President Trump's Cabinet?

[RikidyBones]

He paid some of it only after it became public. Some he paid due to an audit.

Also, he had the penalties waived where typically his particular failure is highly penalized and considered quite serious.

Finally, as Treasury secretary he'd be the de facto head of the IRS. A guy who didn't pay his taxes as head of the IRS - if that does't define government I don't know what does.

Sounds accurate

 

[luthervol]

So she's never made the claim but you've imagined that's what she secretly plans to do.

This is akin to taking Obama's "spread the wealth around" comment to ole Joe the Plumber and reading between the lines to say his plan is full-blown communism for the US. After all, he did say he wanted to fundamentally transform the country.

Stay safe in your fear bubble and keep assuming the worst motives about people you disagree with.

You are piss poor at this.
A reasonable person may look at what she advocated for in Michigan with millions of her own dollars and conclude that her wishes for education on a national level may be similar.

 

[RikidyBones]

Also pretty amazing that he said he used TurboTax to prep the returns in question.

Well I feel turbo tax doesn't give me all of my deductions but that's a different conversation.

 

[05_never_again]

Well I feel turbo tax doesn't give me all of my deductions but that's a different conversation.

Does it cause you to miss paying about $35k in FICA tax (he was working for the IMF at the time, which did not automatically withhold US payroll taxes from his paycheck)?

 

[RikidyBones]

Does it cause you to miss paying about $35k in FICA tax (he was working for the IMF at the time, which did not automatically withhold US payroll taxes from his paycheck)?

I probably pay 35k more in taxes than I should.. ****ers..

 

[volinbham]

You are piss poor at this.
A reasonable person may look at what she advocated for in Michigan with millions of her own dollars and conclude that her wishes for education on a national level may be similar.

If that were true why wouldn't she say it? Why can't you produce any quote from her where she says she'd like to get rid of all public education?

I don't even know that she advocated getting rid of public education in Michigan.

You have proven you aren't reasonable at all. You start with a belief, refuse to prevent facts to support it and then say people are unreasonable if they don't share your unsubstantiated belief. #alternativefacts.

WASHINGTON — In a sometimes contentious confirmation hearing, education secretary pick Betsy DeVos pledged that she would not seek to dismantle public schools amid questions by Democrats about her qualifications, political donations and long-time work advocating for charter schools and school choice.

DeVos said she would address “the needs of all parents and students” but that a one-size-fits-all model doesn’t work in education.

Betsy DeVos: Won’t dismantle public schools as education secretary – The Denver Post

Now lets look at that - she directly says she will not do what you claim AND she says she favors multiple approaches (note privatizing it all is not "multiple" approaches).

But I'm sure your Kreskin-like abilities to divine the real truth are more accurate that what she said directly in the hearings...

 

[AirVol]

If that were true why wouldn't she say it? Why can't you produce any quote from her where she says she'd like to get rid of all public education?

I don't even know that she advocated getting rid of public education in Michigan.

You have proven you aren't reasonable at all. You start with a belief, refuse to prevent facts to support it and then say people are unreasonable if they don't share your unsubstantiated belief. #alternativefacts.



Betsy DeVos: Won’t dismantle public schools as education secretary – The Denver Post

Now lets look at that - she directly says she will not do what you claim AND she says she favors multiple approaches (note privatizing it all is not "multiple" approaches).

But I'm sure your Kreskin-like abilities to divine the real truth are more accurate that what she said directly in the hearings...

Luther only Googles fake news sources. C'mon Vbham.

 

[volinbham]

More of those pesky facts - an article about Detroit public schools - note the quote from the Director of the Great Lakes Education Project (a group Devos is connected to)

Gary Naeyaert is the Director of the Great Lakes Education Project. He generally agrees with Kelly.

“We’re talking about a particular district that has shown itself to be so academically and financially bankrupt that it has forfeited its right to teach our children.” he says. ”[But I] wouldn’t agree with the premise that our goal is to eliminate all public education in Michigan.”

Is it Time to Get Rid of Detroit Public Schools in Favor of All Charters? | WDET

Not in Michigan and not in the US. Statements from the people explicitly saying it is not their goal but of course "reasonable" people who read between the lines know this is exactly their goal

 

[golfballs]

Devos' ideas, however intentioned, could set into motion an effective takeover of private schools by the federal government. They won't affect public schools much at all.

School vouchers are a horrible idea, and I say that as a libertarian who leans conservative. Liberals hate them too, but for a completely different reason.

The Libertarians over at Reason magazine seem to be in favor

 

[volinbham]

I think there are plenty of better choices than her. I favor some form of school choice and believe the DoEd has been generally ineffective at improving education in this country.

The reaction to her is like the reaction to virtually everything since Nov. 9th - over the top.

 

[luthervol]

If that were true why wouldn't she say it? Why can't you produce any quote from her where she says she'd like to get rid of all public education?

I don't even know that she advocated getting rid of public education in Michigan.

You have proven you aren't reasonable at all. You start with a belief, refuse to prevent facts to support it and then say people are unreasonable if they don't share your unsubstantiated belief. #alternativefacts.



Betsy DeVos: Won’t dismantle public schools as education secretary – The Denver Post

Now lets look at that - she directly says she will not do what you claim AND she says she favors multiple approaches (note privatizing it all is not "multiple" approaches).

But I'm sure your Kreskin-like abilities to divine the real truth are more accurate that what she said directly in the hearings...

Why in the world would a nominee to lead the DOE feel the need to publicly state that she won't dismantle public schools? That alone should tell you everything you need to know. Of course she is not going to say that is her desire - that would be political suicide (I guess even for her).

Also, everyone knows that she couldn't dismantle public school education even if she tried. She will steer us in that direction and it will have an adverse effect for years to come.

 

[Grand Vol]

Luther has done jumped the shark.

Just to make this thread a little more entertaining, here's a girl twerking with a hoola-hoop.

 

[luthervol]

More of those pesky facts - an article about Detroit public schools - note the quote from the Director of the Great Lakes Education Project (a group Devos is connected to)



Is it Time to Get Rid of Detroit Public Schools in Favor of All Charters? | WDET

Not in Michigan and not in the US. Statements from the people explicitly saying it is not their goal but of course "reasonable" people who read between the lines know this is exactly their goal

Even the quote in bold face tells you what you need to know. You guys lack reasoning skills.

You'll have to scroll up to see the quote.

 

[BowlBrother85]

I think there are plenty of better choices than her. I favor some form of school choice and believe the DoEd has been generally ineffective at improving education in this country.

The reaction to her is like the reaction to virtually everything since Nov. 9th - over the top.

Maybe but she made it easy for Senate Democrats to whip their base into a frenzy with her hearing testimony. She was unprepared.

 

[05_never_again]

The Libertarians over at Reason magazine seem to be in favor

I'd say it is more mixed:

The Question Isn't Do You Support Betsy DeVos, It's Whether You Support School Choice - Hit & Run : Reason.com

School vouchers are a tough issue for Republicans to oppose politically. They are a pretty big thorn in the side of teachers' unions, which they get lots of brownie points for railing against. They are marketed as "school choice," which I suppose is technically true, and they don't want to be seen as opposing an effort to let parents choose which school their children can go to.

However, IMO, school vouchers are a great way for the federal government to gain control of private schools, which is about as anti-libertarian and anti-conservative as you can get.

 

[05_never_again]

Maybe but she made it easy for Senate Democrats to whip their base into a frenzy with her hearing testimony. She was unprepared.

Totally agree with you there.

A better nominee for the Dems to truly get apoplectic about was Rex Tillerson...the CEO of a multinational oil company being Secretary of State...but the guy seemed exceedingly well-prepared in his hearing. He had everything buttoned up and made it hard for Dems to attack him.

If Tillerson gave some Devos-like answers during his hearing, the firestorm that came down on him would be nuclear and his nomination could have easily failed. The outrage over Devos would pale in comparison.

 

[volbeast33]

We are talking about the freaking Labor Secretary here! Good lord.

I agree he should have but I hope he gets cleared.... I really like him.

 

[volinbham]

Why in the world would a nominee to lead the DOE feel the need to publicly state that she won't dismantle public schools? That alone should tell you everything you need to know. Of course she is not going to say that is her desire - that would be political suicide (I guess even for her).

Also, everyone knows that she couldn't dismantle public school education even if she tried. She will steer us in that direction and it will have an adverse effect for years to come.

1. She was asked to make the pledge! Quite the Catch-22 you've created. :loco:

2. Fear, fear, fear. Tell me what she'll do as DoEd that will bring these dire consequences. I mean policy-wise. Demonstrate some knowledge of what DoEd can do and what you believe she is planning.

 

[volinbham]

Maybe but she made it easy for Senate Democrats to whip their base into a frenzy with her hearing testimony. She was unprepared.

I agree and she should be roundly criticized for that. If the argument is about her qualifications then fine. However, it is like our friend Luther here that predicts end times as she dismantles (but everyone knows she can't dismantle - figure that one out) public education.

 

[05_never_again]

Never mind, I was misreading what you were saying about transfer payments. I think we're on the same page, but I don't entirely agree with tax credits (could/should be a part of it, sure) being that some families just couldn't afford to put up the payments regardless without help.

The actual families of the kids on scholarship would be paying substantially reduced tuition or sending their kid there tuition-free (you're right, many of them couldn't afford it otherwise) - the benefactors who get the tax credit are the donors to the charities.

The charity then pays for the tuition of the student, and each charity could decide the requirements to earn/keep the scholarships they award.

If you want to do school vouchers, I like that idea much better because it reduces the ability for the government to control it.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Totally agree with you there.

A better nominee for the Dems to truly get apoplectic about was Rex Tillerson...the CEO of a multinational oil company being Secretary of State...but the guy seemed exceedingly well-prepared in his hearing. He had everything buttoned up and made it hard for Dems to attack him.

If Tillerson gave some Devos-like answers during his hearing, the firestorm that came down on him would be nuclear and his nomination could have easily failed. The outrage over Devos would pale in comparison.

I think Rubio really wanted to vote against Tillerson but you're right, for the most part his answers were concise and he was willing to depart with some of Trump's campaign rhetoric when he had to (such as when Trump had said that South Korea and Japan having nuclear arms might be a good thing).

My only true qualms with Tillerson were how he deflected questions about Exxon's dealings with Equatorial Guinea and their dictator. Exxon used Riggs Bank in DC to pay this dictator $300 million who had taken over his country's national treasury. Meanwhile, the President of Equatorial Guinea is one of the wealthiest heads of state in the world while his country starves. Tillerson refused to make any moral judgments about this.

 

[luthervol]

I agree and she should be roundly criticized for that. If the argument is about her qualifications then fine. However, it is like our friend Luther here that predicts end times as she dismantles (but everyone knows she can't dismantle - figure that one out) public education.

So we agree that she was unqualified but confirmed none the less.

The educational system is monolithic and once its course is changed, it takes years to adjust course again. All of the Trump string pullers know this and also know the desired end result. Devos isn't smart enough to be a true player (she's proven that) but she will be a willing mouth piece that already buys into a lot of their desires.

 

[volinbham]

So we agree that she was unqualified but confirmed none the less.

The educational system is monolithic and once its course is changed, it takes years to adjust course again. All of the Trump string pullers know this and also know the desired end result. Devos isn't smart enough to be a true player (she's proven that) but she will be a willing mouth piece that already buys into a lot of their desires.

She would not have been my choice and there were better candidates.

The rest of this is cuckcoo

 

[luthervol]

She would not have been my choice and there were better candidates.

The rest of this is cuckcoo

It's an opinion piece on CNN, so everyone can immediately discount the validity of what she says, but for those few that are curious, it's an enlightening read. The natural extension of vouchers, choice, and private schools is obvious for some to see. I think it is the actual goal of many on the right. There are also many on the right that either fail to see, or choose to ignore the natural extension of these policies.....I'll leave it at that.

A vote for DeVos is a vote for resegregation (Opinion) - CNN.com

 

[OrangeDonkey]

The Republicans won. I accept that. I accepted the fact that they were going to put someone in that position who would prefer vouchers, would oppose further government spending for public schools, and who would I would otherwise disagree with. That would be fair- the majority of voters agreed with that.

Instead, they put someone in that position who has 0 experience as a teacher. 0 experience in school administration. Who actively fought a bipartisan effort to have more oversight of charter schools. Who, after seeing her confirmation hearing, knows little to nothing about what policies and standards she would have to enforce.

She has donated more money than most people will ever see in their life to Republican candidates, and because of that, she got this job. There are no arguments that can be made that she was the best candidate for the job. In terms of purely domestic policy, this is likely the most destructive thing Trump has done so far, and I pity everyone who will be in public schools over these next 4 years.