Tuesday, February 25, 2014

MUST READ!!! SHOW-ME KICK-ASS TKC TIPSTER ALTERNATIVE TAKE ON MISSOURI SCHOOL TRANSFER LAW!!!



This morning we want to present an ALTERNATIVE look at talk of news School Transfer legislation pending in Missouri . . .

To wit . . .

CHECK OUT THIS KANSAS CITY THOUGHT ON MISSOURI SCHOOL TRANSFER REGS THAT CHALLENGES POLITICALLY CORRECT THINKING!!!

It shouldn't matter but I'm pretty sure this great bit of writing was sent by one of our African-American readers and it demonstrates an insightful skepticism of current Show-Me State education trends . . .

Thoughts On Missouri's School Transfer Law

The biggest problem with the transfer law is that it reinforces the belief in the black community that black people cannot make decisions for their lives and the lives of their children and must rely on the government to do it.

A democracy would suggest that if a parent does not like the schools in their community, then they would move to a community where they like the schools or create a movement to improve your schools. For your community to pick up the tab for the government to take your children to a different community to become educated sounds like something else.

It's a dangerous precedent. Not unlike the welfare laws that stated that a single mother would receive more money if the father did NOT live in the home. We see the results of that.

I would suggest we re-read: The Negro Family: The Case For National Action.

This article from 1965 predicted the very problems we are having today.
#############

10 Comments:

Westport Trucky said...

Black people cannot make decisions for their lives and the lives of their children and must rely on the government to do it.


There Tony, you said what the issue is

Anonymous said...

the columnist said it, not Tony. It's a questionable point.

Anonymous said...

"A democracy would suggest that if a parent does not like the schools in their community, then they would move to a community where they like the schools or create a movement to improve your schools."

I tend to be libertarian, but even I can see the faulty thinking here. Not everyone can pick up and move to a (higher-priced) community where they like the schools. And creating a movement to improve schools is practically impossible with the entrenched bureaucracy that is the KCPS. Let the kids go to schools that will give them the most important thing they'll ever need to improve their lives--an education.

Anonymous said...

Who cares who said it, the point being it's fact. Tony's stupid way of posting shit sometimes makes you wonder who said what, if anybody did.

Anonymous said...

KCPS hasn't been about either parents' choices, a good education, or certainly not the best interests of the young people.
It has been about MONEY and a small gang of "leaders" with their snouts in the trough who will do pretty much anything they have to to maintain the status quo, regardless of the terrible effects on the community.
And whether you have a local board, state control, or some other plan, those same names will come up over and over again dialing for dollars.
It's been that way for decades and it's going to take some serious guts and leadership to change it, but if you never address the real problem, all the rest of the mess will continue.

Anonymous said...

"The Negro Family"??? Now there's an oxymoron if ever there was...

Anonymous said...

Here's the powerful synopsis:

"The fundamental problem,...is that of family structure....is that the Negro family in the urban ghettos is crumbling. A middle class group has managed to save itself, but for the vast numbers of the unskilled, poorly educated city working class the fabric of conventional social relationships has all but disintegrated.....the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself."

The reality is that you cannot and will not save a people, regardless of race, who are uneducated and are not motivated to elevate themselves. You could announce tomorrow, a program of free GED/college/vocational training to all poor people who apply, and yet most would not participate because they're not sufficiently motivated to change their station in life.

I'm sorry to report that there will always be a perpetual underclass in society, and there will always be those liberal utopian-minded enablers who wish to chastise society for their plight. The question is really just how far does society wish to coddle those who aren't motivated to be responsible for themselves.

Anonymous said...

"I'm sorry to report that there will always be a perpetual underclass in society, and there will always be those liberal utopian-minded enablers who wish to chastise society for their plight. The question is really just how far does society wish to coddle those who aren't motivated to be responsible for themselves."

Agree there will always be an underclass, but I'd hope that it would not be perpetual and that the underclass of the next generation would have it better than that of the previous generation's underclass.

That said, I think everyone has the right to the opportunity for a good education. Whether they take that opportunity is up to them, but it should be available. In this area, that would mean vouchers for private schools, transfers to functional schools, and working alternatives to the KCPS which is only good for sucking money from taxpayers. It isn't even a competent babysitter.

Anonymous said...

10:05 thanks for the good comments.

In relative terms, yes, there will always be a permanent underclass. Recall the "Bell Curve" model whereby most people fall somewhere in the broad middle, with smaller cohorts situated on either end.

"the underclass of the next generation would have it better"..this is already true. As I said, in relative terms, today's poor have it much better than their previous generation (e.g., food/housing support, color TV, air-conditioning, etc.).

Perhaps we should skip right to the heart of the "public education" dilemma. Why is K-12 education a government controlled, publicly taxed, inherently unfair matter? If you want to have ten kids, why aren't you held responsible for their education, instead of relying on others to be forcibly compelled by government to be taxed for their schooling? All education should be run by private non-governmental entities.

Your thoughts welcomed.

Anonymous said...

"Perhaps we should skip right to the heart of the 'public education' dilemma. Why is K-12 education a government controlled, publicly taxed, inherently unfair matter? If you want to have ten kids, why aren't you held responsible for their education, instead of relying on others to be forcibly compelled by government to be taxed for their schooling? All education should be run by private non-governmental entities."

Good question. I guess it comes down to capability. Some people are capable of providing home schooling or paying for a quality education and some are not. It seems to me, though, that it's in everyone's interest to have as many people educated as possible, which is where a justification or at least a rationalization for public taxation comes in. As for government controlled, I think you and I agree there. Most of the time government control results in failure. I was fortunate (as, I'd guess were you) to have gone to public schools in a decent neighborhood at a time when education was valued (by parents, anyway). I also did some substitute teaching in the very early 1970s and got to experience various schools in a large city (not Kansas City). My experience was the poorer the neighborhoods the more interested the students were in education and the discipline problems were fewer. (I was one of the few white subs not afraid to go to integrated schools--I never had a problem.) The wealthier areas had major drug problems and spoiled little brats. Of course times have changed in the past 40-some years and now it appears the poorer schools have more problems.