Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Salty-Leg-9037 t1_j99bulh wrote

Reply to comment by PG-Glasshouse in Eversource doubles pay for CEO as 'skyrocketing' electric bills hit customers by WellSeasonedUsername

See this I can agree with? Why, is the correct question. Here in CT we are too used to be being over-governed. School lunch should be free, 100%. The problem is (and capitalism isn't a factor here) the State allocates certain funding levels for schools. As you know, our state's schools are horribly underfunded. In my home town we didn't even have a high school. The problem herein lies with the school systems themselves. Why would they provide funding for food when they can attract teachers with salary? And because our education budget is always so short and we currently have low education expectations in general. They have no choice to charge for food. This is a cyclical problem and until it's roots are addressed it will continue. I have a young son I'm raising here, and I'm DEEPLY concerned about his schooling coming up. I am more than likely sending him to a catholic school, I will gladly pay for his education in a system I have a say in and his lunch is paid for. That's the difference. This state is horribly broken but sadly the voters continuously determine the status quo. Until that changes, nothing will change.

1

PG-Glasshouse t1_j99ebpt wrote

> They have no choice to charge for food.

This is untrue, no part of our education system being underfunded is because the money is not there.

It does not matter how much is privatized because the budget will always get cut further and no savings will materialize. It’s two pincers of the same claw.

Lunch accounts for 0.25% of the schools cost? Well the parents are now paying that 0.25% and funding was cut by another 3%. I guess we better find something else to privatize since funding is so low and we need more money to pay salaries.

This is the goal of privatization and the means by which it captures public institutions. It never stops.

A. Divert taxes from school funding through lobbying.

B. All of a sudden schools can’t afford materials/expertise (this creates the inadequacies in the education system you mentioned).

C. Introduce a private entity that will alleviate funding shortages through providing some of these things by charging parents directly and make a killing doing it.

D. Lobby to cut funding for education again so you can do it all over.

Congratulations you have “solved” a problem with capitalism.

The state ended 2021 with a 14% surplus, the surplus is currently sitting at over 3 billion for this fiscal year. CT is not a state short on money.

6

Salty-Leg-9037 t1_j99el33 wrote

Negative. All of it not true. I'm involved in local government and your claim is unsubstantiated, the figures you provided are not factual. But I am enjoying the dialogue.

2

PG-Glasshouse t1_j99fpdp wrote

> Negative. All of it not true. I’m involved in local government and your claim is unsubstantiated, the figures you provided are not factual.

Please do not lie.

The figures I provided are not “factual” because they are representations of values that only need to be larger or smaller to prove the point. They are not designed to be exact values pulled from your specific middle schools financial report. If the lunch program cost 70% of the budget, cuts to education would still quickly move to negate the savings of privatization. Let’s call it an 80% cut because the specific numbers in that example literally do not matter. No matter how much money is saved by privatization it will never make up the shortfall created by continuing to cut even more education funding and it isn’t supposed to.

2

Salty-Leg-9037 t1_j9a755j wrote

It's not a lie my dude. It's common sense. When you can reason with yourself and understand that there are some things you may not understand. It's extremely easy to see that feelings or dislike for something doesn't make it untrue. The truth is actually extremely uncomfortable at times, but the truth is what the truth is. I'm sorry to say that you are still incorrect.

1