I don't get it

I don't get it

Post by Eisboc » Sat, 06 Apr 2013 23:50:45


Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
Obama will propose next week.

One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
economists say it's a bad idea.

But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
states.
This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
products.

First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I think
it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.   That's
fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by J Herrin » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:07:50

Quote:

>Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
>Obama will propose next week.

>One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
>Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
>understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
>Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
>economists say it's a bad idea.

>But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
>kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
>states.
>This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
>products.

>First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
>What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
>very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I think
>it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

>Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
>diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.   That's
>fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
>tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
>longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
>in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
>the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

Here's what's being provided in our county right now:

"Learn more about how children are learning and preparing for future success from Early Head Start
through Kindergarten:

    Early Head Start (EHS) is a federally funded comprehensive program for low-income families with
infants and toddlers and pregnant women.

    FECEP/Head Start (FECEP/HS) provides a high quality early learning experience for
income-eligible three and four year-olds, including children with disabilities.

    Kindergarten promotes social, emotional, physical and intellectual growth for all children aged
5 by September 30th through a variety of activities that meet individual and group needs."

Note that it extends down to infants and toddlers, of course, income eligibility is a requirement.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by True Nort » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:20:01

Quote:


> >Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President

> >Obama will propose next week.

> >One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social

> >Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can

> >understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and

> >Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most

> >economists say it's a bad idea.

> >But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*

> >kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all

> >states.

> >This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco

> >products.

> >First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.

> >What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare

> >very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I think

> >it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

> >Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and

> >diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.   That's

> >fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using

> >tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no

> >longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once

> >in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in

> >the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

> Here's what's being provided in our county right now:

> "Learn more about how children are learning and preparing for future success from Early Head Start

> through Kindergarten:

>     Early Head Start (EHS) is a federally funded comprehensive program for low-income families with

> infants and toddlers and pregnant women.

>     FECEP/Head Start (FECEP/HS) provides a high quality early learning experience for

> income-eligible three and four year-olds, including children with disabilities.

>     Kindergarten promotes social, emotional, physical and intellectual growth for all children aged

> 5 by September 30th through a variety of activities that meet individual and group needs."

> Note that it extends down to infants and toddlers, of course, income eligibility is a requirement.

> Salmonbait

Wow.. wish they had that here when my boys were young.
Even way back in the early 80's daycare was expensive if you didn't qualify for a subsidized position.  At least you could claim that expense as a tax credit.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by iBoatere » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:25:12



Quote:

> Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
> Obama will propose next week.

> One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
> Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
> understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
> Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
> economists say it's a bad idea.

> But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
> kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
> states.
> This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
> products.

> First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
> What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
> very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I think
> it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

Here there is pre-K and there is a state mandated curriculum.
 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by Eisboc » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:26:25


Quote:

>Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
>Obama will propose next week.

>One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
>Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
>understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
>Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
>economists say it's a bad idea.

>But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
>kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
>states.
>This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
>products.

>First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
>What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
>very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I
>think
>it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

>Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
>diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.
>That's
>fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
>tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
>longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
>in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
>the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

Here's what's being provided in our county right now:

"Learn more about how children are learning and preparing for future
success from Early Head Start
through Kindergarten:

    Early Head Start (EHS) is a federally funded comprehensive program
for low-income families with
infants and toddlers and pregnant women.

    FECEP/Head Start (FECEP/HS) provides a high quality early learning
experience for
income-eligible three and four year-olds, including children with
disabilities.

    Kindergarten promotes social, emotional, physical and intellectual
growth for all children aged
5 by September 30th through a variety of activities that meet
individual and group needs."

Note that it extends down to infants and toddlers, of course, income
eligibility is a requirement.

-------------------------------------------

So this proposed new  "free"  pre-kindergarten program is in addition
to Early Head Start and Head Start?

There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
external influences while still in the womb.
May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
ticket for more tax revenues!

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by J Herrin » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:30:22

Quote:




>>Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
>>Obama will propose next week.

>>One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
>>Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
>>understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
>>Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
>>economists say it's a bad idea.

>>But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
>>kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
>>states.
>>This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
>>products.

>>First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
>>What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
>>very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I
>>think
>>it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

>>Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
>>diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.
>>That's
>>fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
>>tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
>>longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
>>in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
>>the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

>Here's what's being provided in our county right now:

>"Learn more about how children are learning and preparing for future
>success from Early Head Start
>through Kindergarten:

>    Early Head Start (EHS) is a federally funded comprehensive program
>for low-income families with
>infants and toddlers and pregnant women.

>    FECEP/Head Start (FECEP/HS) provides a high quality early learning
>experience for
>income-eligible three and four year-olds, including children with
>disabilities.

>    Kindergarten promotes social, emotional, physical and intellectual
>growth for all children aged
>5 by September 30th through a variety of activities that meet
>individual and group needs."

>Note that it extends down to infants and toddlers, of course, income
>eligibility is a requirement.

>-------------------------------------------

>So this proposed new  "free"  pre-kindergarten program is in addition
>to Early Head Start and Head Start?

>There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
>external influences while still in the womb.
>May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
>education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
>if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
>ticket for more tax revenues!

Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a well-educated fetus as opposed
to one with only a liberal arts background.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by Eisboc » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:34:17


Quote:

>There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
>external influences while still in the womb.
>May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of
>pre-birth
>education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
>if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
>ticket for more tax revenues!

Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a
well-educated fetus as opposed
to one with only a liberal arts background.

---------------------------------

That's funny right there.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by F.O.A.D » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:36:39


Quote:




>> There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
>> external influences while still in the womb.
>> May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
>> education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
>> if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
>> ticket for more tax revenues!

> Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a
> well-educated fetus as opposed
> to one with only a liberal arts background.

> ---------------------------------

> That's funny right there.

Perhaps if Herring had spent more time studying some of the liberal
arts, he might be less of a hate-filled racist.
 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by J Herrin » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:40:31

Quote:





>>> There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
>>> external influences while still in the womb.
>>> May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
>>> education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
>>> if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
>>> ticket for more tax revenues!

>> Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a
>> well-educated fetus as opposed
>> to one with only a liberal arts background.

>> ---------------------------------

>> That's funny right there.

>Perhaps if Herring had spent more time studying some of the liberal
>arts, he might be less of a hate-filled racist.

Tell us about your 'special circumstances' which required a round in the chamber with the thumb
safety on. Should be enlightening.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by iBoatere » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 01:50:37



Quote:





> >>Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
> >>Obama will propose next week.

> >>One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
> >>Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
> >>understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
> >>Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
> >>economists say it's a bad idea.

> >>But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
> >>kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
> >>states.
> >>This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
> >>products.

> >>First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
> >>What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
> >>very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I
> >>think
> >>it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

> >>Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
> >>diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.
> >>That's
> >>fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
> >>tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
> >>longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
> >>in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
> >>the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

> >Here's what's being provided in our county right now:

> >"Learn more about how children are learning and preparing for future
> >success from Early Head Start
> >through Kindergarten:

> >    Early Head Start (EHS) is a federally funded comprehensive program
> >for low-income families with
> >infants and toddlers and pregnant women.

> >    FECEP/Head Start (FECEP/HS) provides a high quality early learning
> >experience for
> >income-eligible three and four year-olds, including children with
> >disabilities.

> >    Kindergarten promotes social, emotional, physical and intellectual
> >growth for all children aged
> >5 by September 30th through a variety of activities that meet
> >individual and group needs."

> >Note that it extends down to infants and toddlers, of course, income
> >eligibility is a requirement.

> >-------------------------------------------

> >So this proposed new  "free"  pre-kindergarten program is in addition
> >to Early Head Start and Head Start?

> >There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
> >external influences while still in the womb.
> >May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
> >education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
> >if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
> >ticket for more tax revenues!

> Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a well-educated fetus as opposed
> to one with only a liberal arts background.

> Salmonbait

Do you just act stupid, very narrow minded, and hateful or are you
really?
 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by iBoatere » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 01:52:38



Quote:






> >>> There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
> >>> external influences while still in the womb.
> >>> May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
> >>> education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
> >>> if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
> >>> ticket for more tax revenues!

> >> Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a
> >> well-educated fetus as opposed
> >> to one with only a liberal arts background.

> >> ---------------------------------

> >> That's funny right there.

> >Perhaps if Herring had spent more time studying some of the liberal
> >arts, he might be less of a hate-filled racist.

> Tell us about your 'special circumstances' which required a round in the chamber with the thumb
> safety on. Should be enlightening.

> Salmonbait

It depends if it's a polymer, you know, the stuff that's the same as an
alloy in your mind?
 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by F.O.A.D » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 01:53:18


Quote:






>>>> Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
>>>> Obama will propose next week.

>>>> One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
>>>> Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
>>>> understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
>>>> Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
>>>> economists say it's a bad idea.

>>>> But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
>>>> kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
>>>> states.
>>>> This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
>>>> products.

>>>> First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
>>>> What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
>>>> very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I
>>>> think
>>>> it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

>>>> Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
>>>> diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.
>>>> That's
>>>> fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
>>>> tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
>>>> longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
>>>> in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
>>>> the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

>>> Here's what's being provided in our county right now:

>>> "Learn more about how children are learning and preparing for future
>>> success from Early Head Start
>>> through Kindergarten:

>>>     Early Head Start (EHS) is a federally funded comprehensive program
>>> for low-income families with
>>> infants and toddlers and pregnant women.

>>>     FECEP/Head Start (FECEP/HS) provides a high quality early learning
>>> experience for
>>> income-eligible three and four year-olds, including children with
>>> disabilities.

>>>     Kindergarten promotes social, emotional, physical and intellectual
>>> growth for all children aged
>>> 5 by September 30th through a variety of activities that meet
>>> individual and group needs."

>>> Note that it extends down to infants and toddlers, of course, income
>>> eligibility is a requirement.

>>> -------------------------------------------

>>> So this proposed new  "free"  pre-kindergarten program is in addition
>>> to Early Head Start and Head Start?

>>> There are many experts who think a baby starts becoming aware of
>>> external influences while still in the womb.
>>> May as well cover them too with federally funded programs of pre-birth
>>> education.  Of course, it may require some on the left to reconsider
>>> if a fetus is a baby or not.   Pre-baby fetus education.   That's the
>>> ticket for more tax revenues!

>> Then someone would have to decide if an *** is permissible for a well-educated fetus as opposed
>> to one with only a liberal arts background.

>> Salmonbait

> Do you just act stupid, very narrow minded, and hateful or are you
> really?

Herring's stupidity, narrow-mindedness and hate are for real.
 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by Urin Asshol » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 02:23:05

Quote:

>Just listening to some of the details of the budget that President
>Obama will propose next week.

>One item will reduce the cost of living adjustments for Social
>Security recipients and some Medicare benefits.   Ok,  I can
>understand that, even though many politicians, Democrats and
>Republicans alike are adamantly opposed to this.   In general, most
>economists say it's a bad idea.

I certainly agree that it's a bad idea. Of course, it's a budget
proposal, and I expect he'll get some pushback?

Quote:

>But here's the one that gets me.   He wants to make *pre*
>kindergarten  free nationwide by providing federal grants to all
>states.
>This will be paid for by increasing the federal taxes on tobacco
>products.

>First of all,   It's not kindergarten.   It's *pre* kindergarten.
>What the heck is *that*?   Is it an educational program to prepare
>very young children for the arduous demands of kindergarten?   I think
>it's nothing but free, federally paid for day care.

Untrue, and study after study has shown that it's effective.

Quote:
>Proponents will applaud it  because it will further punish and
>diminish the number of people who still use tobacco products.   That's
>fine and good but what happens when enough people have quit using
>tobacco that they can no longer afford and the revenues raised can no
>longer support the free day care called "pre"  kindergarden?    Once
>in place, it's much harder to take it away than to never give it in
>the first place.   So,  other taxes revenues will have to be found.

Yes, other taxes will have to be found. One can hope that day arrives
sooner vs. later.
 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by Wayne » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 02:23:15



Quote:
>Tell us about your 'special circumstances' which required a round in the chamber with the thumb
>safety on. Should be enlightening.

===

He's probably a part time rent collector for a slum lord.  That would
be right in character with all of the previous hypocrisy that we've
seen.

 
 
 

I don't get it

Post by F.O.A.D » Sun, 07 Apr 2013 02:30:26


Quote:


>> Tell us about your 'special circumstances' which required a round in the chamber with the thumb
>> safety on. Should be enlightening.

> ===

> He's probably a part time rent collector for a slum lord.  That would
> be right in character with all of the previous hypocrisy that we've
> seen.

And once again W'hine demonstrates his inability to behave here as he
always exhorts others to do.

Oh, special circumstance. Here's one: if you are driving down I-95 at
night through the state of crazies, aka South Carolina, and you have the
proper permit, you'll want to have your sidearm ready to fire in case
you have to stop for gas or to use the toilet. It's South Carolina,
after all, the state of crazies.