| If the educational burden should be on the local level, how exactly does a city like, say Pre-Katrina New Orleans pay for the educational system? Average annual income was about 20K/year (Keep in mind that this average includes some of the wealthiest people in the state who live uptown and in the orleans side of Lakeview). The tax base left after integration in the whole "White Flight" social phenomenon. So jump from the 60s, where the education wasn't great but was passable to the present where Orleans is considered one of the worst school districts in the country. Simply put, public education has problems getting financed when the tax base is that small. Compare it to the predominantly white suburbs of the area, where the average income rised significantly. Suddenly, you have schools that get more funding because of the larger tax base (higher incomes and more property owners). Simply put, if someone was born into poverty in the Orleans suburbs as opposed to being born into poverty in the inner city, they'd have a better shot of making it through and moving upwards.
Should someone be forced into an inescapable class simply because they were born in the city and have no means out?
I can't tie Bush to dropouts, but I can tie him to gashing Student Loan programs and federally backed need-based financial aid (IE: Pell Grants) for college.
The government does and should provide assistance for education, including free rides to school. Need based grants are essential to getting underprivledged kids into universities, especially since the prospect of going into debt should not be dumped on people who lack the family support to assist them when they finish school.
And when you have a group of bible-thumping retards trying to say "the theory of evolution is bogus, look at Creation---I MEAN INTELLIGENT DESIGN for the real truth," it proves that the localities cannot be trusted with educational matters. |