25th Amendment gaining traction against joey

[RussellCasse]

What does any of this have to do with DEI? You are conflating things. Can you reply without attacks?

And there are plenty of white folks that got released with serious crimes pending trial. This is a perfect example of you living in a bubble. Both of those guys are right wing clowns and stroke fears to white men like you. Go and follow Roland Martin, Jemelle Hill or Marc Lamont Hill and you'll see the same race privilege from the black side.

What are you even talking about. I simply stated 2 different examples of privilege. And yes, privilege is RACISM. Preference based on race IS racism. DEI is racist policy that grants privilege to certain races over others.


I appreciate your admission that being released like this is privilege. I also appreciate your ASSumption of my race. Weird assumption, curious to how you made this JUDGEment. Almost as if you are…

The reason I used the case of a murderer that was freed on bond as an example, is because in the past…if this was a white person, it would have been used as an example of white privilege. Period. Thx for confirming what racist J Hill would have called it. You always are there for me to help when I need you. 🪤

As for attacks…no clue what you are talking about. No one was attacking you. I was being sympathetic with how public education failed you. I am so sorry. Wish we would have done better.

 

[kalimgoodman]

What are you even talking about. I simply stated 2 different examples of privilege. And yes, privilege is RACISM. Preference based on race IS racism. DEI is racist policy that grants privilege to certain races over others.


I appreciate your admission that being released like this is privilege. I also appreciate your ASSumption of my race. Weird assumption, curious to how you made this JUDGEment. Almost as if you are…

The reason I used the case of a murderer that was freed on bond as an example, is because in the past…if this was a white person, it would have been used as an example of white privilege. Period. Thx for confirming what racist J Hill would have called it. You always are there for me to help when I need you. 🪤

As for attacks…no clue what you are talking about. No one was attacking you. I was being sympathetic with how public education failed you. I am so sorry. Wish we would have done better.

So what evidence do you have that this was because of DEI? I see a rant but zero evidence at this time.

You already said that you were an older white men. I believe in your 70s or so.

I just pointed out that this happens with white people as well and why didn't you post about it? I have examples ready to go but I am really curious about the DEI connection.

 

[kalimgoodman]

That's not privilege. That's racial supremacism. Putting your race above the rights of a victim of a different race is in fact a form of racism.

Privilege is passive, racism is active.

I didn't say it, he did. I was using his words to "meet him where, he is". I don't agree with him overall but that's irrelevant right now.

 

[RussellCasse]

So what evidence do you have that this was because of DEI? I see a rant but zero evidence at this time.

You already said that you were an older white men. I believe in your 70s or so.

I just pointed out that this happens with white people as well and why didn't you post about it? I have examples ready to go but I am really curious about the DEI connection.

“ You already said that you were an older white men. I believe in your 70s or so.”

First off…no sir. Stop with the misinformation. You assumed my race. Fell into a 🪤.

Second, and maybe I can try to type slower.

You are conflating DEI with me saying she got her job due to DEI. Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. Misinformation. You should be censored.

Separate the two I said DEI is one example of black privilege.

Another example is a black man getting light sentencing, or special consideration from a judge. Literally the definition of privilege, and something you acknowledged you have examples for white people. Something you alluded that J hill calls white privilege. What I am doing, and you are slow to pick up on…is pointing out the hypocrisy.

Turning the tables so to speak.

 

[kalimgoodman]

“ You already said that you were an older white men. I believe in your 70s or so.”

First off…no sir. Stop with the misinformation. You assumed my race. Fell into a 🪤.

Second, and maybe I can try to type slower.

You are conflating DEI with me saying she got her job due to DEI. Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. Misinformation. You should be censored.

Separate the two I said DEI is one example of black privilege.

Another example is a black man getting light sentencing, or special consideration from a judge. Literally the definition of privilege, and something you acknowledged you have examples for white people. Something you alluded that J hill calls white privilege. What I am doing, and you are slow to pick up on…is pointing out the hypocrisy.

Turning the tables so to speak.

Why are you bringing up DEI? You still haven't explained that.

Sure about privilege, I just don't see what DEI has to do with any of this and you clearly don't either.

 

[RussellCasse]

The privilege of being white everyone!!!

 

[RussellCasse]

Why are you bringing up DEI? You still haven't explained that.

Sure about privilege, I just don't see what DEI has to do with any of this and you clearly don't either.

Nonsense. DEI has everything to do with Black/brown privilege.

It’s the gateway to hire based on race vs merit.

Be better. Hence, privilege.

I already gave you the definition for privilege earlier. If this is still too difficult for you let me know.

Also, if it is too difficult for you, theN maybe you were the beneficiary of DEI, and privilege based on race.

 

[kalimgoodman]

Nonsense. DEI has everything to do with Black/brown privilege.

It’s the gateway to hire based on race vs merit.

Be better. Hence, privilege.

I already gave you the definition for privilege earlier. If this is still too difficult for you let me know.

Also, if it is too difficult for you, theN maybe you were the beneficiary of DEI, and privilege based on race.

Listen man, I know your style is to attack, belittle and call names when confronted. If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen. I grew up with name calling, so it doesn't work on me. It's also your attempt to censure speech by name calling as YOU stated the liberals do. By saying "if it's difficult for you, you're (insert insult)", is your way to make someone reluctant to reply. I'm still going to say what I want to say. With that said....

Have you ever been involved with DEI? Have you ever hired someone through a diversity program? I know you haven't. You think they just go to bar and hire the 1st person of color they see. Companies actually assess the credentials and accomplishments of the candidates.

Also, if you ever hire anyone before, you would know that it's not about the best resume. There is so much that goes into a making the decision to hire someone. When the Eagles hired Andy Reid he was a low level assistant, he wasn't even a coordinator. Now look at him. Phil Jackson was an assistant that interviewed well and now he's a legend. Nick Saban wasn't considered the best candidate when LSU hired him and look at him now. That entire excuse of "merit" makes zero sense when applied to the real world.

All you do is live in these right wing media places and get your thoughts.

In conclusion, DEI has nothing to do with what you originally posted. You just threw it out because you wanted to attack DEI by linking it to this fake black privilege talking point.

 

[LordofallSocks]

That entire excuse of "merit" makes zero sense when applied to the real world.

Interrogative, WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT, OVER.

You can't be serious with this mess. So you're all for what, nepotism and tokens?

 

[kalimgoodman]

Interrogative, WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT, OVER.

You can't be serious with this mess. So you're all for what, nepotism and tokens?

You could ask that question without leading your incorrect account.

I've stated plenty of times that I don't agree with any of that stuff. I just think "merit base" hiring isn't real. Right wing media like to make people think that the best resume should always get the job.

I actually hire people and I know that we don't just look at the best resume then hire on the spot. That is why you actually interview.

Companies filter through resumes, bring a certain amount of candidates in for an interview, and then decide.

My job requires a panel when we hire and you'll be amazed at how each candidate will be ranked at the end by each individual panelist.

I'm all in for hiring the best candidate that the hiring manager feel is at that time. I just don't think it should be about race, family or friends

 

[NavigatorII]

You could ask that question without leading your incorrect account.

I've stated plenty of times that I don't agree with any of that stuff. I just think "merit base" hiring isn't real. Right wing media like to make people think that the best resume should always get the job.

I actually hire people and I know that we don't just look at the best resume then hire on the spot. That is why you actually interview.

Companies filter through resumes, bring a certain amount of candidates in for an interview, and then decide.

My job requires a panel when we hire and you'll be amazed at how each candidate will be ranked at the end by each individual panelist.

I'm all in for hiring the best candidate that the hiring manager feel is at that time. I just don't think it should be about race, family or friends

This might be the best post you've ever made. I agree.

 

[LordofallSocks]

You could ask that question without leading your incorrect account.

I've stated plenty of times that I don't agree with any of that stuff. I just think "merit base" hiring isn't real. Right wing media like to make people think that the best resume should always get the job.

I actually hire people and I know that we don't just look at the best resume then hire on the spot. That is why you actually interview.

Companies filter through resumes, bring a certain amount of candidates in for an interview, and then decide.

My job requires a panel when we hire and you'll be amazed at how each candidate will be ranked at the end by each individual panelist.

I'm all in for hiring the best candidate that the hiring manager feel is at that time. I just don't think it should be about race, family or friends

So what part about that isnt about merit?

You don't know if you're hiring Chad Hunter White the third, Sh'wuanda Jenkins, or Sum Fat Ho.

You're LITERALLY LOOKING AT JUST QUALIFICATIONS.

 

[kalimgoodman]

So what part about that isnt about merit?

You don't know if you're hiring Chad Hunter White the third, Sh'wuanda Jenkins, or Sum Fat Ho.

You're LITERALLY LOOKING AT JUST QUALIFICATIONS.

As I previously stated, merit only hiring isn't a thing. Best resume doesn't always equate to best candidate.

 

[kalimgoodman]

This might be the best post you've ever made. I agree.

I've read this multiple times. This doesn't feel right 😂.

 

[Mdfgator]

So what evidence do you have that this was because of DEI? I see a rant but zero evidence at this time.

You already said that you were an older white men. I believe in your 70s or so.

I just pointed out that this happens with white people as well and why didn't you post about it? I have examples ready to go but I am really curious about the DEI connection.

there is no evidence of it on either side, we need to treat people for who they are not what they are, this isnt rocket science, way too many victims on both sides. Dont be a vicitm. just compete.

 

[Orangeclad]

You could ask that question without leading your incorrect account.

I've stated plenty of times that I don't agree with any of that stuff. I just think "merit base" hiring isn't real. Right wing media like to make people think that the best resume should always get the job.

I actually hire people and I know that we don't just look at the best resume then hire on the spot. That is why you actually interview.

Companies filter through resumes, bring a certain amount of candidates in for an interview, and then decide.

My job requires a panel when we hire and you'll be amazed at how each candidate will be ranked at the end by each individual panelist.

I'm all in for hiring the best candidate that the hiring manager feel is at that time. I just don't think it should be about race, family or friends

Kalim, let me offer this perspective. First I can immediately relate to how you were describing how your job requires a panel to evaluate candidates. I worked for a major insurance company in their audit deartment. As part of that, I was very involved in the hiring process of 5-7 trainees each year. Each candidate was interviewed by several people and that group got together at the end and different people had different evaluations but decisions were made as to who would get job offers, so I can relate to your process.

With that being said, I have never heard anybody on the right say that the best "resume" should get the job. In fact, I don't even hear that word "resume" being used. What I hear and what I say myself is that the "most qualified" should get the job. As you know, getting the "most qualified" is highly subjective and not an exact science.

The resume is just a file or document listing a candidate's grades, work experiences, any leadership experienes or anything that a candidate thinks that would be attractive to an employer. But the resume is just a portion of the candidate's total qualifications, not the whole thing. The interview puts the final piece in front of the evaluator from which to make a determination on who to hire. Kalim, as I saw, and maybe you too, a person could have a better "resume" than somebody else but not interview as well. So the most qualified between those 2 people may not be the person with the better "resume".

I don't know who's hiring based on "resume" only with no interview but for me I am looking at both "resume" and interview to try to get at "most qualified".
But again, I hear no one on the right saying best "resume" should get the job. All I hear is "most qualified" should get the job.
That's my 2 cents.

 

[Mdfgator]

i started a thread for this, you genderless cupcakes were too scared to enter.

 

[RussellCasse]

Listen man, I know your style is to attack, belittle and call names when confronted. If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen. I grew up with name calling, so it doesn't work on me. It's also your attempt to censure speech by name calling as YOU stated the liberals do. By saying "if it's difficult for you, you're (insert insult)", is your way to make someone reluctant to reply. I'm still going to say what I want to say. With that said....

Have you ever been involved with DEI? Have you ever hired someone through a diversity program? I know you haven't. You think they just go to bar and hire the 1st person of color they see. Companies actually assess the credentials and accomplishments of the candidates.

Also, if you ever hire anyone before, you would know that it's not about the best resume. There is so much that goes into a making the decision to hire someone. When the Eagles hired Andy Reid he was a low level assistant, he wasn't even a coordinator. Now look at him. Phil Jackson was an assistant that interviewed well and now he's a legend. Nick Saban wasn't considered the best candidate when LSU hired him and look at him now. That entire excuse of "merit" makes zero sense when applied to the real world.

All you do is live in these right wing media places and get your thoughts.

In conclusion, DEI has nothing to do with what you originally posted. You just threw it out because you wanted to attack DEI by linking it to this fake black privilege talking point.

First you off, I haven’t called you any names or attacked you. In fact, it’s a nice projection on your part. YOU are the one that attacked. Accusing me of being a 70 yr old and CALLING me a white guy in an attempt to use race to shut down discussion. At this point it’s a lie because you were given the opportunity to correct your misinformation and failed to do so.

I will humbly be waiting for your apology and correction. And while we are at it, and since you brought up being able to “take the heat”, where do we stand on you reporting people? I don’t think you ever answered? If you did, I missed it. Have you ever done it? Just curious.

And DEI, by definition is racist, and you have made the ASSumption (again) about who I am and what my career and post career have been about.

Race shouldn’t be ANY of the criteria considered, and it currently is under DEI. Period. And when race is a consideration…it is what it is. And what it is…is racist.

💊

 

[RussellCasse]

Kalim, let me offer this perspective. First I can immediately relate to how you were describing how your job requires a panel to evaluate candidates. I worked for a major insurance company in their audit deartment. As part of that, I was very involved in the hiring process of 5-7 trainees each year. Each candidate was interviewed by several people and that group got together at the end and different people had different evaluations but decisions were made as to who would get job offers, so I can relate to your process.

With that being said, I have never heard anybody on the right say that the best "resume" should get the job. In fact, I don't even hear that word "resume" being used. What I hear and what I say myself is that the "most qualified" should get the job. As you know, getting the "most qualified" is highly subjective and not an exact science.

The resume is just a file or document listing a candidate's grades, work experiences, any leadership experienes or anything that a candidate thinks that would be attractive to an employer. But the resume is just a portion of the candidate's total qualifications, not the whole thing. The interview puts the final piece in front of the evaluator from which to make a determination on who to hire. Kalim, as I saw, and maybe you too, a person could have a better "resume" than somebody else but not interview as well. So the most qualified between those 2 people may not be the person with the better "resume".

I don't know who's hiring based on "resume" only with no interview but for me I am looking at both "resume" and interview to try to get at "most qualified".
But again, I hear no one on the right saying best "resume" should get the job. All I hear is "most qualified" should get the job.
That's my 2 cents.

Correct. Most qualified. Merit based.

And when race, or sex are taken into consideration…and yes I have seen it first hand being promoted…then it’s wrong.

And things like this (not to be conflated with DEI or my above statement) are weird as well…

You always hear folks complaining about NFL head coaching positions being too white, or not enough black NFL coaches….but you NEVER hear complaints about not enough white NBA players. Why is that?

Maybe it’s because if you want the BEST teams, you build them off merit. You know, most qualified.

For my guy @kalimgoodman that doesn’t think companies are using DEI (using race or gender as a consideration to be “more diverse”)as part of their hiring process…here is Billionaire Mark Cuban getting smacked by the EEOC for doing just that…

 

[RussellCasse]

Or, lets use more facts rather than “what @kalimgoodman does at work which isn’t really relevant to the overall discussion on whether or not DEI helps to setup black/brown privilege that is Racist.

Here is harvard (leftist Harvard) admitting that Scotus decision on affirmative action in government institutions might impact “aggressive” DEI policies in private industry.

From the article…

“We don’t mean this in the most obvious sense, which is that the court’s opinion focused on governmental actors and universities rather than on private employers. When the right case reaches the court, the same justices who just endorsed a “colorblind” approach to higher education could also hold that private employers cannot consider race, sex, or other protected characteristics in workplace decisions.

Such a ruling would indeed imperil the most aggressive pro-diversity policies. Reserving hiring or promotion slots for underrepresented groups, instructing managers to use race or sex as a “tiebreaker” when choosing between candidates, or setting strict demographic targets tied to manager compensation are all vulnerable to a judicial rebuke.”

Weird….harvard is admitting companies are using “race” as a tiebreaker, and have “pro dicersity” policies, but hey Kalim got to sit on a board…so it doesn’t exist. Uhuh. Let’s keep the truth going here..

What SCOTUS’s Affirmative Action Decision Means for Corporate DEI

While the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on affirmative action is focused on government actors and universities, it’s inevitable that some corporate leaders will use it as a reason to abandon diversity, equity, and inclusion programs they already opposed. However the authors argue that the court...

hbr.org

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Listen man, I know your style is to attack, belittle and call names when confronted. If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen. I grew up with name calling, so it doesn't work on me. It's also your attempt to censure speech by name calling as YOU stated the liberals do. By saying "if it's difficult for you, you're (insert insult)", is your way to make someone reluctant to reply. I'm still going to say what I want to say. With that said....

Have you ever been involved with DEI? Have you ever hired someone through a diversity program? I know you haven't. You think they just go to bar and hire the 1st person of color they see. Companies actually assess the credentials and accomplishments of the candidates.

Also, if you ever hire anyone before, you would know that it's not about the best resume. There is so much that goes into a making the decision to hire someone. When the Eagles hired Andy Reid he was a low level assistant, he wasn't even a coordinator. Now look at him. Phil Jackson was an assistant that interviewed well and now he's a legend. Nick Saban wasn't considered the best candidate when LSU hired him and look at him now. That entire excuse of "merit" makes zero sense when applied to the real world.

All you do is live in these right wing media places and get your thoughts.

In conclusion, DEI has nothing to do with what you originally posted. You just threw it out because you wanted to attack DEI by linking it to this fake black privilege talking point.

Punk kid trying to give hiring lessons? I have been hiring people before you were a gleam in your parents eyes. Just stop with the BS.

 

[RussellCasse]

Here…more examples on NON race based, black/brown privilege examples of DEI at work From Left leaning Axios…

What other perks are there from DEI outside of hiring?

From Axios article linked.

“Since then, the group that brought that case — American Alliance for Equal Rights — sued two law firms, challenging minority fellowships that were open only to students of color, those who identify as LGBTQ+, or those who have disabilities.”

“The group also sued a venture capital fund, the Fearless Fund, for investing solely in Black women. (The case is working its way through the courts.)”

“On the flip side, more firms had hired a senior DEI leader — and about 40% of firms track race/ethnicity representation.”

Weird, why would they track race percentage of their workforce if race isn’t a consideration?

https://www.axios.com/2023/11/27/dei-affirmative-action-supreme-court

 

[gatordad3]

Could this be the reason?

 

[RussellCasse]

Lets keep it going on Non Racist, Non Privilege based DEI policies shall we…

 

[RussellCasse]

Weird, medical schools “admitted” to hiring based on color of skin. Say it ain’t so @kalimgoodman

I mean, CVS doesn’t do it so…no one else does…amirite?

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Libs LOVE DEI because they are so average at BEST...most below average...and this gives them a chance against more qualified people. It is as simple as that.

 

[kalimgoodman]

Kalim, let me offer this perspective. First I can immediately relate to how you were describing how your job requires a panel to evaluate candidates. I worked for a major insurance company in their audit deartment. As part of that, I was very involved in the hiring process of 5-7 trainees each year. Each candidate was interviewed by several people and that group got together at the end and different people had different evaluations but decisions were made as to who would get job offers, so I can relate to your process.

With that being said, I have never heard anybody on the right say that the best "resume" should get the job. In fact, I don't even hear that word "resume" being used. What I hear and what I say myself is that the "most qualified" should get the job. As you know, getting the "most qualified" is highly subjective and not an exact science.

The resume is just a file or document listing a candidate's grades, work experiences, any leadership experienes or anything that a candidate thinks that would be attractive to an employer. But the resume is just a portion of the candidate's total qualifications, not the whole thing. The interview puts the final piece in front of the evaluator from which to make a determination on who to hire. Kalim, as I saw, and maybe you too, a person could have a better "resume" than somebody else but not interview as well. So the most qualified between those 2 people may not be the person with the better "resume".

I don't know who's hiring based on "resume" only with no interview but for me I am looking at both "resume" and interview to try to get at "most qualified".
But again, I hear no one on the right saying best "resume" should get the job. All I hear is "most qualified" should get the job.
That's my 2 cents.

Your overall insight aligns with mine. I highlighted some key points in which, we agree the most but as you know "most qualified" is in the eyes of the interviewers.

I will just say that the right is saying best resume. They assume that a person of color in a certain position wasn't the best qualified. I saw that NY has like 5 black judges on one of it's court and a right wing media guy said that their no one they all were the "most qualified". They then went into judges that were/are more qualified in their eyes and they were basing the entire argument on "resume".

Because X practiced law for 8 years, they are more qualified than Y, who was practicing for 5 years, etc.

I will believe that anyone who assumes that a person of color or female was hired because of their race or sex WITHOUT evidence is a trouble person.

 

[kalimgoodman]

Punk kid trying to give hiring lessons? I have been hiring people before you were a gleam in your parents eyes. Just stop with the BS.

Go Gators!

 

[kalimgoodman]

Weird, medical schools “admitted” to hiring based on color of skin. Say it ain’t so @kalimgoodman

I mean, CVS doesn’t do it so…no one else does…amirite?

View embedded media

View embedded media

I never said that it didn't happen or doesn't happen. I 100% know that it does. I just asked in the particular situation that you mentioned, how did it apply there?

Also, you do know that we they hire based on race/sex, it's based on the most QUALIFIED minority/woman?

They don't just go to the local bar and grab a person of color/female. That is why I asked you directly about your experience with DEI programs. I've learned already that you speak the loudest about things that have zero direct experience with. It is always what twitter or right wing media tells you. You are king of 2nd hand information.

 

[Orangeclad]

Your overall insight aligns with mine. I highlighted some key points in which, we agree the most but as you know "most qualified" is in the eyes of the interviewers.

I will just say that the right is saying best resume. They assume that a person of color in a certain position wasn't the best qualified. I saw that NY has like 5 black judges on one of it's court and a right wing media guy said that their no one they all were the "most qualified". They then went into judges that were/are more qualified in their eyes and they were basing the entire argument on "resume".

Because X practiced law for 8 years, they are more qualified than Y, who was practicing for 5 years, etc.

I will believe that anyone who assumes that a person of color or female was hired because of their race or sex WITHOUT evidence is a trouble person.

I am not saying that you haven't heard the word ”resume" being used. I am saying that I haven't heard it being used in the context of one person getting the job because of a better "resume" or even being used at all. But I am curious as to who is using this, so the next time you hear this or see it in print, can you let me know who and where.

 

[Orangeclad]

One thing that I find interesting in this thread has been discussions of DEI, hiring practices, merit based, etc etc. But there's one major element that I haven't seen discussed, and frankly I'd like to see it become the new "E" word in DEI and that word is "education". Our public school education system in this country is an embarrassment when you look at where this country is ranked in the world in core subjects like reading, math and science given the money spent on each child.

The democrat party is against school choice because they are wedded to the teacher's union. The emphasis is on the teacher's, not the students. Randi Weingarten should be fired and would be if this were a business where results mattered.

Inner city minority students would do better if the money was going to the student's family to choose where their child goes and not the state. Let's end the insanity of any kid, white, black, brown or any color in high school who can't read past say 3rd or 4th grade proficiency. That is atrocious. What is that kid's future?

 

[kalimgoodman]

One thing that I find interesting in this thread has been discussions of DEI, hiring practices, merit based, etc etc. But there's one major element that I haven't seen discussed, and frankly I'd like to see it become the new "E" word in DEI and that word is "education". Our public school education system in this country is an embarrassment when you look at where this country is ranked in the world in core subjects like reading, math and science given the money spent on each child.

The democrat party is against school choice because they are wedded to the teacher's union. The emphasis is on the teacher's, not the students. Randi Weingarten should be fired and would be if this were a business where results mattered.

Inner city minority students would do better if the money was going to the student's family to choose where their child goes and not the state. Let's end the insanity of any kid, white, black, brown or any color in high school who can't read past say 3rd or 4th grade proficiency. That is atrocious. What is that kid's future?

Another great choice of words by you. You are on fire.

School choice will not fix that problem. It will help the current climate, that's all. The way to fix our education is investing in the schools. The would be better books, building, after and pre school resources. The little things like a free lunch can go a long way. We need to pay our teachers more too. They typically make between 30-60k, that is not enough. We also need to invest in the inner cities better. Most kids drop out to feed the fam or themselves.

I think the Democrats and Republicans are failing with educating our kids.

 

[LordofallSocks]

Another great choice of words by you. You are on fire.

School choice will not fix that problem. It will help the current climate, that's all. The way to fix our education is investing in the schools. The would be better books, building, after and pre school resources. The little things like a free lunch can go a long way. We need to pay our teachers more too. They typically make between 30-60k, that is not enough. We also need to invest in the inner cities better. Most kids drop out to feed the fam or themselves.

I think the Democrats and Republicans are failing with educating our kids.

Facts . A JSO officer with 8 years of service makes 90k.

Pay your teachers or hire my jailers.

 

[kalimgoodman]

Facts . A JSO officer with 8 years of service makes 90k.

Pay your teachers or hire my jailers.

That is sad