NationStates

Internationalist Bastard wrote:Now irony aside, when are the feds getting involved

Kramanica wrote:

Kernen wrote:
Raising taxes is not the only way to generate revenue. Many administrative agencies can, through rulemaking, apply fees and shift funding burdens. Administrative agencies are, depending on structure, subject to varying degrees of executive power.

Now, I'm not familiar with Oklahoma specifically, but if it functions anything like surrounding states, the Governor is not powerless.

But administrative law is hard. I'm not surprised you missed it.

You intend to bureaucracy your way out of this, which won't work. All it will do is apply a bandaid to a much larger problem. Snark won't make up for your utter lack of a solution.

Saiwania wrote:

Kramanica wrote:Okay, but it's not a societal collapse as OP is suggesting.

It is not teachers getting less paid alone that is the problem. The issue at hand, is that "a collapse" is the direction Oklahoma is heading towards. The longer they maintain bad policy, the further behind that state will get; just as what happened in Kansas under Sam Brownback.

The point is that cutting taxes and spending hasn't corresponded with more economic prosperity, it only blew a huge fiscal hole for Oklahoma and that state has no choice but to downgrade to 4 day school weeks, ignore drunk drivers, keep roads unpaved, cut corners for prisons, among many other things that're going wrong as a result of necessary spending going unfunded for lack of any revenues.

Oklahoma has gutted income tax but has tried to rely upon the most regressive forms of taxation (property and sales tax) but it isn't enough (hasn't worked) because those people (lower to middle class) aren't the ones with all the money to spare like might be true with corporations or the mega wealthy.

Kernen wrote:

Kramanica wrote:You intend to bureaucracy your way out of this, which won't work. All it will do is apply a bandaid to a much larger problem. Snark won't make up for your utter lack of a solution.

Right. Following government procedure to solve a government problem is a bandaid. God forbid we work within a system to solve problems, even if we don't immediately understand how they work.

Kramanica wrote:

Kernen wrote:
Right. Following government procedure to solve a government problem is a bandaid. God forbid we work within a system to solve problems, even if we don't immediately understand how they work.

You haven't deigned to tell how that would actually solve the problem beyond just giving vague notions of applying fees and moving money around. Do the math. Explain how it would fix the state's fiscal problems.

Kernen wrote:

Kramanica wrote:You haven't deigned to tell how that would actually solve the problem beyond just giving vague notions of applying fees and moving money around. Do the math. Explain how it would fix the state's fiscal problems.

I did. I suggested the executive power could use fee and cost bearing powers under administrative rulemaking to improve revenue. If you want me to explain exactly how to change administrative rules in Oklahoma, I'll have to charge you the firm's $300/hour rate. I suspect, since you want me to survey all the agencies, that it'll take me about 20 hours of research, but thats just a suspicion. It would be better to work out a retainer agreement.

I don't work for free. My statement, to use rulemaking powers available to the executive, was fairly specific without detailed research. I suspect you've just missed the meaning in the terms of art.

Kramanica wrote:Private education gives people alternatives to the completely and utterly shitty public education system we have. Trying to take away those alternatives is cruel and all it does is send people back to a failing educational system. You can argue all day about inequality and how you want to reform the system, but that doesn't change the fact that school choice actually does give people a way out from failing public schools.

Kramanica wrote:

Liriena wrote:I disagree. Competition guarantees nothing. Your country has a booming private education system, and it's brimming with all manner of frauds, misleading advertising, and continued segregation.

And as far as I'm concerned, you are not entitled to "alternatives" unless you have a genuinely pressing need for them. Otherwise, we are just pandering to a "fuck you I got mine" mentality when it comes to a basic human right like education.

Private education gives people alternatives to the completely and utterly shitty public education system we have. Trying to take away those alternatives is cruel and all it does is send people back to a failing educational system. You can argue all day about inequality and how you want to reform the system, but that doesn't change the fact that school choice actually does give people a way out from failing public schools.

Kramanica wrote:

Kernen wrote:I did. I suggested the executive power could use fee and cost bearing powers under administrative rulemaking to improve revenue. If you want me to explain exactly how to change administrative rules in Oklahoma, I'll have to charge you the firm's $300/hour rate. I suspect, since you want me to survey all the agencies, that it'll take me about 20 hours of research, but thats just a suspicion. It would be better to work out a retainer agreement.

I don't work for free. My statement, to use rulemaking powers available to the executive, was fairly specific without detailed research. I suspect you've just missed the meaning in the terms of art.

I'm doing that because you're snidely suggesting that that could solve the issue, but you haven't proven it. I am so, so sorry to ask you to prove your statements.

Liriena wrote:

Kramanica wrote:Private education gives people alternatives to the completely and utterly shitty public education system we have. Trying to take away those alternatives is cruel and all it does is send people back to a failing educational system. You can argue all day about inequality and how you want to reform the system, but that doesn't change the fact that school choice actually does give people a way out from failing public schools.

What if... y'all actually invested more and smarter in public schools? What if you actually made the effort of improving public education, rather than living it to die because some of you can afford to pay for a private school?

Kernen wrote:

Kramanica wrote:I'm doing that because you're snidely suggesting that that could solve the issue, but you haven't proven it. I am so, so sorry to ask you to prove your statements.

I don't think you understand what you're even asking. I made a suggestion based on an understanding of administrative law, a field I have a reasonable amount of experience working with. The answer I gave is sufficient for a broad-strokes view of the issue. The equivalent of answering a client's question off the top of one's head. Which is what we essentially discuss here. It focuses on the legal concepts in motion for such a solution without having to delve into the particulars of Oklahoma structure.

To delve into that, I'd have to read the OK statutes regarding administrative agencies and then look at every single collection of rules. Hours of research on expensive databases. That isn't an expense I plan to incur.

tl;dr: You're asking for an absurd amount of detail not practicably shared when my solution is sufficient enough for the purposes of the conversation. Swing and a miss, baby.

Saiwania wrote:

Kramanica wrote:Private education gives people alternatives to the completely and utterly shitty public education system we have. Trying to take away those alternatives is cruel and all it does is send people back to a failing educational system. You can argue all day about inequality and how you want to reform the system, but that doesn't change the fact that school choice actually does give people a way out from failing public schools.

K-12 education in the US, is arguably not as good because the US has this backwards system of funding education via property taxes, the net effect of this is that "well off" locales such as Arlington, Virginia will have good public schools, but "poor" locations such as Detroit, Michigan will have bad public schools, because local governments with lower tax bases have to get by with significantly less.

If the funding allocation was more uniform across the board, the quality of the K-12 system as a whole would improve. Another major problem is that the US has no nationally agreed upon curriculum, we have 50 states with different curriculums and this drives up administrative complexity. Some states objectively have better education than certain other states.

Kramanica wrote:

Kernen wrote:
I don't think you understand what you're even asking. I made a suggestion based on an understanding of administrative law, a field I have a reasonable amount of experience working with. The answer I gave is sufficient for a broad-strokes view of the issue. The equivalent of answering a client's question off the top of one's head. Which is what we essentially discuss here. It focuses on the legal concepts in motion for such a solution without having to delve into the particulars of Oklahoma structure.

To delve into that, I'd have to read the OK statutes regarding administrative agencies and then look at every single collection of rules. Hours of research on expensive databases. That isn't an expense I plan to incur.

tl;dr: You're asking for an absurd amount of detail not practicably shared when my solution is sufficient enough for the purposes of the conversation. Swing and a miss, baby.

So, in other words, you're just speculating that this could happen.

Kernen wrote:

Kramanica wrote:So, in other words, you're just speculating that this could happen.

Based on how I know the law works. Which is based on specialized education and work experience. Yes. If I had a governmental proposal that got into the weeds of what specific agency action to take and how to take it, I'd be in Oklahoma City right the fuck now offering the Governor my services for an absolutely obscene fee.

Kramanica wrote:

Kernen wrote:
Based on how I know the law works. Which is based on specialized education and work experience. Yes. If I had a governmental proposal that got into the weeds of what specific agency action to take and how to take it, I'd be in Oklahoma City right the fuck now offering the Governor my services for an absolutely obscene fee.

I guess asking for details is just asking too much of you.

Kernen wrote:
To delve into that, I'd have to read the OK statutes regarding administrative agencies and then look at every single collection of rules. Hours of research on expensive databases. That isn't an expense I plan to incur.

Abraxim wrote:Oklahoma is doing fine. Societal collapse? Call me when people start eating eachother.

Police asked to trim a little fat is a good thing, and education levels there match the teachers pay. I really see no problem.

Kramanica wrote:

The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:
How what?

I'm confused what three statements you are talking about?

How has it failed. Just because it isn't making up for their lack in public education or something?

Kramanica wrote:

The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:Teachers haven't gotten a raise in 10 years.

Okay, but it's not a societal collapse as OP is suggesting.

Petrasylvania wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:Now irony aside, when are the feds getting involved

When the Beast is starved so much it appears on a Feed the Children ad.

Kramanica wrote:

Kernen wrote:
I don't think you understand what you're even asking. I made a suggestion based on an understanding of administrative law, a field I have a reasonable amount of experience working with. The answer I gave is sufficient for a broad-strokes view of the issue. The equivalent of answering a client's question off the top of one's head. Which is what we essentially discuss here. It focuses on the legal concepts in motion for such a solution without having to delve into the particulars of Oklahoma structure.

To delve into that, I'd have to read the OK statutes regarding administrative agencies and then look at every single collection of rules. Hours of research on expensive databases. That isn't an expense I plan to incur.

tl;dr: You're asking for an absurd amount of detail not practicably shared when my solution is sufficient enough for the purposes of the conversation. Swing and a miss, baby.

So, in other words, you're just speculating that this could happen.

Saiwania wrote:

Kramanica wrote:Private education gives people alternatives to the completely and utterly shitty public education system we have. Trying to take away those alternatives is cruel and all it does is send people back to a failing educational system. You can argue all day about inequality and how you want to reform the system, but that doesn't change the fact that school choice actually does give people a way out from failing public schools.

K-12 education in the US, is arguably not as good because the US has this backwards system of funding education via property taxes, the net effect of this is that "well off" locales such as Arlington, Virginia will have good public schools, but "poor" locations such as Detroit, Michigan will have bad public schools, because local governments with lower tax bases have to get by with significantly less.

If the funding allocation was more uniform across the board, the quality of the K-12 system as a whole would improve. Another major problem is that the US has no nationally agreed upon curriculum, we have 50 states with different curriculums and this drives up administrative complexity. Some states objectively have better education than certain other states.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

Saiwania wrote:
K-12 education in the US, is arguably not as good because the US has this backwards system of funding education via property taxes, the net effect of this is that "well off" locales such as Arlington, Virginia will have good public schools, but "poor" locations such as Detroit, Michigan will have bad public schools, because local governments with lower tax bases have to get by with significantly less.

If the funding allocation was more uniform across the board, the quality of the K-12 system as a whole would improve. Another major problem is that the US has no nationally agreed upon curriculum, we have 50 states with different curriculums and this drives up administrative complexity. Some states objectively have better education than certain other states.

A national curriculum would just mean the creationist vote of southern voters would contaminate the curriculum of the whole country.

Much as it sucks, I'd rather let the south have this one than take it away from the north.

Neutraligon wrote:Given how important Texas is to the textbook industry, it already does.

Dahon wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:Given how important Texas is to the textbook industry, it already does.

Ain't the Texas Board of Education a vestigial body at this point, deprived of most of its powers due to the zealously creationist views of its members?

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:A national curriculum would just mean the creationist vote of southern voters would contaminate the curriculum of the whole country.
Much as it sucks, I'd rather let the south have this one than take it away from the north.