yes, because since the government got involved in education (what was it, the 60s or so?) there have been some excellent results in students, schools, and its been very cost effective.
you have completely gone off the deep end, which is a shame. you used to be quite concise and well-spoken. bring "them" on. i have several nice assault rifles and im an excellent shot.
I'm just asking, but do those countries beating us in the education department have privatized systems? Assuming that's the alternative you're promoting...
i am promoting privatized systems, yes. and it is not exceptionally relevant what some of the best countries use as a "system" of education. because almost every single one of them spends less, and gets more out of it. what we do is not working, and therefore it needs to be changed.
I could agree that it needs to be changed, but to what? My question was an attempt to "control" for government involvement, as you are saying that they are the problem.
Oh please... could you be any more pathetic? The source of the data is the IRS. The Tax Foundation publishing that data doesn't invalidate it. If it's conservative propaganda then why did the liberal rag NY Times publish it? Similarly, the source of the numbers in these charts is the U.S. Government, and Heritage publishing them doesn't change anything. You lying, libtarded moonbats have argued with me about this before. And even after giving a link to the specific table in the budget that the national debt projections came from, some of you still pretended that Heritage "made it up." Reality check: this is a spending problem:
And this is a spending problem: U.S. Budget Deficit Expanded to Monthly Record $222.5 Billion in February http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...5-billion-monthly-budget-gap-in-february.html The drunk needs someone to take the bottle away, not give him the keys to the liquor cabinet.