"[Obama] wants to hire more school teachers. We all like school teachers. It's a wonderful thing. Typically, school teachers are hired by states and localities, not by the federal government. But hiring school teachers is not going to raise the growth of the U.S. economy over the next three-to-four years."
Romney goes back to his original position on teachers now that the debate is over and the cameras are off (hint: he doesn't love you anymore).
His statement is typical of the short-term strategies of the GOP that create long-term problems. They cry that President Obama doesn't create long-term strategies, when in fact it's the other way around.
In the debate, when pressed, Romney lied his ass off (again) and said, "I reject the idea that I don't believe in great teachers or more teachers." (emphasis mine)
No, teachers as a group aren't going to fix the US economy in the next 3-4 years. But teachers will do the following:
Head households whom the government needs spending money to 'raise the growth of the US economy over the next 3-4 years.' The more we brag about reducing government jobs and public sector jobs, the more that the GOP can brag about all the teachers they've put out of work. Every single one of those government jobs that has been eliminated represents a person. A US citizen who pays taxes, buys product, and participates in our economy. Every one of those public sector workers that has gone on public assistance now represents the 47% of moochers that Romney would like to ignore. So when he says we don't need teachers (or other public sector workers) he is shooting the US economy in the foot. Also? Most of the public sector job losses have been presided over by Republican governors, not the federal government, so that isn't President Obama's fault, dude. It's your own party's lack of compassion for the people who work for the people.
What else will teachers do?
They will educate the next generation of folks who WILL 'raise the growth of the US economy'. Will that next generation of people be educated or will they be uneducated? Will they be respected in the global economy or will they be ridiculed? Will they know enough about history and economics in order to not repeat past mistakes and utilize the latest and greatest theories? Or will they rely on WWJD in an economy of 2000 years ago? Obviously, we know which Romney (and so many other GOPers) prefers.
So, the idea of the federal government not needing to be involved in education or the hiring of teachers or the policies of what our children should learn really comes down to a matter of priorities - as the President has said. Budgets reflect the values of the people who create them. If you are only thinking about the next couple of years when you talk about an economy the size of the US, then you are short-sighted and have very little compassion for the folks you are downsizing. But then again, we are talking about the king of downsizing and outsourcing and definitely not the king of compassion. So, you get what you pay for, don't you?
Please vote. And vote for the long term health of our economy, not the pretend quick fix brought by heaping the problems of our country onto the shoulders of teachers.
No comments:
Post a Comment