The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Religion & Culture / Atheist Fools

URL:  http://boards.fool.com/but-the-quotpositivesquot-you-mention-are-not-30688608.aspx

Subject:  Re: smaller government, DrB? Date:  5/17/2013  9:43 AM
Author:  DrBob2 Number:  423131 of 456984

But the "positives" you mention are not negated by having the feds set (and enforce) standards and distribute funding. And the negatives ARE negated. There are no negatives with my proposal...

Well, that is an interesting position to take. There are positives, but of course there are negatives. The obvious one is the extra cost of another layer of bureaucracy, this one nationwide. Money is going to harder and harder to come by as the elephant of social entitlement programs expands. Another is reduced flexibility. Have you noticed how difficult it is to get things accomplished in Washington? Thirdly, a lot of people complained about Bush's education policies which were about setting national standards. (How would the good burghers of San Francisco, say, feel about eight years of their school system run by George Bush?) Many community groups are still complaining that Obama is doing more of the same Bush policies. For example:

Our Communities Left Behind
www.scribd.com/doc/35011507/Our-Communities-Left-Behind
Communities for Excellent Public Schools, a new national coalition of community-base organizations composed of parents and student in low-income communities, i