Old-Skool-JC wrote:
Quote:

trambone wrote:
I'm just against the use of recorded music for processions and parades. Every other cultural event usually uses live musicians and just because this is by Muslims does not exempt them from hiring people instead of using canned recordings.

Thank you for explaining yourself. Shamefully, i assumed you were an unreasonable racist, but you clearly have a perfectly rational grievance regarding the use of recorded music in parades.
My apologies.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

trambone wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Every illegal immigrant who uses our 'free' (well, you and I pay for it) emergency rooms should have his home country charged for the cost. Or have the cost deducted from the aid we send them.

Well I'm sure this can be discussed with their consulate. While that is being discussed they need to be treated no matter what the cost when it is a danger to the public.

A danger to the public caused by this foreign national's lying.

We may debate whether or not his family should be charged for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in free care.

But we should all agree that his family isn't entitled to a penny. And the race baiter Jesse Jackson has sunk to a new low by calling this man's death "racist," and threatening to sue the hospital.

Monroe wrote:
Every illegal immigrant who uses our 'free' (well, you and I pay for it) emergency rooms should have his home country charged for the cost. Or have the cost deducted from the aid we send them.

Monroe wrote:
Why should they pay the bill?

Don't you pay for what you use?

And why should we subsidize the healthcare of a foreign national with higher hospital costs because he won't/can't pay?

If we send any aid to Liberia, just reduce it by the amount he owes to the hospital for his care. And the care of anyone else he infected.

TwoBootsJC wrote:
Wow guys. Let me give you our story. Two Boots JC is not a franchise. I am friends with the founder who is based in NYC. I thought JC should have one. With his help, I opened Two Boots JC two years ago. It's completely independent. My wife and I own it. I've lived in JC since 1997. Did you read my post about how much we're involved in the community? I'm happy to answer any other questions.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

trambone wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

trambone wrote:
Did you also notice the poverty rate is also at 30%? Many of these children only eat at school. Have access to the internet at school. Access to other educational needs at school.

Did you notice that our neighbors to the North have MORE children living in poverty, and yet manage to graduate many more of them?

Jersey City: 30.2% in poverty, 67.5% graduation rate
West New York: 34.5% in poverty, 78.4% graduation rate
Union City: 36.5% in poverty, 79.2% graduation rate

The problem with facts is that they can't be easily dismissed... Face it. We have a corruption and/or mismanagement issue in JC.

Let me ask this question. Why are they dropping out? Are they flunking out at 21? Are they leaving to pursue other options?(Some of which do not always require a HS diploma or they would rather just get a GED)

Also on the other hand how do we not know other poorer districts are just pushing students through? Other more affluent districts have been known to make their "advanced" students have better grades then they have earned so they can apply for top universities to bring accolades to that district. Many of these numbers that are provided have no real context.

As someone else already stated, you are now changing goal posts. First, you questioned the graduation rate stat. Once evidence of it is quoted, you throw out poverty as the reason. When poorer towns with much better graduation rates are highlighted, you change the reasoning to kids dropping out voluntarily and questioning all of the stats.

Why not simply admit (and, then, try to address) the issue of corruption and mismanagement?? There is just NO WAY that we have to spend SO MUCH money per pupil. JC now spends the equivalent of college tuition per student. We should stop the madness. Especially before things change (and, I have no doubt they will at some point) and the courts get rid of Abbott or heavily rework it.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

trambone wrote:
Did you also notice the poverty rate is also at 30%? Many of these children only eat at school. Have access to the internet at school. Access to other educational needs at school.

Did you notice that our neighbors to the North have MORE children living in poverty, and yet manage to graduate many more of them?

Jersey City: 30.2% in poverty, 67.5% graduation rate
West New York: 34.5% in poverty, 78.4% graduation rate
Union City: 36.5% in poverty, 79.2% graduation rate

The problem with facts is that they can't be easily dismissed... Face it. We have a corruption and/or mismanagement issue in JC.

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Until teachers -- and any public sector employee -- has a competitive salary with the best and brightest private sector employees, the result is always going to mediocre people making up the majority of positions.

Teaching was once one of the few jobs society allowed women to have. Along with nursing, teaching attracted the best and the brightest women. When society began allowing women to become lawyers and bankers and financiers and plenty of other high paying professions, the best and the brightest followed the best and the brightest men.

There is no reason to compare "average" salaries of college graduates, or even masters+ graduates. You don't want average people responsible for teaching students, and you certainly aren't going to get above average results. There are plenty of jobs that average and below average people are probably suited for, like Human Resources.

You want the best scientists teaching science? Don't compare average college degree salaries, compare the best paid scientists -- chemists who make perfumes, biologists who make drugs, engineers who build apps. You want better teachers who know math? Its not about being competitive with a secretary. Its about being competitive with a salary who can crunch numbers as an accountant or analyst. You want the best people too teach kids to speak real good and right real good? Yeah, well starting salary at a big law firm is 6 figures.

Yeah, YOU probably make less than a teacher. There is a pretty good chance that YOU are below average. Actually, its basically a 1 in 2 chance that you are below average. If you want just average people teaching kids, then go ahead and compare average salaries (although you should adjust for the fact that teachers are being counted towards those average salaries and will bring up or down the area's average, but I digress). But average people aren't going to produce above average results.

No one here thinks we should not compensate great teachers with more money. But in all your comments, not a word about getting rid of the teachers that prove to be inept after they make tenure, and are sometime earning strong salary/benefit packages post tenure.

Not a word.

After all, isn't it about the kids? What industry in NJ has over 100,000 employees and fires less than a handful for poor performance each year? Because that's what happens in NJ-yes, some teachers are fired for other reasons, but the handful removed for being lousy teachers who impede their student's education is so low as to be statistically insignificant.

But ianmac, shouldn't you be concerned with NYS students rather than NJ/JC students, as you live in Brooklyn? Do you pay taxes to NJ? Have kids here? What's the angle on your interest in NJ education?

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
You're comparing teachers who only need to be smarter than the average JC kid with the Ivy League MBA types who work at GS?

We don't need 'steps' for teachers to earn PhD's to get compensated extra for teaching 3rd graders how to spell.

Shit in, shit out.

Yes, I already addressed that when I noted that the 2/3 JC graduation rate should be mostly put at the feet of indifferent parents and lazy kids, or did I say lazy parents and indifferent kids? Either way it's the truth.

dtjcview wrote:
19% wouldn't be unreasonable if they scaled back the platinum healthcare plans, and converted teachers pensions to 401k plans.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

trambone wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Are people saying that renters and owners of new construction should not have the same rights to street parking as other residents?

No they're saying if an area that held a residential building that held 6 people is demolished and can now hold 20, that they should find a way to provide parking for natural increase of cars.

This assumes the people who lived there before had a right to free street parking. But why?

JC has plenty of parking spots in existing parking lots. It doesn't need more lots.

Monroe wrote:
Are people saying that renters and owners of new construction should not have the same rights to street parking as other residents?