• Our friends from the Johto Times are hosting a favorite Pokémon poll - and we'd love for you to participate! Click here for information on how to vote for your favorites!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Walker vs Wisconsin

No offense, but misusing a personal day probably doesn't bode well for public opinion. Aren't those for illness, injury, or medical emergencies? At least where I live. Plus other "urgent events" related to family members.
 
TRIFORCE89 said:
No offense, but misusing a personal day probably doesn't bode well for public opinion. Aren't those for illness, injury, or medical emergencies? At least where I live. Plus other "urgent events" related to family members.
Click to expand...

Personal days are a certain amount of days one can take off by law without having to have justification. Those are usually different than sick days; which are usually unlimited since no one can plan on being sick for X amount of days (but the law can regulate how much of that is paid time off).
 
I know its different than sick days. For me, Personal Days mean like....your parents died, you go into a car accident, even your babysitter cancelled. "I'm too sick to work today" would be a sick day.

Anyway...different topic altogether.
 
Magmaruby and Aquasapphire said:
I find it unprofessional that Teachers show their political positions to their students...
So it passed? Huh interesting...
Some people I heard were actually using sick days...guess they used up their personal days...
Click to expand...

I find no problem with it. If a child actually changes their opinion on politics/was influenced simply because a teacher discussed their own Political views then that child is a naive idiot. We're supposed to think critically, yes? Same thing.
 
Live_Wire466 said:


I find no problem with it. If a child actually changes their opinion on politics/was influenced simply because a teacher discussed their own Political views then that child is a naive idiot. We're supposed to think critically, yes? Same thing.
Click to expand...

That's a bit harsh. We're talking about children, not adults. Children are easily impressionable. That is human nature at an early age.
 
We're talking about seniors in high school. The people impressionable enough to change their opinions based on their teacher's don't understand the issue/don't care about it anyway. The ones that do care enough about the issue had basically the same opinion as my teacher anyway.
 
Magmaruby and Aquasapphire said:
I find it unprofessional that Teachers show their political positions to their students...
So it passed? Huh interesting...
Some people I heard were actually using sick days...guess they used up their personal days...
Click to expand...

I think it's perfectly fine for them to be stating their political opinions to their older students, especially those who are in high school.

And I wonder how it will affect other states, and how many more will consider this.
 
TheSmartOne said:
We're talking about seniors in high school. The people impressionable enough to change their opinions based on their teacher's don't understand the issue/don't care about it anyway. The ones that do care enough about the issue had basically the same opinion as my teacher anyway.
Click to expand...

The terms "children" and "child" don't imply high schoolers, let alone seniors. In high school, I think it's okay for teacher's to express their opinions as long as they are clearly identified as opinion and not fact. When this happens, all students should feel free to express their opinions and perhaps have some healthy, civil debate on topics of interest.

My 12th Grade IB History teacher would show us films that are clearly biased to the left of American political spectrum. We had to watch Outfoxed, Sicko by Michael Moore, and Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth and write essay responses to them. That's inappropriate if the information is one-sided like that. I don't care how old a student is; teachers shouldn't be teaching political opinion as fact.
 
FreakyLocz14 said:
The terms "children" and "child" don't imply high schoolers, let alone seniors. In high school, I think it's okay for teacher's to express their opinions as long as they are clearly identified as opinion and not fact. When this happens, all students should feel free to express their opinions and perhaps have some healthy, civil debate on topics of interest.

My 12th Grade IB History teacher would show us films that are clearly biased to the left of American political spectrum. We had to watch Outfoxed, Sicko by Michael Moore, and Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth and write essay responses to them. That's inappropriate if the information is one-sided like that. I don't care how old a student is; teachers shouldn't be teaching political opinion as fact.
Click to expand...

Of course they are. High schools across the country advocate abstinence programs in health class and in the school, and those are clearly misleading, heavily right-wing religeous groups. Same thing, yet that's ok?

Back to Walker v. Wisconsin, I do hope the GOP knows they are literally digging their own grave for the 2012 elections. All this outrage and outcry over GOP-backed proposals will not go over well come next November. The democrats will carry the vote of the Middle class this time. All the Democrats have to do is bring up that they kept their distance from the Collective Bargaining Legislation, and did what they could to abstain from it's vote. Same strategy the Republicans used against Obama before the Midterms.
 
Last edited:
Live_Wire466 said:


Of course they are. High schools across the country advocate abstinence programs in health class and in the school, and those are clearly misleading, heavily right-wing religeous groups. Same thing, yet that's ok?

Back to Walker v. Wisconsin, I do hope the GOP knows they are literally digging their own grave for the 2012 elections. All this outrage and outcry over GOP-backed proposals will not go over well come next November. The democrats will carry the vote of the Middle class this time. All the Democrats have to do is bring up that they kept their distance from the Collective Bargaining Legislation, and did what they could to abstain from it's vote. Same strategy the Republicans used against Obama before the Midterms.
Click to expand...

Teaching children that abstaining from sex is an effective way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases is misleading?

I think it's way too early to be forecasting the 2012 elections. One could also see that the Democrat's failure to cooperate in order to reduce deficits will lead to higher taxes and slashed budgets for popular programs, thus fermenting more voter anger.

We must remember that those angry over these proposals are public sector employees. These people have always been a reliable voting base for the Democrats. Most middle class Americans are employed in the private sector and more worried about taxes than what benefits public employees get. In fact, many private sector employees probably loathe the fact that government works gets such generous benefits, yet still have the nerve to complain.
 
Lowest income tax: 10%
Highest income tax: 35%

30 years ago

Lowest income tax: 14%
Highest income tax: 70%

So the taxes for the poorest citizens have dropped a 4%, while the taxes for the richest have dropped by half. And now the deficit is crazy, so what's the solution? Increasing the taxes for the richest citizens back (not even to their previous levels!!!)? Nah, it's much better to cut down the benefits of the poorest since there are more of those and, after all, the richest could run away and avoid their legal obligations to contribute to the taxes.

Seriously, I find it horribly disgusting to live in a world where our leaders have such ideas. Sadly, they are all over the place lately.
 
Meh, I've been concentrating on Economics a lot lately and kinda realize...we need more tax brackets. Or the "millionaires tax."

We used to have 20+ actually, but tax code "simplification" in the 1980's *cough cough* eliminated it to 6 and capped the highest tax bracket to $250k+ so some like to argue when people say "tax the rich" that you're taxing "small businesses and entrepreneurs" because they fall under the $250k+ bracket LOL.

Love how these things are bended to appear in such ways. >.>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top