DontBeEvil1

DontBeEvil1 t1_ix05e3a wrote

Not getting...they've been that way for quite some time. A while back, I literally had to jump backward to avoid being hot my a speeding car very close to there at about 1 am. And I was already in the crosswalk hallway across when he came speeding and turning the corner. Never so much as slowed down. Had I not jumped back fast enough I would have been laid out, and obviously that idiot would have kept on speeding away.

6

DontBeEvil1 OP t1_ivhw2n5 wrote

Some of my posts are presenting the opposing point of view to posts telling people: VOTE FOR CHANGE FOR CHILDREN. You will never find a single post of mine telling people to VOTE FOR EDUCATION MATTERS. Sorry, try again. The fact that you are so angry and worked up about this just makes YOUR bullshit more evident. Anyone who isn't gullible knows that posts from you and your ilk are self serving and you care about nothing more than reducing your personal tax bill and pushing the agenda of developers. 🤷

You're full of it and angry for no reason. Continue to be mad. Not everyone is a sheep who will follow your orders.

0

DontBeEvil1 t1_ivhmwcz wrote

"The Change for Children would be, at best, a component of the BOE, which itself is embedded in a much bigger system."

They already have been. And one of them voted to raise the taxes, and is now running on the opposing slate, while another remains on the Change for Children slate.

"But the opposing slate has said, essentially, that they don't really think the budget should be a major consideration, that they have no problem with raising taxes, and that they don't really believe in any measure of accountability."

This is simply not true. I spent the past several days reading interviews with the candidates both together and individually, as well as reading coverage on their debate, and they have said the exact opposite of what you are claiming here they had.

"So I would prefer a BOE that was not entirely union,"

I agree. And it's not. Also, important to note that being Union and being backed by the Union are 2 different things.

0

DontBeEvil1 t1_ivgdyd3 wrote

You realize everything you said is speculation and not fact? One person on the opposing side, voted once. Everyone from all sides have said they don't want to see taxes continue to increase. You have no idea about all the inner workings of the BoE and exactly where money is being allocated. That 1 one vote that FINALLY brought them up to be fully funded is not going to produce miraculous changes overnight. A seriously neglected school system will take years of investment to build up. All the luxury homes that people are crying about paying taxes on, were sitting on wasteland 10, 15, 20 years ago; those areas didn't go from trash dumps to luxury high rises overnight, so why do you think the school system would? 🤔 Just because someone SAYS they want better accountability does not mean they WILL get and give it once elected and doesn't guarantee you know exactly how they will vote regarding tax hikes once elected. ONCE AGAIN, the ONE PERSON running who voted for tax hikes, was on the Change for Children Slate when she ran and was elected. So you have zero clue or guarantee of how anyone on Change for Children will vote in regards to taxes. And sorry, when I have to choose between actual Educators, experience in many facets of Education, BoE and government, and backing from a teachers Union, OR no experience in Education whatsoever or Government, and backing from Real Estate Developers, I ain't picking the Real Estate Developer Side.

0