RT> understands that just standing back and throwing monies into welfare 
RT> is not the solution. 
RB> Hahaha.. but throwing money into education will? Maybe you
RB> haven't been in a  high school lately, but it sure isn't any
RB> sock hop. Metal detectors, drug  searches, armed police
RB> officers, gangs, not to mention vastly plummeting 
RB> standards. Not because the kids are stupid, but the system
RB> keeps grinding more  and more to a complete halt. Now, of
RB> course, *rich* high schools aren't like  this, but nearly
RB> every high school with a *poor* population is. I'm sure
RB> that's 
RB> just another coincidence, though.
No its another example of your government and a union
at work.  Private schools spend less money per student
and get better results.  How can they do that?  Could
it be the fact that they have fewer supervisors and
more teachers?  Even in my small rural area in one
school there are approximately 30 teacher but there are
8-10 people working in the office.  Not one of these
people teach a student.  I know that there must be
someone who takes care of the 'other' stuff but having
almost 1 for every 3 teachers?
They also have the ability go fire teachers who do not
do their job well.  When ever there is a suggestion of
making public school teachers take test to make sure
they know the subject they are teaching who is the
first and loudest to complain?  The teacher's union.
                      Remember:  Freedom isn't Free!
--- timEd-B11
---------------