23 Aug 10
Originally posted by zeeblebotCorrect. It's not costing the taxpayers. It's costing the fools who will buy California bonds at this point.
although, it IS a K-12 school, not just K-6, and it IS being built with bond funds, it's not like it's costing the taxpayers anything.
Seriously. Who would buy California bonds right now? Maybe the Chinese?
23 Aug 10
Originally posted by KazetNagorraPeople like you, who are always claiming that the poor folks don't have the same quality of educational facilities that the better off neighborhoods have.
Who are the idiots in the California government who would approve such a thing?
This half billion dollar turkey will be a wasteland and covered in grafitti in 2 years.
23 Aug 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Sam The ShamThe state could pay nothing and convert the yearly operating costs to vouchers for parents to spend at the private schools of their choice and get much better results in terms of student achievement.
People like you, who are always claiming that the poor folks don't have the same quality of educational facilities that the better off neighborhoods have.
This half billion dollar turkey will be a wasteland and covered in grafitti in 2 years.
Then California could waste the $578m on 12 new museums that no one will visit.
23 Aug 10
Originally posted by Sam The ShamPeople like me think public schools should be affordable and small-scale.
People like you, who are always claiming that the poor folks don't have the same quality of educational facilities that the better off neighborhoods have.
This half billion dollar turkey will be a wasteland and covered in grafitti in 2 years.
23 Aug 10
2 edits
Originally posted by rwingettIt's not the school building that counts, it's the dedication of the teachers and parents and the willingness of the students to learn that counts.
But you didn't turn out so well. 😛
I once held tutoring classes in the back of a bus during the hour ride home (I was a substitute teacher) and all passed with flying colors.