7.5m spent on little Einsteins vs 11.5B on disabled school-aged children

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by dinaluvsApple, Sep 23, 2010.

  1. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #1
    the future of america is doomed.
    'Still, it might be argued that since super-smart kids are few in number and hardly require lavish facilities, even $7.5 million would help. This is a truly embarrassing lie that sheds enormous light on how Washington regards America's brainpower.

    First, compare the proposed $7.5 million to the $11.5 billion that the national government spent in fiscal 2010 for disabled school-aged children. "



    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/the_war_on_academic_achievemen.html
     
  2. macrumors G3

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #2
    Why would smart kids need money? :confused:

    I was part of a gifted program, I didn't need special assistants, equipment, transportation, etc. Those with disabilities DO need that kind of stuff.

    Of course those with special needs are going to need money to help out.
     
  3. macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #3
    uh oh

    This should get some interesting responses....:eek:
     
  4. macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #4
    On this issue, I agree with Sarah Palin. I'm actually shocked anyone would suggest that money spent for DD/MR children is money that is wasted or poorly spent. Oh, and do you really think 7.5 million is the only money being spent for students who excel? That's just silly.
     
  5. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #5
    right because, science room equipment, modern computers, field trips to museums and other such educational tool aren't helpful to help nurture gifted children?
     
  6. macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6
    I am with this logic. It makes since.

    A lot of times people people with disabilities you require specialist to help with them. Specialist do not come cheap. On top of that the specialist are going to be dealing with a very few amount of people.

    I have dyslexia. The school district had a specialist at the school to address the students with that disability by hiring a specialist to address it and that was fairly costly of an extra for less than 20 students for separate pull out program.

    The GT kids you do not need to sped the extra money like that that. Just a regular teacher at most is all you need and they can handle a larger number of kids.

    Like another post also talk about the ones with much greater disabilities than mine you have to add in some transportation cost for very few. That equipment is very costly for very few kids. Some students require a full time aid to be with them at all time at the school and that is pretty costly for a single student.

    you have any idea how much stuff like that pisses off regular students. Plus often those things fall into what all the students should be exposed to. That extra so call equipment can easily be pulled from what they already have (regular budget)

    Computers already have them.... No need to buy more.
    Field trips to museums. Already do that in regular students.
    They have a pull out program and they do a fair amount to help the gifted kids but like he said it not like they require that much extra. So not much money needs to be spent.
     
  7. macrumors G3

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #7
    Why don't we get those for average students and propel them forward collectively?
     
  8. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #8
    because we are wasting 11.5B......
     
  9. macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #9
    pretty clear you never been on the side of someone with disablity.

    I pointed out my example. A specialist was hired a few students. That specialist cost quite a bit more than a regular teacher.
    That was their to help us learn to adapted to living with dyslexia and using our abilities to our best. Btw if you want to get into a smarts war I am willing to bet that you would loss to me. My IQ is top 3-5% of the world. So do not say I am dumb. I just pointed out a fact. Also my true IQ is impossible to test. All they can tell you is it what is it north of.
    So do not get into gifted war with me. I also fell under the gifted category as well.

    I will tell you that helping me adjust to dyslexia was money much better spent than any of the "gifted money" spent.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #10
    Smart and capable people cost less money because they're smart and capable.

    If you're not smart enough to understand this... you might just be riding the short bus of life.
     
  11. macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #11
    Wow. I consider myself pretty smart, and have been tested as such, but I don't think I'm that smart.
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #12
    Very true.

    I think I come from a unique perspective, having participated in both of these "programs."

    I had a severe speech impediment in early grade school, resulting in two years spent working with a speech therapist every day at school. I also participated in the "Gifted" program, whatever the heck it was called.

    I benefited from both of them immensely, and in all honesty, I probably got more from my speech work than the gifted thing.
     
  13. Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #13
    There was an article in the NYT about seven or eight weeks ago about the obscene amount of money spent on educating severely mentally handicapped persons.

    New York Public school system spent, I think, around 1.8 million USD so this kid could recognize 5 words and an assortment of colors.

    There is no way that this is justifiable.

    That same amount of money could have been spent on academically gifted children and of had a positive impact.

    It is absolutely horrifying that so much money is poured into educating children that have zero promise of doing anything when academically gifted children are marginalized in favor of trying to educate their less gifted peers.

    EDIT:

    Here's a link to the article.

    What a waste of money.
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #14
    Because they will draw on them with sharpies as they check their facebook, say a microscope? I hate science! and try to figure out ways to sneak into the museums bathroom for a handjob.
     
  15. macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #15
    I will like to add IQ means jack crap on what you can really add to the world. It is more about drive than anything else. Only reason I brought it up was to show were I fit in the category to kill an article and post from the OP.

    I already figure his counter was to insult my intelligent. I was going to head it off and prove that I could of been in both categories very easy. I qualified for GT but did not go into it. Money was much better spent on my disability than any of the money that would of been spent on GT.
    Now I did do something that went from my more gifted talents in both math and science.
    Also I went some some special feed trips that we had to compete to go on. Yes I won it.

    What is pretty clear is people do not understand how costly it is to address the people with disabilities in school.
     
  16. macrumors G3

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #16
    My gifted program was great, though we wasted a TON of time with "free play" (AKA launching our lego cars against the wall for fun :p).

    Looking back though, there were a lot of elements that should have been spread about the whole school, rather than just concentrated on our 20 student "APEX" program.

    Are you suggesting that somehow smarter kids are better behaved? My experience, while anecdotal, is the complete opposite. Half the trouble makers in my schools were smart kids too bored with the softball curriculum to pay attention. Instead, we came up with clever ways to cause trouble in discrete ways.
     
  17. macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #17
    You know what thinking about another reason you see the huge spend in how the money is spent is often money for those programs comes from private donations so they are not counted in the budget. Now people with disabilities guess what no private company or donations are really collected for those needs so only one place for the money to come from.

    If you add in all the private donations money spent or side things spent it would be a lot closer. Government really does not need to spend huge amounts of money on GT programs when private donations covers it.
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #18
    How did you come up with the figure of 1.8 million?

    The article states that in 2009 the cost per student was $58,877. he'd have to be in school 30.5 years to add up to your number.
     
  19. macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    Agreed.

    The money would be better spent helping normal poor kids to get a good education - as at least then they can give something back.
     
  20. Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #20
    Yes, that figure must have been from another article/ source.

    I assumed that the edit would make that error clear.
     
  21. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #21
    Well... not when you consider that you made the edit after I pointed out the error.

    One could assume that I can't see into the future. :rolleyes:
     
  22. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #22
    Depends on how exactly it is being spent. Are some of them becoming productive members of society? I would say we waste more in other assistance programs, like paying for women to have children they cannot afford.

    I guess it would be cheaper to check them all before they are born and flush them? Not a world I would want to live in.
     
  23. macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #23
    You might be surprised. 95th percentile is only around 125 IQ.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #24
    I think we should come up with an intelligence test that can be done in vitro, and abort all babies that are stupid or show signs of being republicans (same thing). (edit) I hope y'all note my sarcasm and the effort in pointing out the irony.
     
  25. macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #25
    I,m glad to see the thread title has changed. Einstein being a high school drop out who hated school and showed a healthy disrespect for authority throughout his life would I'm sure laugh at the original,he'd have been in the second grouping.
     

Share This Page