You Can't Soak the Rich

[red states rule]

With the Dems foaming at the mouth to jack up nearly all taxes, and wanting to increase Federal spending; they should all take an Economics 101 course



You Can't Soak the Rich
By DAVID RANSON
May 20, 2008; Page A23

snip

The data show that the tax yield has been independent of marginal tax rates over this period, but tax revenue is directly proportional to GDP. So if we want to increase tax revenue, we need to increase GDP.

What happens if we instead raise tax rates? Economists of all persuasions accept that a tax rate hike will reduce GDP, in which case Hauser's Law says it will also lower tax revenue. That's a highly inconvenient truth for redistributive tax policy, and it flies in the face of deeply felt beliefs about social justice. It would surely be unpopular today with those presidential candidates who plan to raise tax rates on the rich – if they knew about it.

Although Hauser's Law sounds like a restatement of the Laffer Curve (and Mr. Hauser did cite Arthur Laffer in his original article), it has independent validity. Because Mr. Laffer's curve is a theoretical insight, theoreticians find it easy to quibble with. Test cases, where the economy responds to a tax change, always lend themselves to many alternative explanations. Conventional economists, despite immense publicity, have yet to swallow the Laffer Curve. When it is mentioned at all by critics, it is often as an object of scorn.

Because Mr. Hauser's horizontal straight line is a simple fact, it is ultimately far more compelling. It also presents a major opportunity. It seems likely that the tax system could maintain a 19.5% yield with a top bracket even lower than 35%.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121124460502305693.html?mod=opinion_main_comment aries

[midcan5]

Clinton raised taxes and proved that old saw false.

"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well."

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-taxgrowth.htm

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

http://www.bostonreview.net/BR25.5/simon.html

[red states rule]

Clinton raised taxes and proved that old saw false.

"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well."

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-taxgrowth.htm

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

http://www.bostonreview.net/BR25.5/simon.html

You may have set a record - more erros is a single post

The biggest peace time economic growth was during the years opf Pres Reagan who cut traxes across the board. the top rate was an insane 70%. it was cut to 28%

Revenues DOUBLED in his 8 years to over $1 trillion per year

Do you remeber the good ol economic says of Peanut Carter?

Right now the top 1% pay 38% of Fedral Income taxes. When you add SS taxes, Medicare taxes, state taxes, local taxes, property taxes - they are easily forking over more then half their income to the government

[midcan5]

Reagan had the highest tax increase in peace time ever. He made us a debtor nation and ruined the economy, you do know why Bush senior lost?

"The fiscal legacy of the early Reagan years was large budget deficits resulting from his programme to cut tax rates and bolster defence spending. During his first term, the deficit rose from 2.6% of GDP to a peak of 6.0% in 1983. However, in contrast to the current administration of President George Bush, he was not oblivious to the risk of large fiscal deficits and accepted numerous tax rises after the large tax cut bill in 1981:

The primary thrust of the 1981 tax bill was to reduce the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 50% and significantly bolster business investment allowances. In the subsequent tax bills, he protected the reduction in marginal tax rates but took back much of the business tax relief."

http://www.oxan.com/about/news/2004-06-14Reaganlegacy.asp


Serious question?

But aside from Reagan's voodoo economics I wonder why you and other republicans support the rich so readily? I am lucky in life and know many of them well, and I have to say if you raised their taxes it would not hurt them or the economy. So why the crocodile tears for those who wouldn't have you over for dinner or for that matter would probably have nothing to do with you unless you moved in their realm?

And the WSJ opinion page is pure BS.

[manu1959]

Reagan had the highest tax increase in peace time ever. He made us a debtor nation and ruined the economy, you do know why Bush senior lost?

"The fiscal legacy of the early Reagan years was large budget deficits resulting from his programme to cut tax rates and bolster defence spending. During his first term, the deficit rose from 2.6% of GDP to a peak of 6.0% in 1983. However, in contrast to the current administration of President George Bush, he was not oblivious to the risk of large fiscal deficits and accepted numerous tax rises after the large tax cut bill in 1981:

The primary thrust of the 1981 tax bill was to reduce the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 50% and significantly bolster business investment allowances. In the subsequent tax bills, he protected the reduction in marginal tax rates but took back much of the business tax relief."

http://www.oxan.com/about/news/2004-06-14Reaganlegacy.asp


Serious question?

But aside from Reagan's voodoo economics I wonder why you and other republicans support the rich so readily? I am lucky in life and know many of them well, and I have to say if you raised their taxes it would not hurt them or the economy. So why the crocodile tears for those who wouldn't have you over for dinner or for that matter would probably have nothing to do with you unless you moved in their realm?

And the WSJ opinion page is pure BS.

define rich.......

questions why should a dollar a "rich person" makes be taxed at a higher rate than a "non rich person" ......

does not our founding documents state that all men are created equal....and that all shall be treated equally under the law.....

[red states rule]

Reagan had the highest tax increase in peace time ever. He made us a debtor nation and ruined the economy, you do know why Bush senior lost?

"The fiscal legacy of the early Reagan years was large budget deficits resulting from his programme to cut tax rates and bolster defence spending. During his first term, the deficit rose from 2.6% of GDP to a peak of 6.0% in 1983. However, in contrast to the current administration of President George Bush, he was not oblivious to the risk of large fiscal deficits and accepted numerous tax rises after the large tax cut bill in 1981:

The primary thrust of the 1981 tax bill was to reduce the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 50% and significantly bolster business investment allowances. In the subsequent tax bills, he protected the reduction in marginal tax rates but took back much of the business tax relief."

http://www.oxan.com/about/news/2004-06-14Reaganlegacy.asp


Serious question?

But aside from Reagan's voodoo economics I wonder why you and other republicans support the rich so readily? I am lucky in life and know many of them well, and I have to say if you raised their taxes it would not hurt them or the economy. So why the crocodile tears for those who wouldn't have you over for dinner or for that matter would probably have nothing to do with you unless you moved in their realm?

And the WSJ opinion page is pure BS.

The deal made with Dems was for every dollar in tax increase there was to be a spending cut of $2

Dems lied and never cut spending

Rge Reagan tax cuts pulled the country out the same disaster yu clowns want to revist with Barry's $2 trillion in tax increases - and nearly $900 billion in new spending ideas

The rich are the ones who fund your stupid social programs and yet to look at them with such contempt

Even the DNC Times fessed up how much of the tax burden the "rich" carry

snip

The top 1 percent of income earners paid about 36.7 percent of federal income taxes and 25.3 percent of all federal taxes in 2004. The top 20 percent of income earners paid 67.1 percent of all federal taxes, up from 66.1 percent in 2000, according to the budget office.

By contrast, families in the bottom 40 percent of income earners, those with incomes below $36,300, typically paid no federal income tax and received money back from the government. That so-called negative income tax stemmed mainly from the earned-income tax credit, a program that benefits low-income parents who are employed.

Put another way: rich families were the undisputed winners from President Bush’s tax cuts, but people in the bottom half of the earnings scale were not paying much in taxes anyway.



http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[mundame]

define rich.......

questions why should a dollar a "rich person" makes be taxed at a higher rate than a "non rich person" ......

does not our founding documents state that all men are created equal....and that all shall be treated equally under the law.....


This is the best argument against progressive taxation that I have ever read! And it's so simple!

This idea is a keeper.

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

Before Mr P jumps on it....Fair Tax (which I thought McCain supports) is a great equalizer for all hardworking Americans.

http://www.fairtax.org

[manu1959]

This is the best argument against progressive taxation that I have ever read! And it's so simple!

This idea is a keeper.

i am sure the dems who claim that conservatives seek to undermine the constitution at every turn....see other thread.....can find it in our constitution somewhere that the rich should be taxed at a higher rate...

question....why is not gas and other items taxed at different rates.....

you know each according to their needs each according to their means.....

[midcan5]

define rich.......

questions why should a dollar a "rich person" makes be taxed at a higher rate than a "non rich person" ......

does not our founding documents state that all men are created equal....and that all shall be treated equally under the law.....

2 first, the answer is above, 90%. Most didn't make it.

3. I don't believe it does and are you now an affirmative action proponent?

1. 'Rich' is hard to define exactly, it is those who live strictly on inheritance, or inherited a part of a large company, or the company itself, say a meat manufacturer or a large car dealership. Some married into families with highly profitable businesses, a few are VP levels or above in large businesses or investment firms, a few lawyers. Some salesmen/woman approach rich. Symbols are 2 or 3 houses, I know some who own 5, kids with escalades going to preppy schools, next come the salaried rich, when you know figure exceeds 250-300k. The well to do are below this in the 200k salary range. imo

[Yurt]

2 first, the answer is above, 90%. Most didn't make it.

3. I don't believe it does and are you now an affirmative action proponent?

1. 'Rich' is hard to define exactly, it is those who live strictly on inheritance, or inherited a part of a large company, or the company itself, say a meat manufacturer or a large car dealership. Some married into families with highly profitable businesses, a few are VP levels or above in large businesses or investment firms, a few lawyers. Some salesmen/woman approach rich. Symbols are 2 or 3 houses, I know some who own 5, kids with escalades going to preppy schools, next come the salaried rich, when you know figure exceeds 250-300k. The well to do are below this in the 200k salary range. imo

how is "equal" = to affirmative action

[manu1959]

2 first, the answer is above, 90%. Most didn't make it.

3. I don't believe it does and are you now an affirmative action proponent?

1. 'Rich' is hard to define exactly, it is those who live strictly on inheritance, or inherited a part of a large company, or the company itself, say a meat manufacturer or a large car dealership. Some married into families with highly profitable businesses, a few are VP levels or above in large businesses or investment firms, a few lawyers. Some salesmen/woman approach rich. Symbols are 2 or 3 houses, I know some who own 5, kids with escalades going to preppy schools, next come the salaried rich, when you know figure exceeds 250-300k. The well to do are below this in the 200k salary range. imo

affirmative action does not treat each person equally.....it gives preferential treatment.....same as progressive taxation....

[red states rule]

All libs do with their tax policy is punish achievement, and remove incentives to take risk

[midcan5]

I have been on this earth, this great blue sphere, long enough to know discrimination is real and is still real. Consider the affirmative action that got W into Yale and Harvard, connections are AA of another kind because if the field were level he would never have made it. AA just attempts to right some of the 100 years of wrong. Hardly worth the effort you jackals throw at it.

[red states rule]

I have been on this earth, this great blue sphere, long enough to know discrimination is real and is still real. Consider the affirmative action that got W into Yale and Harvard, connections are AA of another kind because if the field were level he would never have made it. AA just attempts to right some of the 100 years of wrong. Hardly worth the effort you jackals throw at it.

In a liberals mind racism toward blacks is evil, but reverse racism toward whites is acceptable

Unless they are on the receiving end

[Silver]

I have been on this earth, this great blue sphere, long enough to know discrimination is real and is still real. Consider the affirmative action that got W into Yale and Harvard, connections are AA of another kind because if the field were level he would never have made it. AA just attempts to right some of the 100 years of wrong. Hardly worth the effort you jackals throw at it.

Getting any advantage because your name is Bush or Clinton or Kerry affects few people.....
getting an advantage because of the color of your skin affects millions of people

and just in case it might mean something to you...its AGAINST THE FUCKIN' CONSTITUTION !!!!:finger3:

[midcan5]

In a liberals mind racism toward blacks is evil, but reverse racism toward whites is acceptable

Unless they are on the receiving end

You do realize how dumb it is for someone to constantly attribute their own small thoughts to others. Again I ask you to show me some proof of racism directed towards whites and not the pablum feed to you by your high priests of wingnutland who keep you active in a nether world of hate and stupidity.

[midcan5]

Getting any advantage because your name is Bush or Clinton or Kerry affects few people.....
getting an advantage because of the color of your skin affects millions of people

and just in case it might mean something to you...its AGAINST THE FUCKIN' CONSTITUTION !!!!:finger3:

So then Bush should not have been allowed in Yale, boy, you are learning in spite of yourself. And I'm sure connections count more than AA. Proof in case I read you wrong. LOL

[red states rule]

You do realize how dumb it is for someone to constantly attribute their own small thoughts to others. Again I ask you to show me some proof of racism directed towards whites and not the pablum feed to you by your high priests of wingnutland who keep you active in a nether world of hate and stupidity.

Not that facts ever mater to you - here you go

BTW, why are you changing the hread topic? We were talking about the over taxation of Americans


Chapter One: A Question of Discrimination

When the University of California at Berkeley routinely admits African American students with lower grades and SAT scores 200 points lower than Chinese Americans who are rejected, there is nothing fancy or esoteric about what the university is doing: it is discriminating against Chinese Americans on the basis of race. When the Department of Defense (DOD) requests bids for a road construction contract at the White Sands missile range and then informs a white bidder that the contract is "sheltered" for the benefit of racial minorities, DOD has discriminated on the basis of race. When, under pressure form the U.S. Department of Justice, the state of North Carolina draws a congressional district with no substantial black voters to elect a black congressman, white voters have been discriminated against. And when a white firefighter in Birmingham, Alabama, who finished eleventh among those taking a promotion exam for lieutenant is passed over in favor of a black who finished ninety-fifth, that white fireman has also suffered discrimination on the basis of race.

Americans of all races and political persuasions in overwhelming numbers disapprove of any sort of officially sanctioned race discrimination. As practiced today, affirmative action discriminates on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity against whites, males, and other unfavored groups. And yet today this official discrimination is one of the most pervasive and powerful of government social policies, denying Americans jobs, career and educational opportunities, even handicapping their ability to bid on government contracts unless they fit into one of the preferred racial or ethnic categories.

Supporters of such discrimination have argued that it is "benign" and, as such, distinguishable from the more virulent forms of race discrimination practiced in the past. Indeed, the argument runs, this past discrimination has so disadvantaged blacks as to make modest preferences a practical necessity. Whatever its merits, and available evidence suggests they are dubious, the approach fails on legal grounds. Despite recurring dissents, the Supreme Courts has specifically and repeatedly held that neither past official discrimination nor current generalized societal discrimination justifies special treatment by the government for members of the afflicted group who have, as individuals, suffered no harm.

But despite the Court's unceasingly clear rejection of discrimination in principle, affirmative action remains pervasive today, just as in 1964, ten years after Brown v Board of Education, Jim Crow still ruled the South. Facing both political and legal rejection, those who would perpetuate the current affirmative action regime have danced gingerly roundabout the core issue to do battle with a series of straw men, to cite ills their remedies do not address, and to broaden the community of beneficiaries in the hope of improving the political odds. So far, they have been remarkably successful.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/backfire.htm

[Silver]

In any instance where someone was given any advantage or consideration over another because of AA, there was discrimination.....it ain't rocket science..

[manu1959]

I have been on this earth, this great blue sphere, long enough to know discrimination is real and is still real. Consider the affirmative action that got W into Yale and Harvard, connections are AA of another kind because if the field were level he would never have made it. AA just attempts to right some of the 100 years of wrong. Hardly worth the effort you jackals throw at it.

so because a group long ago treated another group poorly....all of whom are now long dead......

we now pass laws so that one group can treat another group poorly.....

when do you see this cycle ending.....

[manu1959]

You do realize how dumb it is for someone to constantly attribute their own small thoughts to others. Again I ask you to show me some proof of racism directed towards whites and not the pablum feed to you by your high priests of wingnutland who keep you active in a nether world of hate and stupidity.

i did not get into uc berkeley because i was white......plain and simple...the quota was filled and the rest of the spaces had to go to non whites.....

my company is white owned ... we can not get public sector work because we do not meet the goals set for non white ownership....but if we hire non white consultants we can get work....

[Yurt]

i did not get into uc berkeley because i was white......plain and simple...the quota was filled and the rest of the spaces had to go to non whites.....

my company is white owned ... we can not get public sector work because we do not meet the goals set for non white ownership....but if we hire non white consultants we can get work....

tsk tsk, thats not racism according to bleeding heart guilty libs, that is progress and that is you paying for the sins of your father, oh wait, libs hate religion...

[manu1959]

tsk tsk, thats not racism according to bleeding heart guilty libs, that is progress and that is you paying for the sins of your father, oh wait, libs hate religion...

my father did not come here till after slavery ended........i want reparations for pain and suffering ......

[Yurt]

my father did not come here till after slavery ended........i want reparations for pain and suffering ......

what is more moronic (does not deserve irony) is that not all whites owned nor supported slavery, yet all whites must pay and no white person is allowed honor in his culture, whiteness, according to obama's church, must be destroyed.

[midcan5]

so because a group long ago treated another group poorly....all of whom are now long dead......

we now pass laws so that one group can treat another group poorly.....

when do you see this cycle ending.....

So we should continue discrimination against an entire race because one white boy didn't get into the college of choice. If I were being smart I'd say, sorry, you had such poor grades or no connections. Lots of kids don't get into the college of their choice. Big poo.

And I disagree with reparations except if they were given to inner city schools to be rebuilt and supplied with the tools that make a difference.

It will end when we are all shades of beige brown...way after we are dust and forgotten I suspect. Time is too long but hopefully people will survive.

[red states rule]

So we should continue discrimination against an entire race because one white boy didn't get into the college of choice. If I were being smart I'd say, sorry, you had such poor grades or no connections. Lots of kids don't get into the college of their choice. Big poo.

And I disagree with reparations except if they were given to inner city schools to be rebuilt and supplied with the tools that make a difference.

It will end when we are all shades of beige brown...way after we are dust and forgotten I suspect. Time is too long but hopefully people will survive.

Read post #19 - or did you, and you are ignoring it?

[KitchenKitten99]

my father did not come here till after slavery ended........i want reparations for pain and suffering ......

Speaking of reparations, a little OT of the original post, but I immediately thought of this when I read your post. Remember, there is a warning about rampant swearing and half-nekkid women for those who may be viewing at work.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wQdSAlqNWPs&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wQdSAlqNWPs&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VhZaUFMKQ94&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VhZaUFMKQ94&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9EtvHvGtdco&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9EtvHvGtdco&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[KitchenKitten99]

since i can't seem to edit the post, the three videos are actually one show in three parts. I forgot to mention that.

[Yurt]

So we should continue discrimination against an entire race because one white boy didn't get into the college of choice. If I were being smart I'd say, sorry, you had such poor grades or no connections. Lots of kids don't get into the college of their choice. Big poo.

And I disagree with reparations except if they were given to inner city schools to be rebuilt and supplied with the tools that make a difference.

It will end when we are all shades of beige brown...way after we are dust and forgotten I suspect. Time is too long but hopefully people will survive.

are you saying that there no whites are denied entrance (as you know uni's have a max number they can accept) because a certain percentage of those who gained entrance must be a minority? are you that dense? if a school had a cap of only 100 admittees -- 100 whites applied and 10 minorities applied, all things being equal, in fact the minorities could even have lower grades, the minorities would get in. that leaves 10 whites who did not make it.

i'll bill you later for that little lesson in reality...

[Gaffer]

In 69-73 I was looking at becoming a police officer in southern calif. They had a discriminator police in effect through out the state that you had to be a certain height. I was 5' 7 and a half, the shortest height requirement was 5' 8". even though I could out perform all the other applicants in mental and physical abilities I was consistently refused the jobs. That was my first esperience with discrimination.

When I was 37 I was looking at government jobs. And sending in applications. Turns out they all had an age cut off of 35. Even though I was well qualified for all the positions I was refused because of my age. Again discrimination.

I had worked for the state prison for over two years when I got divorced and moved down near cincinnati. I applied at the prison near there. The HR guy was thrilled with my application and said they had 19 openings and to call him in a few days. When I called he said they couldn't hire me, because I was white. They hired 19 blacks and one hispanic. Good old affirmative action.

The cincinnati police exam is another example. To get in for an interview a white male had to get a score of at least 98%. A black male had to score 60%. Females needed 40%. Affirmative action.

I have been discriminated against multiple times for my age and color. These are just a few examples off the top of my head. And I'm not even touching on the nepotism that abounds in government agencies.

[Abbey Marie]

So we should continue discrimination against an entire race because one white boy didn't get into the college of choice. If I were being smart I'd say, sorry, you had such poor grades or no connections. Lots of kids don't get into the college of their choice. Big poo.

And I disagree with reparations except if they were given to inner city schools to be rebuilt and supplied with the tools that make a difference.

It will end when we are all shades of beige brown...way after we are dust and forgotten I suspect. Time is too long but hopefully people will survive.

Please enlighten us- what tools would make the difference?

[red states rule]

Please enlighten us- what tools would make the difference?

More money via higher taxes for one.

Lay off trying to hold teachers accountable, They should only answer to their union leaders

Allow teachers academic freedom. They should be allowed to teach liberal opinions and beliefs as facts

How is that for starters?

[midcan5]

Read post #19 - or did you, and you are ignoring it?

I asked for statistics not one man's opinion. Again for those who live in the real world, discrimination exists, the West Virginia voters mentioned it clearly during exit polls. In our free country colleges can give some extra credit to aid in diversifying their student body; I see nothing wrong with that.

[Kathianne]

I asked for statistics not one man's opinion. Again for those who live in the real world, discrimination exists, the West Virginia voters mentioned it clearly during exit polls. In our free country colleges can give some extra credit to aid in diversifying their student body; I see nothing wrong with that.

Does the denial of being prejudiced mean it doesn't exist? How do you explain the black vote of over 85% for Obama? My guess, they are prejudiced in favor of blacks. Is that wrong? Is it the best way to have an electorate vote? If ok for Blacks, why not other groups?

[Yurt]

I asked for statistics not one man's opinion. Again for those who live in the real world, discrimination exists, the West Virginia voters mentioned it clearly during exit polls. In our free country colleges can give some extra credit to aid in diversifying their student body; I see nothing wrong with that.

link? what exactly did they say that was different from 90% of blacks voting for obama?

[midcan5]

Please enlighten us- what tools would make the difference?

Jonathan Kozol covers this in several books, secure well kept and supplied inner city schools do help as the charter schools demonstrate.

http://www.learntoquestion.com/seevak/groups/2002/sites/kozol/Seevak02/html/se-open.htm

[midcan5]

link? what exactly did they say that was different from 90% of blacks voting for obama?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/west-virginia-countrys-mo_b_101651.html

[manu1959]

So we should continue discrimination against an entire race because one white boy didn't get into the college of choice. If I were being smart I'd say, sorry, you had such poor grades or no connections. Lots of kids don't get into the college of their choice. Big poo.

And I disagree with reparations except if they were given to inner city schools to be rebuilt and supplied with the tools that make a difference.

It will end when we are all shades of beige brown...way after we are dust and forgotten I suspect. Time is too long but hopefully people will survive.

actually lots of white boys got discriminated against....you should read the bakke case......i got into usc so grades and contacts were not an issue.....

but you ask a good question.....so we should continue discrimination against an entire race because previous generations did bad things.....

[Yurt]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/west-virginia-countrys-mo_b_101651.html

wow, a whole whoppin 20% polled did so based on race, wow! and did they ask the same question of the 90% blacks who voted for obama? no. and you failed to fully address my question and relate how that racism is any different from blacks voting for obama solely because he is black.

isn't that their right though? to vote however they want....no one says boo about blacks voting that way....hmmm

[manu1959]

wow, a whole whoppin 20% polled did so based on race, wow! and did they ask the same question of the 90% blacks who voted for obama? no. and you failed to fully address my question and relate how that racism is any different from blacks voting for obama solely because he is black.

isn't that their right though? to vote however they want....no one says boo about blacks voting that way....hmmm

and i know women that are voting hillary because she is a woman and every other permutation you can think of......

isn't america and free speach and choice a great thing.....

[Yurt]

and i know women that are voting hillary because she is a woman and every other permutation you can think of......

isn't america and free speach and choice a great thing.....

it is, unless you're white and/or conservative.

[Abbey Marie]

Jonathan Kozol covers this in several books, secure well kept and supplied inner city schools do help as the charter schools demonstrate.

http://www.learntoquestion.com/seevak/groups/2002/sites/kozol/Seevak02/html/se-open.htm

If charter schools work, it is because they can be selective about who they let in. This insures a group of students whose parents really care that they learn, and who are not going to be disruptive. At least, that is how they work in our state.

Secure and well-kept, huh? The reason the schools are unsafe and falling apart is because of the students. Fix them, and they will just turn into crud again shortly. There already are metal detectors and school security officers. What do you want - the National Guard? Are we teaching humans or animals?

As for your author's insights, I lived in that South Bronx that he likes to talk about. I made it through both college and law school. No one threw money at my schools, yet I managed. You libs will never get that it is the parents who set the tone for a student's lack of respect for authority, education, and property, and NO amount of white guilt or money will fix that.

So, what were those tools again that money will buy to "fix" the public schools?