Don't ever doubt the power of BBN. Bevin v. Jurich

[sambowieshin]

Certainly the administrators are responsible or the crap that is actually being shoveled into their little minds. I made a blanket statement because there are certainly good teachers who are frustrated by having their hands tied. But seriously, when you teach history and the founding fathers are ignored or at best cast as flawed men who owned slaves etc.... that we are not exceptional as a country..... it is certainly worse at the university level but it is not exempt in k-12.

I have worked in public schools for almost 30 years. A lot of the perceptions you are referring to are just flat out wrong. I have never witnessed the disparaging of our founding fathers in a history class. Does that happen in isolation, possibly. If you recognize that their are thousands of history teachers across the U.S. teaching on a daily basis that may have a personal perspective that is of that nature, it may occur very rarely. But I guarantee that is not going on daily in classrooms all across America. That anti-U.S. narrative is one that is being peddled continuously by right wing mouths that have never spent a day of their lives in a school and use that one in ten thousand example to stir up gullible people for tv and radio ratings. Every school I have ever worked in starts the day with the Pledge of Allegiance before morning announcements, teaches the greatness of our country and spends zero amount of time engaging the kids in negative views of our country. No teacher in their right mind has time for that kind of stuff with everything else on their plate. Trust me, I've lived it.

 

[sk73]

Hell, I'm a teacher and I'm voting for Bevin. Man's done nothing but bring in jobs and tear the guts out of the cesspool that is UofL leadership. Bravo!

People vote against their self interest in each election cycle. I am sorry to see a teacher vote for someone that hates the profession.

 

[sk73]

....who was instrumental in Jurich and Pitino being fired. For that fact alone....BBN should be in his debt. I will vote for him forever.

An anecdotal case of what I see as "future" and not current teacher greed does not impress me. Sorry. You guys are responsible for the millennial generation and their beliefs that have created ANTIFA and BLM and the Socialist party gains in the US.

You are an idiot.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

I have worked in public schools for almost 30 years. A lot of the perceptions you are referring to are just flat out wrong. I have never witnessed the disparaging of our founding fathers in a history class. Does that happen in isolation, possibly. If you recognize that their are thousands of history teachers across the U.S. teaching on a daily basis that may have a personal perspective that is of that nature, it may occur very rarely. But I guarantee that is not going on daily in classrooms all across America. That anti-U.S. narrative is one that is being peddled continuously by right wing mouths that have never spent a day of their lives in a school and use that one in ten thousand example to stir up gullible people for tv and radio ratings. Every school I have ever worked in starts the day with the Pledge of Allegiance before morning announcements, teaches the greatness of our country and spends zero amount of time engaging the kids in negative views of our country. No teacher in their right mind has time for that kind of stuff with everything else on their plate. Trust me, I've lived it.

I'm not going to specifically name the high school, but my youngest son used to tell me stories about his American Government class that just blew my mind. This woman was a complete nut job and frankly should not be teaching anyone anything. I will give you a couple of examples. When discussing Jefferson, she repeatedly referred to him as a rapist. After Trump won the election, she basically had a meltdown. She actually told the class that there is no rationale for the electoral college system. How can someone who teaches government not understand the purpose and logic of the electoral college system? He said most of the class openly argued with her and told her she didn't know what she was talking about. I'm not saying this is typical, but I highly doubt that liberal view points being taught in American Government is extremely rare either.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

My wife's family is full of educators and she is kindergarten teacher, although at a private school. I understand that Bevin has unnecessarily insulted teachers because of criticisms of his plan to fix the retirement system. I also thought he made some absolutely stupid and unnecessary comments. That being said, the retirement system for government employees and teachers is not in good shape. At least he has tried to find a way to fix it. And fixing it is going to require some sacrifice on the part of teachers. You are dreaming if you think the system can be fixed at the full benefits you are expecting. The state doesn't have the money to do that and I don't think people will accept tax increases to fund it. There is going to have to be some level of compromise. We are in the shape we are in due to decades of horrible leadership in this state, most of which has been from Democrats, because they have been the party in power. In spite of how stupid his comments have been, I think Bevin has done more to get the state back on track than anyone I can remember. If he wins the republican primary, and that may not be given, I certainly won't vote to go back to liberal Democrats making decisions again. I'm not sure why teachers believe that someone else will magically fix the retirement issue. And if no one fixes it, many of you won't have a retirement worth a damn.

 

[sk73]

I'm not going to specifically name the high school, but my youngest son used to tell me stories about his American Government class that just blew my mind. This woman was a complete nut job and frankly should not be teaching anyone anything. I will give you a couple of examples. When discussing Jefferson, she repeatedly referred to him as a rapist. After Trump won the election, she basically had a meltdown. She actually told the class that there is no rationale for the electoral college system. How can someone who teaches government not understand the purpose and logic of the electoral college system? He said most of the class openly argued with her and told her she didn't know what she was talking about. I'm not saying this is typical, but I highly doubt that liberal view points being taught in American Government is extremely rare either.

Eliminating the electoral college is not a liberal stance. It is a common sense stance to take. When a state like Wyoming, with a population of less than 600,000 people has 3 votes in the electoral college and California with a population of almost 38 million has 55 electoral votes it is not right. Simply do the math. It is why in two of the last 3 presidential elections , the candidate with the highest popular vote, lost the election.

 

[sk73]

My wife's family is full of educators and she is kindergarten teacher, although at a private school. I understand that Bevin has unnecessarily insulted teachers because of criticisms of his plan to fix the retirement system. I also thought he made some absolutely stupid and unnecessary comments. That being said, the retirement system for government employees and teachers is not in good shape. At least he has tried to find a way to fix it. And fixing it is going to require some sacrifice on the part of teachers. You are dreaming if you think the system can be fixed at the full benefits you are expecting. The state doesn't have the money to do that and I don't think people will accept tax increases to fund it. There is going to have to be some level of compromise. We are in the shape we are in due to decades of horrible leadership in this state, most of which has been from Democrats, because they have been the party in power. In spite of how stupid his comments have been, I think Bevin has done more to get the state back on track than anyone I can remember. If he wins the republican primary, and that may not be given, I certainly won't vote to go back to liberal Democrats making decisions again. I'm not sure why teachers believe that someone else will magically fix the retirement issue. And if no one fixes it, many of you won't have a retirement worth a damn.

The teachers retirement system will be fine or even great if the legislators and Bevin do two things: 1. Simply contribute the amount of money in the fund (something that did not happen for over a decade) that they are legally ,supposedly, bound to do. Obviously the law that makes this contribution mandatory has not been followed.
2. Simply, leave it alone.

The KY. Retirement System, which is in no way connected to KTRS, is in severe jeopardy. Bevin and his legislative majority tried to lump all retirement systems together. Obviously, it didn't turn out too good.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

Eliminating the electoral college is not a liberal stance. It is a common sense stance to take. When a state like Wyoming, with a population of less than 600,000 people has 3 votes in the electoral college and California with a population of almost 38 million has 55 electoral votes it is not right. Simply do the math. It is why in two of the last 3 presidential elections , the candidate with the highest popular vote, lost the election.

First, that wasn't the point of her comment. Her comment was that there isn't a reason for the electoral college system. Anyone who understands our government knows there is a very good reason for it.

Second, I disagree that eliminating the electoral college is common sense. The purpose of the electoral college system is exactly what your example points out. Each state is a sovereign government. Each state voluntarily joined the union. Why would a state with a small population join the union if the President is elected on straight popular vote. It would mean small states have no say in electing the President. The electoral college was constructed to give small states some say in electing the President. In other words, the states elect the President of the United States, not the people. In my opinion, that is a good thing. Otherwise, large population centers would dominate elections and small population areas would have no say in the matter.

Think about it like this. If the USA had the choice to join a world government, would you be okay if the election were based on popular vote? In that system the USA would have no say in the election. I would want something akin to the electoral college system or I would not want the USA to join such a government. That is exactly the same scenario each state faced when thinking about joining the union. Fundamentally, the electoral college system makes perfect sense for a collection of sovereign governments coming together to create a unified country.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

The teachers retirement system will be fine or even great if the legislators and Bevin do two things: 1. Simply contribute the amount of money in the fund (something that did not happen for over a decade) that they are legally ,supposedly, bound to do. Obviously the law that makes this contribution mandatory has not been followed.
2. Simply, leave it alone.

The KY. Retirement System, which is in no way connected to KTRS, is in severe jeopardy. Bevin and his legislative majority tried to lump all retirement systems together. Obviously, it didn't turn out too good.

I agree that they shouldn't have lumped them together, but I don't think you are correct about the KTRS. Just contributing what they are supposed to from now on without making up for the shortages from the past, will not create a viable retirement system in the long run. Somehow the money that was supposed to have been contributed in the past has to be made up. I don't think the state has the funds to do that.

 

[sambowieshin]

My wife's family is full of educators and she is kindergarten teacher, although at a private school. I understand that Bevin has unnecessarily insulted teachers because of criticisms of his plan to fix the retirement system. I also thought he made some absolutely stupid and unnecessary comments. That being said, the retirement system for government employees and teachers is not in good shape. At least he has tried to find a way to fix it. And fixing it is going to require some sacrifice on the part of teachers. You are dreaming if you think the system can be fixed at the full benefits you are expecting. The state doesn't have the money to do that and I don't think people will accept tax increases to fund it. There is going to have to be some level of compromise. We are in the shape we are in due to decades of horrible leadership in this state, most of which has been from Democrats, because they have been the party in power. In spite of how stupid his comments have been, I think Bevin has done more to get the state back on track than anyone I can remember. If he wins the republican primary, and that may not be given, I certainly won't vote to go back to liberal Democrats making decisions again. I'm not sure why teachers believe that someone else will magically fix the retirement issue. And if no one fixes it, many of you won't have a retirement worth a damn.

I agree with a lot of what you said but still will vote for a pro education R or D. I don't know any teachers who aren't open to compromise regarding the pension issue. Raising the retirement age/number of service years/ capping sick day retirement benefits/limiting max retirement benefits amounts etc. for all new hires should all be on the table. The problem with Bevin is that he viciously attacked the current and retired teachers for being upset about wanting to reduce pension benefits we have already paid for. Many in the general public don't know that teachers prepay our COLA @3% out of every check. We only get a 1.5% COLA upon retirement that he wanted to eliminate completely. We also pay almost another 12 % of every check toward the pension and retirement health insurance. He tried to eliminate the retirement health insurance as well (which is in a giant prepaid account). Taking all new teachers out of the current system will cost the state more money down the line because nobody is contributing to the old system but the tax payers. The current system works very well when the state makes their required contribution and doesn't use the teacher pension fund as a freaking piggy bank to cover state budget shortfall like they did for 15 years. Bashing and name calling teachers about this would be the equivalent of criticizing someone who is pissed because they got robbed then had more money taken from them to pay them back for the money that was robbed, calling them names as they do it. I actually voted for Bevin but am very disappointed in how he has talked to and treated the educators of this great state.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

I agree with a lot of what you said but still will vote for a pro education R or D. I don't know any teachers who aren't open to compromise regarding the pension issue. Raising the retirement age/number of service years/ capping sick day retirement benefits/limiting max retirement benefits amounts etc. for all new hires should all be on the table. The problem with Bevin is that he viciously attacked the current and retired teachers for being upset about wanting to reduce pension benefits we have already paid for. Many in the general public don't know that teachers prepay our COLA @3% out of every check. We only get a 1.5% COLA upon retirement that he wanted to eliminate completely. We also pay almost another 12 % of every check toward the pension and retirement health insurance. He tried to eliminate the retirement health insurance as well (which is in a giant prepaid account). Taking all new teachers out of the current system will cost the state more money down the line because nobody is contributing to the old system but the tax payers. The current system works very well when the state makes their required contribution and doesn't use the teacher pension fund as a freaking piggy bank to cover state budget shortfall like they did for 15 years. Bashing and name calling teachers about this would be the equivalent of criticizing someone who is pissed because they got robbed then had more money taken from them to pay them back for the money that was robbed, calling them names as they do it. I actually voted for Bevin but am very disappointed in how he has talked to and treated the educators of this great state.

I don't disagree with most of what you said. He often says stupid things and doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. That in itself would not stop me for voting for him. He is the only governor that has tried to correct the problem. I wasn't a big fan of the plans that were put together, but I'm also not sure there is an easy fix. I'm not sure how realistic it is to think that current teachers can retain 100% of the current benefits, even though they did pay for much of it through their paychecks. I understand the point and I also understand why teachers are pissed at the idea of losing benefits they paid for. That being said, there may not be much of an alternative. If the solution were straight forward, wouldn't someone have proposed a better solution by now?

 

[sambowieshin]

I don't disagree with most of what you said. He often says stupid things and doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. That in itself would not stop me for voting for him. He is the only governor that has tried to correct the problem. I wasn't a big fan of the plans that were put together, but I'm also not sure there is an easy fix. I'm not sure how realistic it is to think that current teachers can retain 100% of the current benefits, even though they did pay for much of it through their paychecks. I understand the point and I also understand why teachers are pissed at the idea of losing benefits they paid for. That being said, there may not be much of an alternative. If the solution were straight forward, wouldn't someone have proposed a better solution by now?

Wish more political leaders were as reasonable and rational as you sound.....even if we may not agree on everything.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

Wish more political leaders were as reasonable and rational as you sound.....even if we may not agree on everything.

People are not going to agree with everything you do or think. You still have to be able to work with them and try to get to a workable solution. I really enjoy discussions with people who can disagree with you without name calling, etc. I appreciate that you can do that. Unfortunately, Kentucky has suffered from very poor leadership over the decades. I think it's why we have lagged the rest of the country both educationally and economically. I think if Bevin had kept his mouth shut, most Kentuckians would be pretty satisfied with what he has accomplished compared with many of our past Governors. I don't know what he thinks he is accomplishing by running his mouth like he does. It very well may cost him a chance at reelection. I just hope if it does, we don't elect someone who wants to go back to business as usual.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

Eliminating the electoral college is not a liberal stance. It is a common sense stance to take. When a state like Wyoming, with a population of less than 600,000 people has 3 votes in the electoral college and California with a population of almost 38 million has 55 electoral votes it is not right. Simply do the math. It is why in two of the last 3 presidential elections , the candidate with the highest popular vote, lost the election.

You are an idiot. Back at you.

We are not a democracy. Educate yourself as to the reasons why each state is represented as it is. The founders knew EXACTLY what they were doing.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

I have worked in public schools for almost 30 years. A lot of the perceptions you are referring to are just flat out wrong. I have never witnessed the disparaging of our founding fathers in a history class. Does that happen in isolation, possibly. If you recognize that their are thousands of history teachers across the U.S. teaching on a daily basis that may have a personal perspective that is of that nature, it may occur very rarely. But I guarantee that is not going on daily in classrooms all across America. That anti-U.S. narrative is one that is being peddled continuously by right wing mouths that have never spent a day of their lives in a school and use that one in ten thousand example to stir up gullible people for tv and radio ratings. Every school I have ever worked in starts the day with the Pledge of Allegiance before morning announcements, teaches the greatness of our country and spends zero amount of time engaging the kids in negative views of our country. No teacher in their right mind has time for that kind of stuff with everything else on their plate. Trust me, I've lived it.

Not sure if you are in Jefferson County but I am not so sure your statement would hold true here. In your class room would you play Michael Moore's anti gun Movie Bowling for Columbine as part of the class curriculum? Did your school send home a form to allow your students to opt OUT of the pledge? That is happening here. The schools are a reflection of the things that are happening in our society. Whether they are an engine or not is a fair question to ask.

 

[sambowieshin]

N

Not sure if you are in Jefferson County but I am not so sure your statement would hold true here. In your class room would you play Michael Moore's anti gun Movie Bowling for Columbine as part of the class curriculum? Did your school send home a form to allow your students to opt OUT of the pledge? That is happening here. The schools are a reflection of the things that are happening in our society. Whether they are an engine or not is a fair question to ask.

Have worked in Jeff(many years ago), Bullitt and Oldham. I have not observed any of that in any school I have worked in. Like I said, kooky stuff will happen when dealing with thousands of individuals, but that is not the norm in any school I have worked .

 

[DrH. Lecter]

N

Have worked in Jeff(many years ago), Bullitt and Oldham. I have not observed any of that in any school I have worked in. Like I said, kooky stuff will happen when dealing with thousands of individuals, but that is not the norm in any school I have worked .

It is becoming the norm in Jefferson County....and of course that is the only area of the state that has sent a Dem (Yarmouth) to the House. The state SHOULD take over JCPS as it has threatened to do.

 

[sk73]

First, that wasn't the point of her comment. Her comment was that there isn't a reason for the electoral college system. Anyone who understands our government knows there is a very good reason for it.

Second, I disagree that eliminating the electoral college is common sense. The purpose of the electoral college system is exactly what your example points out. Each state is a sovereign government. Each state voluntarily joined the union. Why would a state with a small population join the union if the President is elected on straight popular vote. It would mean small states have no say in electing the President. The electoral college was constructed to give small states some say in electing the President. In other words, the states elect the President of the United States, not the people. In my opinion, that is a good thing. Otherwise, large population centers would dominate elections and small population areas would have no say in the matter.

Think about it like this. If the USA had the choice to join a world government, would you be okay if the election were based on popular vote? In that system the USA would have no say in the election. I would want something akin to the electoral college system or I would not want the USA to join such a government. That is exactly the same scenario each state faced when thinking about joining the union. Fundamentally, the electoral college system makes perfect sense for a collection of sovereign governments coming together to create a unified country.

So, if I want my vote to have more impact than all other voters in all the other states, I should move to Wyoming. My vote is equal to 3 or votes in California . Again, in todays world, it makes no sense. A vote is a vote. It should not matter where you cast it. When the electoral college was first conceived , your stance on why it was useful is very understandable. Not now. It should be eliminated.

 

[homeytheclown]

Eliminating the electoral college is not a liberal stance. It is a common sense stance to take. When a state like Wyoming, with a population of less than 600,000 people has 3 votes in the electoral college and California with a population of almost 38 million has 55 electoral votes it is not right. Simply do the math. It is why in two of the last 3 presidential elections , the candidate with the highest popular vote, lost the election.

Common Sense my fkng ass, if you do away with electoral college it is ny and California to run the country

 

[sk73]

You are an idiot. Back at you.

We are not a democracy. Educate yourself as to the reasons why each state is represented as it is. The founders knew EXACTLY what they were doing.

I am quite aware of the intent of the electoral college. It is outdated and should be eliminated. And you are right, we are not a democracy. Any lingering shreds of having a democracy were eliminated with the Citizens United verdict.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

So, if I want my vote to have more impact than all other voters in all the other states, I should move to Wyoming. My vote is equal to 3 or votes in California . Again, in todays world, it makes no sense. A vote is a vote. It should not matter where you cast it. When the electoral college was first conceived , your stance on why it was useful is very understandable. Not now. It should be eliminated.

It is even more important today. To assert that California should have selected the POTUS just because they have allowed millions of illegals across the border and have a larger population...is a fundamental level of ignorance as to the difference between a democracy which we are NOT, and a representative Republic which we ARE. When the simple majority FOR Proposition 8 in California, the MAJORITY voted to make only same sex marriage the law......do you support that simple majority vote? Or do you only support "majority vote" when it comes up the way you like it?

 

[sk73]

It is even more important today. To assert that California should have selected the POTUS just because they have allowed millions of illegals across the border and have a larger population...is a fundamental level of ignorance as to the difference between a democracy which we are NOT, and a representative Republic which we ARE. When the simple majority FOR Proposition 8 in California, the MAJORITY voted to make only same sex marriage the law......do you support that simple majority vote? Or do you only support "majority vote" when it comes up the way you like it?

California may not be the best choice for comparison. Any populated state will do. Ohio, Florida, Texas, New York.
Oh yeah, single sex marriage is legal in several states now. Because it exists doesn't mean I will be a part of it. I do have friends that are gay. I think they have rights also. Don't worry, you will not have to participate in the sex. You honestly think you can control that by making it a crime or keeping it illegal.
My first response to one of your text still stands.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

California may not be the best choice for comparison. Any populated state will do. Ohio, Florida, Texas, New York.
Oh yeah, single sex marriage is legal in several states now. Because it exists doesn't mean I will be a part of it. I do have friends that are gay. I think they have rights also. Don't worry, you will not have to participate in the sex. You honestly think you can control that by making it a crime or keeping it illegal.
My first response to one of your text still stands.

I'd point out that it is the law of the land (SCOTUS: Obergefell v. Hodges 2015) and has been for several years. Do you have poor dial-up service in your area?

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

So, if I want my vote to have more impact than all other voters in all the other states, I should move to Wyoming. My vote is equal to 3 or votes in California . Again, in todays world, it makes no sense. A vote is a vote. It should not matter where you cast it. When the electoral college was first conceived , your stance on why it was useful is very understandable. Not now. It should be eliminated.

I'm not sure how your vote in Wyoming has three times more impact than it would in California. I understand your math to get to three times, but the conclusion is incorrect. Your vote doesn't elect the President. Never did, and hopefully never will. The President is elected by the states. Your vote in Wyoming is limited to 3 electoral college votes in the Presidential election. Just because the relationship of population to electoral college votes is three times doesn't mean your vote is worth three times in Wyoming what it is worth in California.

You seem to hung up on the vote. The vote is irrelevant. All that matters is how each state votes.

If you accept that it was useful when it was originally implemented, what has changed that would necessitate it being eliminated?

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

I am quite aware of the intent of the electoral college. It is outdated and should be eliminated. And you are right, we are not a democracy. Any lingering shreds of having a democracy were eliminated with the Citizens United verdict.

We were never a democracy. Our founding fathers called democracy a dictatorship of the majority. We are a republic and for whatever reason, people don't seem to understand that.

 

[sk73]

I'm not sure how your vote in Wyoming has three times more impact than it would in California. I understand your math to get to three times, but the conclusion is incorrect. Your vote doesn't elect the President. Never did, and hopefully never will. The President is elected by the states. Your vote in Wyoming is limited to 3 electoral college votes in the Presidential election. Just because the relationship of population to electoral college votes is three times doesn't mean your vote is worth three times in Wyoming what it is worth in California.

You seem to hung up on the vote. The vote is irrelevant. All that matters is how each state votes.

If you accept that it was useful when it was originally implemented, what has changed that would necessitate it being eliminated?

i agree with you in that states have their vote and the electoral reflects that vote. As an example I gave Wyoming as having a population, not voters, but population of 600,00. They get one electoral vote for every 200,000 people. If all was equal California would have around 190 electoral votes instead of the 55 they have now. 38million population. Our founding fathers were very thorough in their thinking but they were not thinking in numbers like this. It is an outdated system and has been proven to be ineffective when two of the last three presidential elections have been won by a person w inning with a minority of the votes. Does away with majority rules . Just my opinion. Go cats.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

i agree with you in that states have their vote and the electoral reflects that vote. As an example I gave Wyoming as having a population, not voters, but population of 600,00. They get one electoral vote for every 200,000 people. If all was equal California would have around 190 electoral votes instead of the 55 they have now. 38million population. Our founding fathers were very thorough in their thinking but they were not thinking in numbers like this. It is an outdated system and has been proven to be ineffective when two of the last three presidential elections have been won by a person w inning with a minority of the votes. Does away with majority rules . Just my opinion. Go cats.

You are inserting your opinion as to how you think things should be into what actually exists. The country would never have been founded under your wish. The states ratified a constitution to join together based on the STATE and not the individual vote electing the POTUS. You are angry because your guy lost. I asked you a direct question as to whether the MAJORITY vote on Prop 8 in California should have been made Cali law. It was the majority vote. Your own criteria, not mine. Why not answer?

As for numbers that existed....they were totally concerned that the population centers of the time would defeat the "farmers" when it came to legislation. They CLEARLY knew the ramification of large numbers in a city. They were brilliant and it is a perfect system.

 

[BlueRattie]

You should be ashamed of yourself...the man's an arrogant ass who's using Kentucky to further his own agenda, w/ little regard to what's fair, morally upright and legal.

I'm sorry, but what is his "agenda"? What is his end goal? Please, enlighten us with your acumen.

Since we're on the subject of fairness and morality, let me remind you that Bevin is currently overhauling one of the most unfair tax and regulations systems in the country, all while battling a party that is perfectly willing to break campaign laws left and right to get what they want and actively work to throw elections. I've spent my entire life living in a state stuck in the 1920's. Bevin is dragging us--kicking and screaming--into the 20th century. If you don't like jobs, or a solvent budget, or a lower tax burden, then by all means move to Illinois. Leave the future for those with open minds.

 

[BlueRattie]

i agree with you in that states have their vote and the electoral reflects that vote. As an example I gave Wyoming as having a population, not voters, but population of 600,00. They get one electoral vote for every 200,000 people. If all was equal California would have around 190 electoral votes instead of the 55 they have now. 38million population. Our founding fathers were very thorough in their thinking but they were not thinking in numbers like this. It is an outdated system and has been proven to be ineffective when two of the last three presidential elections have been won by a person w inning with a minority of the votes. Does away with majority rules . Just my opinion. Go cats.

You are assuming that (in the absence of the electoral college) that the popular vote would be the same. This assumption is, of course, false because voting/campaign patterns are influenced by the electoral college. No GOP candidate works California because losing by 15% as opposed to 20% means nothing. Likewise, the GOP vote in California is likely suppressed for the same reason. (Of course, the reverse is true in Texas, Kentucky, etc.) Thus, no one can really say who won the "popular vote" because no one was competing for it.


It's like a football coach saying "yeah, but we got more first downs that the Patriots did." OK, sure, but we weren't playing for first downs, were we? Play the game over again with first downs and the objective and the Pats will win that one too.

 

[BlueRattie]

People vote against their self interest in each election cycle. I am sorry to see a teacher vote for someone that hates the profession.

How noble of you to tell me what my best interest are, you arrogant prick. As far as I can tell, Bevin is the only governor in a generation that cared enough about teachers to try to save their pension systems. The last 7 or so governors were perfectly willing to watch the retirement system bankrupt the state, as long as it didn't cost them votes.

 

[BlueRattie]

The teachers retirement system will be fine or even great if the legislators and Bevin do two things: 1. Simply contribute the amount of money in the fund (something that did not happen for over a decade) that they are legally ,supposedly, bound to do. Obviously the law that makes this contribution mandatory has not been followed.
2. Simply, leave it alone.

The KY. Retirement System, which is in no way connected to KTRS, is in severe jeopardy. Bevin and his legislative majority tried to lump all retirement systems together. Obviously, it didn't turn out too good.

OK, this is patently false. While it is true that our retirement (17 years a teacher here) was criminally underfunded by the dem's, even at full funding we'd be running a huge deficit. That's because our system was designed in the 1920's, before people understood the unsustainability of pyramid schemes. It takes about 5 working teachers to food the bill for one retired teacher. So, to work, our system must have a 5 to 1 teacher to retiree ratio. Today, that ratio is 1 to 1. So, the current system is around 66 billion on the whole in a state that nets about 63 billion in revenue a year. The system, as is, WILL NOT WORK. Period. Full stop. Every private business in the world that had our system dumped it or went bankrupt.

Worst case scenario is that I'm 75 years old one day and the Commonwealth of Kentucky declares bankruptcy under the weight of it's debt. Better to fix it now while we still have some semblance of solvency.

 

[UKRob 73]

The teachers pension has been raided and underfunded for decades, and Bevin is the first governor to fully fund it in 30 years. Most teachers are too stupid to realize that what he did is a positive for them. Sad, but true.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

i agree with you in that states have their vote and the electoral reflects that vote. As an example I gave Wyoming as having a population, not voters, but population of 600,00. They get one electoral vote for every 200,000 people. If all was equal California would have around 190 electoral votes instead of the 55 they have now. 38million population. Our founding fathers were very thorough in their thinking but they were not thinking in numbers like this. It is an outdated system and has been proven to be ineffective when two of the last three presidential elections have been won by a person w inning with a minority of the votes. Does away with majority rules . Just my opinion. Go cats.

I'm going to try this one more time. Our founding fathers did not want, or believe in, majority rules. I'm not sure where that notion comes from. They referred to democracy as a dictatorship of the majority. They rejected the idea that majority rule is a good system of government. In fact, in some of their writings they comment that if the majority votes to strip away a persons liberty in some way, is it more legitimate than if a single dictator does the same, just because it is a majority of people who do it.

Why are you using the popular vote as a measure of how effective the electoral college system is? The popular vote is meaningless and was never meant to be important in electing a President. If anything, two of the last three elections going against popular vote demonstrates that the electoral college is working as intended. If it always followed popular vote, it would not be working because it would exactly the same as using popular vote. So why are you assuming that if the results don't match the popular vote, it is not functioning properly?

 

[sk73]

You are inserting your opinion as to how you think things should be into what actually exists. The country would never have been founded under your wish. The states ratified a constitution to join together based on the STATE and not the individual vote electing the POTUS. You are angry because your guy lost. I asked you a direct question as to whether the MAJORITY vote on Prop 8 in California should have been made Cali law. It was the majority vote. Your own criteria, not mine. Why not answer?

As for numbers that existed....they were totally concerned that the population centers of the time would defeat the "farmers" when it came to legislation. They CLEARLY knew the ramification of large numbers in a city. They were brilliant and it is a perfect system.

I simply disagree. And it doesn't matter which side wins, the candidate with the most votes should win. You seem to be only concerned with a rational that is outdated.

 

[BlueRattie]

The teachers pension has been raided and underfunded for decades, and Bevin is the first governor to fully fund it in 30 years. Most teachers are too stupid to realize that what he did is a positive for them. Sad, but true.

I am a teacher and I fully recognize Bevin's that Bevin is trying to save my pension and am thankful that he's doing it. I know that I'm not alone among teachers, but I'm certainly in the minority.

As for why more teachers aren't like me, well, that's seems to be a mixed bag. Some teachers are simply misinformed, others are beholden to their union and won't listen to reason. Most I've met, though, are simply in denial. When I point out to them that their retirement is in real danger of bankruptcy within their lifetime they usually say back to me, "But I was promised a full pension!" Correct. You were promised a pension by democrats that are long gone. They lied to you. They all lied to you. Now, you finally have someone telling you the truth, but it's a truth you don't want to hear. Classic cognitive dissonance.

 

[BlueRattie]

I simply disagree. And it doesn't matter which side wins, the candidate with the most votes should win. You seem to be only concerned with a rational that is outdated.

A pure democracy (most votes wins) is essentially mob rule. 51% of the people get to push around 49% of the people; it's tyranny of the majority. Mob rule is what tore Greek society apart and crippled the Roman empire.

A change to the popular vote would devastate the United States, especially rural areas like Kentucky. Politicians would simply aim all of their campaign funds, attention, and policies at the most densely populated areas and ignore the rest of the country. Economic and social policy (by both parties) would be geared toward placating urban voters and the expense of neutered rural voters.

If you think that tribalism is a problem in America now, wake up in a world where 49% of the country is utterly ignored for the sake of winning elections.

 

[sk73]

OK, this is patently false. While it is true that our retirement (17 years a teacher here) was criminally underfunded by the dem's, even at full funding we'd be running a huge deficit. That's because our system was designed in the 1920's, before people understood the unsustainability of pyramid schemes. It takes about 5 working teachers to food the bill for one retired teacher. So, to work, our system must have a 5 to 1 teacher to retiree ratio. Today, that ratio is 1 to 1. So, the current system is around 66 billion on the whole in a state that nets about 63 billion in revenue a year. The system, as is, WILL NOT WORK. Period. Full stop. Every private business in the world that had our system dumped it or went bankrupt.

Worst case scenario is that I'm 75 years old one day and the Commonwealth of Kentucky declares bankruptcy under the weight of it's debt. Better to fix it now while we still have some semblance of solvency.

It is not a false statement. If you will take the time to look at information that is readily available you will see that the budget for a decade did not include contribution to the teacher retirement system. This is not a political party argument , it is a factual argument. The senate was headed by David Williams. He was the head of the republican majority that has been in power in the KY. Senate for close to two decades.

 

[sk73]

I'm going to try this one more time. Our founding fathers did not want, or believe in, majority rules. I'm not sure where that notion comes from. They referred to democracy as a dictatorship of the majority. They rejected the idea that majority rule is a good system of government. In fact, in some of their writings they comment that if the majority votes to strip away a persons liberty in some way, is it more legitimate than if a single dictator does the same, just because it is a majority of people who do it.

Why are you using the popular vote as a measure of how effective the electoral college system is? The popular vote is meaningless and was never meant to be important in electing a President. If anything, two of the last three elections going against popular vote demonstrates that the electoral college is working as intended. If it always followed popular vote, it would not be working because it would exactly the same as using popular vote. So why are you assuming that if the results don't match the popular vote, it is not functioning properly?

While you make a good argument and I can tell you really are passionate in your thoughts, I simply do not agree. In the last election 94% of campaign events took place in swing states, 12 swing states. Why, because those states determined the outcome of the election. If you live in Florida, a swing state, your vote is important. If you live in Texas, not so much. Many people go to the polls during a presidential election when in fact, the results of only a handful of states will determine the outcome. Trump lost by over 2 million votes. Doesn't matter. The electoral votes win out. It is an antiquated approach to nation wide elections for president. We can just simply agree to disagree.

 

[sk73]

OK, this is patently false. While it is true that our retirement (17 years a teacher here) was criminally underfunded by the dem's, even at full funding we'd be running a huge deficit. That's because our system was designed in the 1920's, before people understood the unsustainability of pyramid schemes. It takes about 5 working teachers to food the bill for one retired teacher. So, to work, our system must have a 5 to 1 teacher to retiree ratio. Today, that ratio is 1 to 1. So, the current system is around 66 billion on the whole in a state that nets about 63 billion in revenue a year. The system, as is, WILL NOT WORK. Period. Full stop. Every private business in the world that had our system dumped it or went bankrupt.

Worst case scenario is that I'm 75 years old one day and the Commonwealth of Kentucky declares bankruptcy under the weight of it's debt. Better to fix it now while we still have some semblance of solvency.

You really have no idea what you are talking about when you discuss KTRS. You must be thinking about the Ky. Retirement System. Intensive studies were conducted concerning KTRS. The system , if the state funded their part, is and will be in good shape. The statement that it takes 5 teachers to fund is not accurate. Also the statement that it started in the 1920s is not accurate. It began in 1940 after the measure was passed in the 1938 legislative session. You can have your opinions but you can't just make up your own facts.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

I simply disagree. And it doesn't matter which side wins, the candidate with the most votes should win. You seem to be only concerned with a rational that is outdated.

Once again you refuse to look honesty at your "tyranny of the majority" view of how things should be. You refuse to answer the Prop 8 question I asked you because you would expose your hypocrisy.

You make a totally subjective opinion with no basis in fact. Just because you view it as being "outdated" that has no bearing on it at all. I do not view it as being outdated so my opinion cancels out your opinion. The reality is that the CONSTITUTION says it is the correct way to select the POTUS. Are you an anarchist?