CA State Budget Passed – State’s demise imminent

[meadandale]

[quote=kewp]
And if the private sector stops exploiting illegal labor, there will be less of a burden on social services to support their extended families.

Quid pro quo, Clarice. [/quote]

Comeon kewp. You sound like a broken record. The school system in this state is also complicit in keeping illegals here. They knowingly educate the kids of illegals and even provide them free lunch and breakfast (of which the families often partake in whole). You are probably one of those that railed against prop 187 aren’t you?

Face it, the state in general and the Democrats in the legislature want the illegals as much as the private sector does for both their votes and their taxes (what little they pay).

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]
The cuts do not mean that PE and art won’t be taught in district schools. The subjects are already taught in the classroom. The cuts mean that they won’t be taught by specialized teachers in the ESC program, who bring “depth and complexity” to these subjects.
[/quote]

Just a note here… San Diego unified cut PE and Art a while back. I suspect Carmel Valley schools have well funded/active PTA’s the way the University City schools do… So the PTA picks up the slack. My sons get Art and PE from specialized teachers – and the salaries of these teachers are paid by the PTA. That alone is why I give a lot more to the PTA than the minimum suggested.

I would worry more about schools where the socio-economics are such that the PTA isn’t well funded and can’t pick up the slack.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]
The cuts do not mean that PE and art won’t be taught in district schools. The subjects are already taught in the classroom. The cuts mean that they won’t be taught by specialized teachers in the ESC program, who bring “depth and complexity” to these subjects.
[/quote]

Just a note here… San Diego unified cut PE and Art a while back. I suspect Carmel Valley schools have well funded/active PTA’s the way the University City schools do… So the PTA picks up the slack. My sons get Art and PE from specialized teachers – and the salaries of these teachers are paid by the PTA. That alone is why I give a lot more to the PTA than the minimum suggested.

I would worry more about schools where the socio-economics are such that the PTA isn’t well funded and can’t pick up the slack.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]
The cuts do not mean that PE and art won’t be taught in district schools. The subjects are already taught in the classroom. The cuts mean that they won’t be taught by specialized teachers in the ESC program, who bring “depth and complexity” to these subjects.
[/quote]

Just a note here… San Diego unified cut PE and Art a while back. I suspect Carmel Valley schools have well funded/active PTA’s the way the University City schools do… So the PTA picks up the slack. My sons get Art and PE from specialized teachers – and the salaries of these teachers are paid by the PTA. That alone is why I give a lot more to the PTA than the minimum suggested.

I would worry more about schools where the socio-economics are such that the PTA isn’t well funded and can’t pick up the slack.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]
The cuts do not mean that PE and art won’t be taught in district schools. The subjects are already taught in the classroom. The cuts mean that they won’t be taught by specialized teachers in the ESC program, who bring “depth and complexity” to these subjects.
[/quote]

Just a note here… San Diego unified cut PE and Art a while back. I suspect Carmel Valley schools have well funded/active PTA’s the way the University City schools do… So the PTA picks up the slack. My sons get Art and PE from specialized teachers – and the salaries of these teachers are paid by the PTA. That alone is why I give a lot more to the PTA than the minimum suggested.

I would worry more about schools where the socio-economics are such that the PTA isn’t well funded and can’t pick up the slack.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]
The cuts do not mean that PE and art won’t be taught in district schools. The subjects are already taught in the classroom. The cuts mean that they won’t be taught by specialized teachers in the ESC program, who bring “depth and complexity” to these subjects.
[/quote]

Just a note here… San Diego unified cut PE and Art a while back. I suspect Carmel Valley schools have well funded/active PTA’s the way the University City schools do… So the PTA picks up the slack. My sons get Art and PE from specialized teachers – and the salaries of these teachers are paid by the PTA. That alone is why I give a lot more to the PTA than the minimum suggested.

I would worry more about schools where the socio-economics are such that the PTA isn’t well funded and can’t pick up the slack.

[kewp]

[quote=meadandale]You are probably one of those that railed against prop 187 aren’t you?
[/quote]

I didn’t live in CA at the time, but I would have supported it had I did.

How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.

[kewp]

[quote=meadandale]You are probably one of those that railed against prop 187 aren’t you?
[/quote]

I didn’t live in CA at the time, but I would have supported it had I did.

How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.

[kewp]

[quote=meadandale]You are probably one of those that railed against prop 187 aren’t you?
[/quote]

I didn’t live in CA at the time, but I would have supported it had I did.

How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.

[kewp]

[quote=meadandale]You are probably one of those that railed against prop 187 aren’t you?
[/quote]

I didn’t live in CA at the time, but I would have supported it had I did.

How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.

[kewp]

[quote=meadandale]You are probably one of those that railed against prop 187 aren’t you?
[/quote]

I didn’t live in CA at the time, but I would have supported it had I did.

How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.

[cr]

[quote=kewp]How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.[/quote]

Kewp – you’ve not yet mentioned one good argument for raising taxes, except that it punishes the “criminal rich” as you put it, and subsidizes the illegals you paradoxically want to deport.

You’re turse quasi-whitty replies are getting old.

If you have a reasonable argument for how higher taxes will solve what at its root is a spending problem in our state Government let’s hear it.

Otherwise stop wasting everyone’s time.

If I wanted to hear commi-liberals bash conservative Gov’t values while the lack thereof sends our country into an economic abyss I’d read my Time magazine.

[cr]

[quote=kewp]How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.[/quote]

Kewp – you’ve not yet mentioned one good argument for raising taxes, except that it punishes the “criminal rich” as you put it, and subsidizes the illegals you paradoxically want to deport.

You’re turse quasi-whitty replies are getting old.

If you have a reasonable argument for how higher taxes will solve what at its root is a spending problem in our state Government let’s hear it.

Otherwise stop wasting everyone’s time.

If I wanted to hear commi-liberals bash conservative Gov’t values while the lack thereof sends our country into an economic abyss I’d read my Time magazine.

[cr]

[quote=kewp]How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.[/quote]

Kewp – you’ve not yet mentioned one good argument for raising taxes, except that it punishes the “criminal rich” as you put it, and subsidizes the illegals you paradoxically want to deport.

You’re turse quasi-whitty replies are getting old.

If you have a reasonable argument for how higher taxes will solve what at its root is a spending problem in our state Government let’s hear it.

Otherwise stop wasting everyone’s time.

If I wanted to hear commi-liberals bash conservative Gov’t values while the lack thereof sends our country into an economic abyss I’d read my Time magazine.

[cr]

[quote=kewp]How about a deal; I’ll stop mentioning the burden that illegal immigration puts on social services when the businesses that *profit* from it stop complaining about high taxes.[/quote]

Kewp – you’ve not yet mentioned one good argument for raising taxes, except that it punishes the “criminal rich” as you put it, and subsidizes the illegals you paradoxically want to deport.

You’re turse quasi-whitty replies are getting old.

If you have a reasonable argument for how higher taxes will solve what at its root is a spending problem in our state Government let’s hear it.

Otherwise stop wasting everyone’s time.

If I wanted to hear commi-liberals bash conservative Gov’t values while the lack thereof sends our country into an economic abyss I’d read my Time magazine.

[Author]

Posts