TN Repub state Senator wants to tie welfare benefits to kids' academic performance

[Brown_Pride]

As i've said, regardless of the motives the idea is sound.
Placing stipulations that a parent become involved in their children's education at the very, very, very lowest of levels is not to much.

All the attacks on the senator who though of the bill or where he thought of it are moot. If your worst enemy tells you not to stick your dyck in a running blender does that make it a bad idea?

When republicans took control of the national stage do you know how they did it? They started at the school level. They got on school boards, then they just kept on going.

I'm for turning this shyt, which again as i've said is clearly not "for the children," into something that can work for those not well off.

And Kid's whose parents can't muster the force of will to help their kids get a D are not worthy of parenting, that's tantamount to child abuse and we should really think about the ability of that parent to provide a nurturing environment for their kid.

 

[Brown_Pride]

As i've said, regardless of the motives the idea is sound.
Placing stipulations that a parent become involved in their children's education at the very, very, very lowest of levels is not to much.

All the attacks on the senator who though of the bill or where he thought of it are moot. If your worst enemy tells you not to stick your dyck in a running blender does that make it a bad idea?

When republicans took control of the national stage do you know how they did it? They started at the school level. They got on school boards, then they just kept on going.

I'm for turning this shyt, which again as i've said is clearly not "for the children," into something that can work for those not well off.

And Kid's whose parents can't muster the force of will to help their kids get a D are not worthy of parenting, that's tantamount to child abuse and we should really think about the ability of that parent to provide a nurturing environment for their kid.

 

[Brown_Pride]

Starving them and possibly forcing them out of their homes on the other hand.

Not such a big deal.


I'm not trolling or anything of the sort in here either btw

Sounds like the state should step in as the parents are clearly not able to provide minimum care. Isn't that what we do when a parent can't take care of their kid? We try to help (welfare) and if that doesn't work we do what's best for the kid?

 

[88m3]

Sounds like the state should step in as the parents are clearly not able to provide minimum care. Isn't that what we do when a parent can't take care of their kid? We try to help (welfare) and if that doesn't work we do what's best for the kid?

Yes because the state has such a brilliant history of dealing with the care of children.

 

[Robbie3000]

As i've said, regardless of the motives the idea is sound.
Placing stipulations that a parent become involved in their children's education at the very, very, very lowest of levels is not to much.

All the attacks on the senator who though of the bill or where he thought of it are moot. If your worst enemy tells you not to stick your dyck in a running blender does that make it a bad idea?

When republicans took control of the national stage do you know how they did it? They started at the school level. They got on school boards, then they just kept on going.

I'm for turning this shyt, which again as i've said is clearly not "for the children," into something that can work for those not well off.

And Kid's whose parents can't muster the force of will to help their kids get a D are not worthy of parenting, that's tantamount to child abuse and we should really think about the ability of that parent to provide a nurturing environment for their kid.

The guy is a misinformed crack pot who offers half baked ideas and talks out of his ass on the regular. A quick google search will demonstrate his ideas are not fully thought out.

He has not established that children of welfare parents are getting failing grades in at a much higher rate when compared to other populations or that his proposal will greatly increase school performance as a whole.

He is literally talking out of his ass.

 

[OG Talk]

this is the same guy who introduced the 'Don't Say Gay' bill and pushed it for six years.

'Don't say gay' bill clears Senate panel » Knoxville News Sentinel

That's an ad hominem.. What does one that have to do with the topic at hand?

 

[Robbie3000]

That's an ad hominem.. What does one that have to do with the topic at hand?

1) To demonstrate that he has a bias. Therefore his proposal may have less to do with improving education and more to do with pushing his right wing agenda.

2) To demonstrate that his ideas are not well thought out.

 

[OG Talk]

1) To demonstrate that he has a bias. Therefore his proposal may have less to do with improving education and more to do with pushing his right wing agenda.

2) To demonstrate that his ideas are not well thought out.

And (fill in the blank) politician doesn't?

This is the problem with group think and political identity.. It creates the inability to look at every issue by an individual basis...

He could have had 10 sh1tty ideas but if this one has potential to do more good than harm it shouldn't be dismissed because of how he feels about gays or the R next to his name..

I do agree with his assessment that academic neglect is a form of child abuse...It definately causes more long term damage then things like spanking or bullying...

 

[Mr swag]

if you show up every day no one's going to fail you....havent read through this thread but im sure that's what theyre trying to get at.

I got a .014 in my health class. Showed up every day and did my work

 

[Robbie3000]

And (fill in the blank) politician doesn't?

This is the problem with group think and political identity.. It creates the inability to look at every issue by an individual basis...

He could have had 10 sh1tty ideas but if this one has potential to do more good than harm it shouldn't be dismissed because of how he feels about gays or the R next to his name..

I do agree with his assessment that academic neglect is a form of child abuse...It definately causes more long term damage then things like spanking or bullying...

Has he demonstrated academic neglect on the part of the welfare parents that would justify this draconian measure or is he simply making an assumption based on his biases?

If such neglect exists then fine, we can have a discussion about the validity of his proposal. But until he can make such a case, we should reject his premise outright.

We don't know that welfare kids are failing (receiving grades< 1.0) at any higher rate than other populations.

 

[theworldismine13]

Has he demonstrated academic neglect on the part of the welfare parents that would justify this draconian measure or is he simply making an assumption based on his biases?

If such neglect exists then fine, we can have a discussion about the validity of his proposal. But until he can make such a case, we should reject his premise outright.

We don't know that welfare kids are failing (receiving grades< 1.0) at any higher rate than other populations.

What is draconian about requiring a 1.0? Have you lost touch with reality?

If anything a kid getting a 1.0 in school is grounds for child welfare to look into the family and getting the kids proper care

 

[Robbie3000]

What is draconian about requiring a 1.0? Have you lost touch with reality?

If anything a kid getting a 1.0 in school is grounds for child welfare to look into the family and getting the kids proper care

Can you or this state senator demonstrate that welfare kids are failing in large enough numbers to justify this law?

I'm done arguing the hypotheticals of a stupid law introduced by a moron which may end up trying to solve a problem which doesn't exist.

 

[theworldismine13]

Can you or this state senator demonstrate that welfare kids are failing in large enough numbers to justify this law?

I'm done arguing the hypotheticals of a stupid law introduced by a moron which may end up trying to solve a problem which doesn't exist.

I can't justify that at all, but I can justify not giving a fuk whether does law passes or not, becuase it will effect pretty much....nobody, and if it does effect somebody than so be it, there is zero crisis here

 

[Type Username Here]

That's a very good and fair point but that's not what we talking about breh breh. Lets stay on topic though.

That's the Problem breh. This topic is meant to keep us distracted from the real fraud and welfare abuse.

I don't get where the angry stems from....is it because this affects black people, or because it's coming from a rethuglican?

I'm not black and I don't care that it is from a Republican. This is just ass backwards thinking.

So y'all would rather throw money at the poor because they're poor and not help pull them out of poverty. So how long should we throw money at them?

I don't think I ever advocated just throwing money at the poor to fix problems. This isn't about throwing money at the poor, it is having a safety net in place. Yes, abuses do happen, but it is a c*nt hair of money compared to the fraud that happens in other places.

i just don't get this.
On the one hand you're saying generational welfare is a problem, on the other you're against a law that intends to change this?

Seems quite easy to understand. Generational Welfare is a problem of culture, upbringing and personal responsibility. This law won't change that. They might get the kids to do bare minimum, but you think a 1.0 GPA is going to fix the issues? This is just retribution for appeasement.

Just on principle are you using morality as a justification for this law being garbage?

Yes. I'm all for parent involvement in teaching children and kids doing better in school, but I'm not for adding stipulations to money set aside for the poor.

Let me ask you, how does this harm either child or parent?
Who DOES NOT benefit from this in the long run?

It harms the parent if the parent is trying to get her kid to do better but the child doesn't give a fukk.

It harms the child if the parent doesn't care about the 30% deduction and the child has to suffer even more.

Society doesn't benefit when we add stipulations to the poor receiving welfare, but we neglect stipulations to the rich who receive MUCH more of our taxpayer money.

Don't fall for the okey doke. This tactic is as old as time.

 

[Serious]

The guy is a misinformed crack pot who offers half baked ideas and talks out of his ass on the regular. A quick google search will demonstrate his ideas are not fully thought out.

He has not established that children of welfare parents are getting failing grades in at a much higher rate when compared to other populations or that his proposal will greatly increase school performance as a whole.

He is literally talking out of his ass.

No sh*t, this is why I saw it as a running joke. If this stupid piece of legislation passes, I wouldn't be upset, because it shouldn't effect not one damn person.

But to sit up here and make excuses for parents not fostering a healthy enough environment for children to at least maintain a D- average, is beyond ridiculous, it's down right insulting. It should blow up in the State Senators face as being ineffective...

More black people need to learn how to instill a set of morals for ourselves, if this is deemed acceptable behavior. There is not one excusable explanation, for why a student can't maintain a D- minus average.(with the exception of a disability / handicap)

We got to do better...