to work. He endangered passengers to break the union. There were a lot of options to settle the situation, and he took the most drastic and unsafe one.
In fact, there had been 22 other strikes prior to the air controllers under the same laws, such as postal workers, the Government Printing Office and Library of Congress employees and by air traffic controllers prior to 1981.Yet, he took the opportunity to kill the union.
As uneasy as I am to agree with mcbluster, I have to join him with his anger/disgust at the Republican senators. Their action was shameful and destructive, not only toward Michigan but toward the American economy as a whole.
You are getting a little out there, "not anonymous." I'd advise you to be cautious about believing everything that shows up on the web.
Maybe I would agree with “mcbluster” too if I knew he or she was. I see lots of posts from anonymous trolls, but none from a screen name mcbluster. However, I agree with you that the actions of the Republican senators were shameful and destructive, not only toward Michigan but toward the American economy as a whole.
Funny, isn't it, Republicans used to be "Buy 'murikin', or you're a goddamn Commie". Now, it's piss on the Big 3 and buy a Toyota.
And, CG, don't complain about the anonymous folks...it's within your power to do something about it. You can't blame these scumbags for taking advantage of it.
Thank goodness Dargo doesn't stoop to name-calling like those bad anonymous types.
Hey, guru, what's with the Dargo Hussein name? Is that a smear?
I know Dargo, but I just don’t understand why people will not chose a screen name to take ownership of what they write. But I just don’t want some stupid trolls dictate how I operate my blog. I’ll take it under advisement.
No, it was to show your attempt to smear President Obama by using the name B. Hussein Obama was not going to work. Many people adopted Hussein as their middle name, too.
So now I'm against the workers and for the foriegn companies. Those people in Kentucky (where your organizers can't seem to find) and California that mentioned are American workers. Well, in the case of California, they could be illegal aliens. Furthermore, I drive a GM vehicle. I'm all for the American worker earning as much money as he can earn. I'm not for the unions trying to ruin the Big three. As for believing Republican Senators, I'm not basing my position on what they say. I'm also not basing my position on my living in Michigan. If the union isn't willing to lower wages up front, lower costs up front, the result will be the big three will go out of business and those workers won't be getting any paychecks. Bankruptcy, so they can restructure themselves will save those jobs. The bailout will only delay the the bankruptcy. Let's see, if they get the $14 billion bailout, then file bankruptcy, they won't have to pay that back, unless their bankruptcy is the restructuring type.
Have you ever heard the expression, “if the shoe fits?”
I understand they are American workers, but they are foreign companies. As for Kentucky, the organizers have no problem finding the plant, but they have zero access to workers because of the rural location, like I have said repeatedly.
I don’t ever recall mentioning California, but the Big 3 doesn’t employ illegal aliens. I don’t blame you for driving a GM vehicle, it that’s true. They are some of the best cars in the world.
How are the “unions trying to ruin the Big three?” In 2007 they made huge concessions, which included a two-tier wage system that paid new workers $14 an hour and taking responsibility for the health care for thousands of retirees.
It makes no sense for the union to accept arbitrary reductions. The UAW has said they will go back to the bargaining table, but all the parties should be at the table.
It’s a loan, not a bailout, and I don’t believe the loan “will only delay the bankruptcy.”
From your post at 10:30 am: The company is eliminating nine days of output by extending an annual holiday shutdown at its Georgetown, Kentucky, facility and closing the location for two additional days in January, the company said Dec. 5.
Holiday shutdowns are also extended at a plant in Fremont, California, that Toyota shares with GM and at plants in Cambridge and Woodstock, Ontario, the company said. “
From your original posting:
They locate in rural, conservative areas like Kentucky that are hard to get to by organizers and that are grateful to have any job that's off the farm.
Hard to lie about what you said when it's still online.
You're joking, right? Yes, they locate in primarily rural, conservative areas in the south. Georgetown, Kentucky has like 11,000 people. The plant in California was an existing GM plant before the joint venture. The plants in Ontario are not relevant to this discussion. Now, where is the alleged lie, anonymous troll?
Post a Comment