A teacher’s perspective: Firing Day at a Charter School

[proud2BlibKansan]

I just quit my job as a teacher in an urban charter school. Even though I still don’t have another job and I support myself entirely, it is the best decision I ever made. It is especially liberating this week while my colleagues – and after five incredibly stressful years on the education front lines, my truly beloved friends – wait for the June 1 ax to fall.

Every June 1, the exhausted teachers and staff at my school learn whether they will be rehired for another grueling year. Last year the school gave 43 staff and teachers the you’re-outta-luck-pal letters, including the entire three-man physical education department and the student support genius, Dany Edwards, who somehow made harmony out of the schools’ cacophony of crazy student behavior. This year the school’s three glorious new gymnasiums are largely unused because we have no gym teachers and Dany is dead of unknown causes. Whatever happened to this beautiful young man, firing him didn’t help him live any better or happier for his last few months on earth. And the kids he championed lost his tender, tough, hilarious and real guidance.

This post is dedicated to you Dany, one year after you ran from the building in frantic disbelief, waving your letter as you ran up and down Hyde Park Avenue, looking for people to share your grief. If they can fire you, they can fire any of us. Except they can’t fire me. I beat them at their game.

The first thing you need to know reader, is that there is no job security at a charter school. Even excellent veteran educators, like the three physical education teachers who were fired one year ago, are vulnerable. Between them these men gave something like 35 years to the school. They offered serious nutrition education in their fight against childhood obesity. They miraculously coached kids who have hair trigger tempers through team sports without break-out fights. They taught the kids good sportsmanship and how to represent themselves, their families and the school during games at other schools. They taught yoga, which the kids actually used to calm themselves in class. And they worked the kids hard. Oh how I miss seeing the kids come to class from gym all red and sweaty and happy. This gymless year, the kids seem fatter and more out of breath as they huff and puff their way to the third floor.

more ... https://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/charter-schools/a-teachers-perspective/

[Baitball Blogger]

1. Damn. That was a good letter.

[nineteen50]

8. these corporate schools are about the bottom line

forget students, parents, education and the future they are after an existing money stream and public education is in their way.

[BrotherIvan]

2. Not surprisingly, this is corporate culture and it has no business in schools

I hope more parents get this message as they are sold a bill of goods about what a wonderful education their children will be getting at a charter school. Shiny new computers and fancy buildings can't make up for a good teacher. The corporatists propaganda campaign has worked. Parents have been convinced that teachers are lazy, union thugs.

I hope the teachers' union figures out a way to counter this as the vampires smell their favorite blood, $$$$, and they won't let go until the body is drained. Allowing Duncan and Rhee et al to lead education under a Democratic administration means it has gotten way too far. I'm glad I don't have a school-age child as this would make me weep every day. If parents care about their children, they will fight for their teachers.

[We People]

3. Most people won't find out about what's really happening in education until it's too late

and the damage is already done. Of course, that's how it's been planned - because it's working out this way all over the country.

[lindysalsagal]

4. 27 year veteran teacher here, and I advise all young people to avoid the education field

I loved teaching when I started. Now, it's all B.S. ass-covering, testing, accountability crap. Nothing we do is about kids anymore.

Until parents start complaining, the corporatist state legislators will keep "reforming" education into the english model: The public schools are just wearhouses for the poor. Anyone who can will pay for private education.

Democracy is dead if our schools fail to educate everyone equally.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. Intense read! Thanks for posting!

[Rain Mcloud]

6. It is a simple concept

Corporations exist to turn a profit.
Public Entities exist to do the work of the people at minimal cost.

There are plenty of Public Schools out there that would love to have you,from what i have read of your posts.
Dedication and ethics are welcome traits in any organization.
Look to the smaller districts,they need you.

[Canuckistanian]

13. Schools were NEVER meant to be a profit vehicle

They're a government SERVICE, like the EPA or the National Park Service.

And anyways, those "profits" NEVER seem to make their way back to the governing bodies, ever notice that?

WE pay for this with taxpayer dollars. And the standards just keep on slipping.

So, where's the overall benefit to society?

[KG]

7. charter schools are a pox on this country.

[duffyduff]

9. I don't doubt the situation is true, but

working conditions in public school districts are a thousand times worse because they have the full force of the legal system behind them when they destroy teachers' careers.

The "unions" more often than not collude with the districts in getting rid of the "undesirables."

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. Not my union

That's crazy. How could a union that did that stay afloat?

[duffyduff]

16. Talk to a few who were forced out of education, and then you will know how bad it is

You have to have an outside lawyer to be able to keep your career if god forbid you are targeted.

Unions are largely ineffective for individual teachers.

They are good for negotiating contracts, but since your dues are paying for representation, unions need to do it for individual teachers.

All often, union officials collude with administration.

The situation is getting much, much worse, and it is nationwide.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. I vehemently disagree

I've taught for 33 years and have been active in my union for most of that time. I am currently an officer in my local union. We spend an unreal amount on legal fees to help teachers KEEP their jobs. $30,000 or $40,000 PER TEACHER is not unusual. We had one case recently that was over $100,000.

And we win 90% of the time.

No one in my union or in my state is colluding with administration to get any teachers fired. That's a ridiculous accusation.

So no, this is not happening nationwide.

[HiPointDem]

18. weingarten is, because she signed on to measures that result in teachers getting fired. i'm sure

Last edited Sun Jun 2, 2013, 06:28 AM - Edit history (1)

the union defends teachers at the grassroots in lots of cases. but the leadership is colluding in education deform.

for example, no child left behind was a measure that as a mathematical certainty would result in turning an ever-increasing number of schools into 'failing schools' subject to firing of staff & charterization. that would have been clear to anyone who understood the legislation, understood the situation in schools, and understood the limits of pedagogy.

what was the response of the union leadership?

they signed on. with some criticism around the edges, but they signed on.

Educational Research & Dissemination (ER&D) Program & the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, provides funds to states and school districts to support high-quality professional development programs based on scientific research that will increase the number of highly qualified teachers and paraprofessionals and help raise student achievement. These brochures describe how the AFT's ER&D program, which is based on proven practice and meets the NCLB criteria for high-quality professional development, can help schools and districts meet the new requirements under NCLB.

http://www.aft.org/yourwork/teachers/reports/nclb.cfm

The national union leadership has made *no* effort to mobilize their membership in the face of the biggest attack on the principle of unionism and the principle of public education *ever*.

Both of the major teachers' unions have taken funding from the Gates Foundation and collaborated with it.

And they're going along with Common Core, too.

Did these people never grasp that the “proficiency” requirements of No Child Left Behind were impossible to achieve? That the projections for 2014 were that 99 percent of California schools would be labeled as “failing,” with “failure” rates of 95 percent in the Great Lakes states and elsewhere?

A former assistant secretary of education in the Bush administration said that NCLB was really a “Trojan horse…a way to expose the failure of public education…to blow it up a bit.” Is the Common Cre really so different?

Look at who supports the Common Core standards: Margaret Spellings, former Ed Secretary, who infamously called NCLB “99.9 percent pure;” Jeb Bush, who is pushing charter schools and vouchers across the country; Bill Gates, who funded the Common Core, and who wants more H1-B visas for his company despite the fact that American education churns out three times as many STEM graduates as there are jobs; and, the Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who lobbied aggressively for unfunded corporate tax cuts that spawned huge deficits and debt, and for laissez-faire regulatory policies that aided and abetted massive fraud and corruption (especially on Wall Street) and that blew up the economy.

And now public school “leaders” are lending their support?

Public education in the United States is a foundational cornerstone of democratic governance. Both are in greater jeopardy than many of us thought.”

http://dianeravitch.net/2013/06/01/on-common-core-the-leading-groups-are-wrong-again/

Teacher calling out UFTs collaboration & Leo Casey, fake lefty & collaborator, defending collaboration.

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. I'm tired of having this argument

I've had ER&D training. I've been a trainer for ER&D. It's actually better PD than I've had from district administrators. There is nothing in ER&D that promotes firing teachers.

Your AFT link is from 2007. Since then, because of pressure from the rank and file (teachers like me), AFT leadership has backed down on several issues, particularly Common Core. Just last week, a statement was released asking for a moratorium on high stakes testing attached to Common Core. AFT has NEVER supported the growing amount of high stakes testing. In my district, because of feedback from teachers like me, and based on research from AFT, the amount of testing has actually been decreased. We have successfully negotiated every year for fewer tests and have cut the number in half in 5 years. Again, this has been accomplished with AFT's support and encouragement.

Your second link isn't even about AFT. Surely you understand that AFT represents teachers, not school board members or administrators.

The original claim was that "union officials collude with administration" and this is a nationwide problem. Unless my district and state are no longer a part of the nation, this is not true.

I can't speak for what is happening in NY or other locals. But I do know that in my local and in my state, there is absolutely no colluding with admins to fire teachers. Jobs have been saved, not lost.

We have also successfully lobbied at the state level (again, with AFT national's support) to fight back against every piece of legislation that attempts to tie student achievement to teacher pay and/or evaluation. Credit also goes to NEA, also spending lots of money at the state level to keep this legislation dead. This year we were able to beat back every piece of legislation promoted by Students First. At the district level, we have also successfully opposed every plan to evaluate and/or pay teachers based on student test scores. We also still have tenure and LIFO language in our contract.

Again, my objection is to the statement that this is a nationwide problem. I'm not 100% in agreement with AFT leadership on every issue. But I can state that at the local and state level, they have been an invaluable resource for us.

[HiPointDem]

21. the national leadership has repeatedly conceeded without a fight. not an argument, observable

FACT.

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Are you a member of AFT or NEA?

I'm trying to figure out why this is so important to you. FACT.

[HiPointDem]

23. i'm trying to figure out why you've made a political disagreement personal. if you think my

motivations are evil, just stop talking to me. Or better yet, just refute the point.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. I did refute the point.

I'm now trying to understand why this is so important to you. Most of the regulars here have talked about our roles. Some of us are teachers, some are parents, some are students. We all bring different perspectives to this struggle. It would help to know why you are so interested in education topics and why you seem so determined to criticize our unions.

I'm also curious about why you seem to not believe me, an actual member of a union. Are you a member who has had different experiences? It would be helpful to know that. I know enough NEA and AFT members across the country and have been very active in several national coalitions of teachers that I know not everyone's experience is identical. I'm not trying to get personal and you certainly don't have to answer my questions. It would just be helpful to understand why you are so angry at the the unions.

[HiPointDem]

28. you didn't refute the points about the national organizations. i criticize because they are

colluding in education deform. That's why they're losing.

[AnneD]

40. We do not have unions in Texas.....

They are called associations. We can't strike. But with the way we are being worked to death and students tested out of their minds, it may come to pass.

All those problems aside, I signed up for my 'union' 2 years into my service as a School Nurse. Year before last our school became a charter in a deal that I still think is illegal (public resources going for a private enterprise). The first year, they got rid of all the teachers with experience and continuing contracts. Now these teachers taught and survived an inner city ghetto school and loved their job. They only thing I could see in common was that they were high paid for their seniority. They were replaced by these fresh faced Teach for America kids that got poverty wages and loan forgiveness after several years. They are now all gone, on to greener pastures.

I noticed that after the blood shed layoffs, I was the highest paid person on campus. I knew they would come gunning for me and sure enough, they did. But in one way, a Nurse on campus id not like a teacher. I provided medical services for special education student and it was stipulated in the federal paperwork. They laid me off, but I stopped of at the union building with documentation, clinic notes and letters from parents.

My union went to bat for me and 2 weeks before we had a hearing, the layoff was reascended and I was offered another position at another school. My union steward said that I basically had them by the short hairs. I needed one more year to make my retirement and I got that and more. In that one action, it made it worth all my years of volunteering my time and the pittance that was my dues. Your union is what you make of it. I love my union and will volunteer they after I retire.

I am looking into retiring within the next year and all I can say is that education in this country is being stripped of funds for profit with the intention of discarding the remains. They do not want an educated workforce or voters. It is not to their benefit. So anytime you see the latest education flavor of the month-ask yourself this: After all the reforms in education that has taken place, why are the graduating students of today not able to match their grandparent level of ability in the basics? Just a thought......

[awoke_in_2003]

10. 20 years from now...

education will only be available to the rich.

[knitter4democracy]

11. It's this way in the private schools, too.

One is never sure until those contracts are put in the mailboxes, and it's a nailbiter every year.

Then again, I teach for one more week in a high school that's been closed. *sighs*

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. Very true.

My dad was an administrator in private schools. The job security is scary. Also salary can change dramatically from year to year.

[bvar22]

12. Job Security?...a thing of the past for the Working Class

After NAFTA started the flight of good jobs from the USA,
and Corporations were free to use Slave Labor in foreign countries to drive down wages and benefits here at home...THAT was the beginning of the end.

Unemployment, kept artificially high added more pressure,
along with the bi-partisan busting of Unions.

As if that were not enough, In-Sourcing, hiring foreign workers to come in who were willing to do the jobs that couldn't be outsourced for 1/2 the pay and NONE of the "benefits", was added to the recipe.

Raising the price of Higher Education to absurd levels, ensuring that graduates were deeply indebted to the Ownership Class BEFORE they even took their first job as a nice touch too.


Job Security? a thing of the past.
Welcome to the New NeoLiberal Free Trading American Century.
THIS is our new normal.

New Rule (Passed by Congress and signed by President Obama) signals Kiss of Death for Pensions
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100694955

Wealthy win lion's share of major tax breaks
http://www.boston.com/business/news/2013/05/29/wealthy-win-lion-share-major-tax-breaks/Ua0UyYle21EUXub7g1suCI/story.html

Half of America is in poverty, and its creeping toward 75%
http://www.alternet.org/economy/real-numbers-half-america-poverty-and-its-creeping-toward-75-0

Wealth gap widens as labor's share of income falls
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/wealth-gap-widens-labors-share-income-falls-1B6097385

As the Economy Recovers, the Wealth Gap Widens
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2013/03/11/as-the-economy-recovers-the-wealth-gap-widens

Top One Percent Captured 121 Percent Of All Income Gains
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/top-one-percent-income-gains_n_2670455.html

Corporate Profits Hit Record High While Worker Wages Hit Record Low
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/12/03/1270541/corporate-profits-wages-record/?mobile=nc

The above does NOT happen by accident.
It is the result of Planning and Policy.

Until WE have a Political Party that represents the Working Class,
this IS the New Normal.


[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[TBF]

24. Rec this post with the exception of one line --

"Until WE have a Political Party that represents the Working Class,
this IS the New Normal."

I would suggest we change that to "until we get rid of capitalism as our economic system" ...

[bvar22]

26. Just as we will never get rid of "Terror",

so to we will never get rid of "Capitalism".
Capitalism is a natural condition of man,
and will always exist.
Trying to Stamp It OUT is a Quixotic Mission.

I WANT to be able to trade my goods and sweat equity to improve my economic situation.
Everybody does.
You do too, whether you admit it or not.
Profit is a great incentive, and fair competition produces superior goods.
The Problem is Unrestrained Capitalism that allows the unfair accumulation of Wealth and Concentrated Power.

The European countries, especially those in Scandinavia have demonstrated that an enlightened blend of Socialism and regulated Capitalism produces good results and a high quality of living.

The problem in the USA today is that our government, with the help of BOTH dominant political parties,
has completely abdicated its responsibility to restrain Capitalism through regulation,
and has lunged headlong into the abyss of Privatization of the Commons.

[TBF]

29. "Capitalism is a natural condition of man" -

I can't think of a statement I disagree with more - unless it's anything to do with the Bible being anything other than fiction.

Sorry, but no, I don't believe in screwing over others in order to make my own life better. YMMV, and obviously does.

[HiPointDem]

33. all the european countries are going neolib, including the scandinavian countries.

capitalism isn't about 'trading', it's about using capital to make more capital. that's its only raison d'etre.

no, i don't want to trade my goods and sweat to 'improve my economic situation'. my real economic situation is fine. i enjoy a high standard of living. i don't want to *improve* my situation, particularly. I simply don't want to fall behind & be thrown into penury & homelessness, or have to live next to crackheads, or to have to be beholden to other people's will as the lowest man on the totem pole. thus i must keep on the treadmill, like everyone else.

it's kind of a nightmare, actually.

[bvar22]

30. AT the end of this term,

...when you go over to the Freshman Dorm to get someone to write your term paper on the History of Economic Systems so you can get a passing grade,

...and the 14 year old prodigy tells you that he'll do it for $100 and a notarized lein entitling him to 2% of your yearly income for the rest of your life,

and you say, "Screw You. I know a guy on the 2nd floor who'll do it for $20.00"...

.
.
.
.
.
Think about me,
and Welcome to the Natural State of Capitalism!

[TBF]

31. lol - I'm probably much older than you dear bvar22 -

after all my parents actually belonged to unions, I painted signs and attended strikes with them back in the 1970s, and worked myself through a state college.

Unlike others I am NOT a conservative DLC asshole. I support labor, plain and simple. And that is why you are having trouble attracting folks to the democratic party. You have forgotten who built this party, and, really, you've forgotten who built this country. It didn't begin with Ronald Reagan. Maybe put away your Gordon Gecko movies and do some reading on Haymarket. You'll learn about the area I grew up in and the strong labor backbone.

[bvar22]

32. So, did you sign the lien and give the kid a percentage of all your future profits,

...or did you run upstairs and give his competitor $20 cash?

What about the kid who mows your lawn?
Have you signed a contract with him giving him a percentage of the profits from any future sale of your property,
or maybe a rent reduced room in back?
After all, aren't the workers entitled to part of the profits from capital?

THAT was the point of my response to you,
NOT your chronological age (though I might win your bet).

I'll stand by my comments that:
* trying to exterminate "Capitalism" is a fools errand,

*that man has a natural proclivity for Capitalism,
and that is not a bad thing,

*and that a blended system of Socialism/regulatedCapitalism works best in the real world.

QED: Scandinavia

[TBF]

34. Your "blend" does not work -

evidence is this country. We tried it with taxation/regulation from roughly the 30s - 80s and it wasn't enough for the capitalists so now we are back to survival of the fittest. That may work for the top 400 families or so, but that's about it.

What I personally do or do not do is not the point. It's the system ... but anyone who thinks there is a "natural proclivity for capitalism" is never going to understand that. Your "real world" is a very harsh place and your desire to keep it that way is very uninspiring.

[bvar22]

35. Pure "Socialism" vs Pure "Capitalism" is a fun debate to have in the classroom.

Given that binary choice, I would choose the ideal of pure "Socialism".
Since you insist that the "blend" hasn't worked, a claim I dispute,
perhaps you could point out an example of pure 'Socialism" that has worked?
I won't be holding my breath.

ANY system can be corrupted by greed,
and care must be taken to protect ANY system from those who would corrupt it for personal gain. The GREEDY will always be with us. They can't be "abolished".

You are correct in claiming that our system today is broken.
I would be the last to try and defend our current system of Unbridled, Savage Capitalism.
The system we have today is far different from the system we had coming out of WW2.

The New Deal, the Fair Deal, and the Great Society has been systematically dismantled by craven politicians in BOTH dominant parties,
and the last vestiges are being attacked by the Party that once claimed to be the Workers Party.

The blend we had coming out of WW2 built the largest, wealthiest, and most Upwardly Mobile Working Class the WORLD has ever seen.
Had we continued along the course set by FDR with the Economic Bill or Rights (SOTU, 1944)

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established [font size=3]for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being".

....combined with the Social Improvements of the 60s under LBJ, we would be in a much better place today. We were headed in the right direction before Reagan and the "Centrist" "Democrats".

Unless you are willing to abolish "Capital" all together,
and with that the ownership of property,
there is no way to implement YOUR ideal system of Pure Socialism,
and I'm not sure I would want to live there anyway.


I MUCH prefer a system that rewards Excellence, Creativity, Industriousness, Efficiency, Performance, Productivity, Savings, Frugality, and Hard Work with reasonable accumulations of Private Property (Capital),
but enforces a more equitable distribution of wealth through:

* a steeply progressive Income Tax (like we had in the 60s),

*Capital Gains taxed as Income

*a steep Wealth Tax above a moderately comfortable limit,

*and very steep Inheritance Tax with provisions to protect small family businesses.

These taxes would be used to fund the Basic Human Rights as stipulated by FDR (above),
AND level the playing field every generation.
(The more successful European "blend" countries do the above)

Even the emerging"Socialist" countries of Latin America are careful NOT to demand an "End to Capitalism", and distinguish between NeoLiberal Free Market Capitalism and Restrained Capitalism.

[font size=3]"The worst enemy of humanity is U.S. capitalism. That is what provokes uprisings like our own, a rebellion against a system, against a neoliberal model, which is the representation of a savage capitalism. If the entire world doesn't acknowledge this reality, that nation states are not providing even minimally for health, education and nourishment, then each day the most fundamental human rights are being violated."[/font]
----Bolivian Reform President Evo Morales

I'll stand with Evo Morales,
and when I put my pay check into a Savings Account instead of spending it all on Friday Night,
I won't feel the slightest bit of guilt about drawing interest thanks to "Capitalism".

[TBF]

36. Evo Morales is a champion of anti-imperialism -

holding him up as a capitalist is very disingenuous. I'll cut to the chase: (1) the period between the 30s -80s in the US was very promising why couldn't it keep going? What stopped it? I'd say it is inevitable that capitalism can't be constrained for more than a limited period of time because it is inherent in the system that profit is the motive as opposed to sharing wealth, and (2) I agree that aside from the Paris Commune (which only lasted a very short couple of months before being overtaken) we have not seen a form of sustainable socialism that I could really get on board with. The Soviet Union for example was a great example of full employment but there are too many stories of folks trying to escape that regime for me to completely embrace communism via dictatorship.

The question for me is how do we get to a place of socialism with democracy? I'm not sure I've come to a conclusion on how we can get there, but I'm quite sure it doesn't include individuals accumulating mounds of capital. I meet far too many liberals who want to have their wealth and share it too. Resources are limited - it can't work that way. At least hard-core conservatives are honest about their accumulation of capital and what it means for everyone else. Pretending that we can have something that is impossible is not going to help us get to a better place.

[bvar22]

37. 1) I never held up Evo Morales as a Capitalist.

THAT is a Strawman.

I did say he was and is very careful to distinguish between Unrestrained Free Market Capitalism (NeoLiberalism), and a system that allows regulated markets.
Did you bother to read the quote above?
Neither Chavez nor Morales has attempted to outlaw the ownership of private property.

You asked me:
"how do we get to a place of socialism with democracy?"

I also answered THAT question in the above post:
We support:

" a system that rewards Excellence, Creativity, Industriousness, Efficiency, Performance, Productivity, Savings, Frugality, and Hard Work with reasonable accumulations of Private Property (Capital),
but enforces a more equitable distribution of wealth through:

* a steeply progressive Income Tax (like we had in the 60s),

*Capital Gains taxed as Income

*a steep Wealth Tax above a moderately comfortable limit,

*and very steep Inheritance Tax with provisions to protect small family businesses.

These taxes would be used to fund the Basic Human Rights as stipulated by FDR (above),
AND level the playing field every generation.

[font size=3]"The worst enemy of humanity is U.S. capitalism. That is what provokes uprisings like our own, a rebellion against a system, against a neoliberal model, which is the representation of a savage capitalism. If the entire world doesn't acknowledge this reality, that nation states are not providing even minimally for health, education and nourishment, then each day the most fundamental human rights are being violated."[/font]
----Bolivian Reform President Evo Morales

That sounds "radical" but it really isn't.
FDR said much the same thing in his Economic Bill or Rights where he stipulated that
Health Care, Food & Nutrition, Housing, Pensions, Fair markets, Jobs, and Education
were Basic Human Rights to be protected and administered by the Government,
and NOT For Profit Corporations.

There was a time not so long ago when voting FOR the Democrat was voting FOR the above Values, so there IS precedent for those Values right here in the USA.
Our neighbors in Latin America have given us the Blue Print.

VIVA Democracy!
I pray we get some here soon!

[TBF]

38. I know you said all that -

and that is fine but it doesn't answer the question of how we get there and REMAIN there with capital pushing back. And push back it does - in the form of electing folks who will limit how much others can acquire. If we had gotten to such a beautiful place in the 60s/70s why did folks not guard that - why in the world did they decide electing Ronald Reagan was the way to keep economic equality in place? I would argue that "leveling the playing field" is impossible when accumulation of vast amounts of personal and private property are allowed/encouraged. Regarding property, I would advocate ownership of a moderate amount of personal property as opposed to private property.

I know many on this website would love to bring back the glory days of the democratic party but when you look at it in the course of history we had roughly 50 years where there was something like a democracy with more opportunity (well, unless you were female or a minority, not quite as much opportunity there - and that discrepancy in pay exists today) ... and leaders in this country shut it down pretty quickly when they tired of it. I'm not sure that is the blueprint we should use moving forward.

[bvar22]

39. Now you have gone back to the Freshman term paper .

"how we get there and REMAIN there forever"?
Really?

I'll be delighted to just move BACK in that direction.
That goal is within the realm of possibility.



How do we outlaw private property and remain there forever?

How do we prevent people from saving food for their for a rainy day?
(That IS accumulating "Capital&quot .

How do we change the basic competitive nature of Human beings?

How do we prevent the promotion of the best and the brightest to positions of leadership?

[Starry Messenger]

15. recommend

[blackspade]

27. Charter Schools are a plague on our education system.