Waiting on the Wake County school legislation to be introduced

Whoa...lot of garbage here to clean up...not sure I'll get to all of it.

First, international comparisons are difficult, however, when you compare our top students with theirs we're not doing so well. Generally, most "socialist" countries you may be thinking of don't do a great job with people in the "lower classes". They tend to put them on different tracks than the more wealthy, connected kids. Also, many of those "socialist" countries don't have a lot of diversity to contend with. Some don't even allow ANY immigration for example. Some don't have to worry about immigration because no one wants to move there anyway.

You like to bring up the plight of the poor in the US a lot (usually with a lot of exaggeration). There are a lot more REALLY poor people in socialist countries than there are in the US. The poor in the US are generally doing quite well by international standards.

If kids are coming to school hungry or don't have an environment to learn in at home, it's because their parents are not taking care of their primary responsibility...period. I always find it interesting when people claim the poor are working all the time, two jobs, both parents out of the house, etc. If that were true, then why on earth are they still "poor"? If both parents are working 2 full-time jobs each even at minimum wage, that's 60K per year! If both parents are working just one job at minimum wage, that's at least 30K per year. Let's also mention that nearly everyone who works the same job for more than 3 months DOESN'T MAKE MINIMUM WAGE! The average full-time hourly wage for a Wal-mart associate is $10.76. Depending on the number of hours you work, that can be more than $20K per year plus health benefits and a 401K plan.

There is no doubt that some people end up being poor through no fault of their own. Illness, mental issues, tragic accidents, etc, but let's not pretend that's most of them. Most people end up poor because they made poor choices and continue to make poor choices. If they're not feeding their children or making sure they're doing ok in school, they're just perpetuating the problem. Charter schools and vouchers absolute help the poor who want to offer something better for their children. Parents who don't give a darn...well...I completely agree that charter schools and vouchers are not gonna fix that. However, for every poor child that does get that opportunity, that will be one less person depending on government in the next generation. So....in the long run, charter schools and vouchers may be the answer.

Now, if you want to know which political party benefits the MOST from a failing public education system, all you have to so is look at who gets the most money from teacher unions and look which party the people dependent on government (excluding military retirees and SS recipients) vote for. If even fraction of people were made less dependent on government via a strong public education system, Republicans would have a much greater chance at regaining power.

That was one study you picked on....The overarching point was (while self-evident to the majority of people) was that liberals dominate the education system, certainly at Universities (while that wasn't part of my original point). Now, if you want to claim that faculty at Universities are largely balanced in their political view points...well, I simply cannot help that kind of ignorance.

As to the study you picked on....I think you have to ask yourself whether its a chicken or egg scenario. If the field is dominated by one-train of thought, perhaps its attracting people with that point of view is a disproportionate manner. I don't think its healthy for any field to be so lopsided in its point of view or political persuasion. That tends to breed group think which isn't helpful and may very well explain while "research" in the social sciences is of such poor quality.