No, Haim, I made it all up. And your characterization of the "whole rest of the country" has no statistical legs whatsoever. So it's doubtful that my town stood alone in its idiotic reactionary defeating of the school budget for more than ten years in a row.
As for my being a "child," I was in school from age 5 to 18, like most Americans. At what point would I be qualified to have an awareness of local political events in a household with parents who were very active in trying to get the school budget passed? As always, you arrogant ass, you speak of that which you don't know.
So regardless of your incredulity, what I recounted is true, and if you don't care to believe, I'm hardly surprised. Or concerned. You've never been one to let reality interfere with your version of history. On May 6, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Haim wrote:
> MPG Posted: May 5, 2007 9:08 PM >> With the swing in salaries favoring the city or other >> suburbs, my local schools could no longer attract as >> many top-notch teachers, and there was a definite >> decline in some schools and some of the high school >> departments, notably in math and science. > > > And so, your theory is that, at a time when the whole rest of > the country was embarking on a campaign to quadruple education > expenditures, yours was the only town in the U.S. to actually > reduce spending. This story may even be true, but you can > understand our skepticism and why we would want to see some > evidence of this. After all, then, as now, N.J. is one of the > highest taxed states in the country and it spends like drunken > sailors on education. > > Quite possibly, what you do not remember, because you were a > child and it would not have made any sense to you, is that your > town might have entered into some kind of cost sharing arrangement > with a neighboring. Only recently, I saw, and posted, an article > describing this ancient N.J. practice. In this case, your town may > very well have been spending less, but the schools would have been > getting their same, rising allotment of money. It is, simply, > incredible that in the late 1950s to early 1960s, a school > district, in N.J. of all places, would actually be getting less > money, not more. > >> I'm sure Haim would have been an active voice in the >> Cosmos Club (had he been Italian) or some other local >> anti-tax, anti-public schools groups, urging people to >> think as narrowly and with little vision as possible. >> If there were no local scandals of financial abuse, >> he'd have cooked some up or, most likely, told many >> tales of horror about financial mismanagement somewhere >> else. > > Yea, well I think I will leave the cooking to you.
I don't cook up tales to win arguments, unlike you, dearest Haim. > You are "sure" I would do this or that, but > > (a) you do not know me,
I know you only too well.
> (b) I did not live in N.J.,
So where do you get off offering commentary on what I'm speaking about, bright boy?
> (c) I am not Italian,
No, of course, you're Jewish. That much is glaringly obvious even if I didn't already know who you are based on much of what you post here.
> (d) I never heard of the Cosmos Club, and
Did I suggest you did? Why would you? But that was already accounted for in my previous post.
> (e) Anytime I want "tales of horror" and other stories of financial > abuse in the schools, I have only to open a newspaper, as this > thread will attest,
You find horror in interesting places. An easier way to do so would be to look in a mirror any time. Or at a photo of that dinner you and the rest of the charming members of NYC-HOLD had. You're the very tall one. > > while you make inferences from your wholesale fabrications about me.
In your case, that would be retail. But there's a difference between predictions and fabrications. You're the expert at the latter. I merely make reasonable inferences based on your track record. You most assuredly would have been fighting against passing the school budget, had you been old enough and there. Didn't claim you were.
> What a schmuck.
I'm cut to the quick. > >> Not to go all bumper-stickerish, but as the saying >> goes, "If you think education is expensive, try >> ignorance." > > We are so there.
Hmm. Valley Haim?
> And you are right, it is very expensive.
But you don't mind much. Better > >> And that's precisely what the Haim's and Wayne's of the >> land would love to see us do. Education for them and >> theirs, but not for anyone else. > > Aren't you the great humanist who makes fun of dead people?
Why? Did you die? If so, I'll be happy to make fun of you. But you make such fine sport of yourself.
As for making fun of actual and particular dead people, see Bishop, Wayne, late 2002, regarding the late Walter Denham. On this very list. Oh, but you knew that. >