Comments on: South Carolina: Averting The 1.6% Cataclysm

By: Hmmmm....

Hmmmm.... — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:42:43 +0000

Fashizzle, this is 1.6% of the entire budget, not just the school, per pupil, spending, but the entire government of South Carolina.

By: Small Town

Small Town — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:08:28 +0000

@ Fashizzle

That figure might work well with larger student bodies, but the low end of the spectrum is hurting. There are some counties that are docking already low pay for teachers and were expected to do the same next year. Granted, teachers don’t exactly teach for the great pay, but giving them even less is a kick in the teeth. If anything maybe this will at least be a morale boost to those teachers.

By: Pat Hendrix

Pat Hendrix — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:51:04 +0000

You can’ say that 700 million is the end of the world and that it’s only 1.6 percent at same time. Logic is flawed.

By: Fashizzle

Fashizzle — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:45:28 +0000

The logic is sound. This year SC spent $11,480 per child in public schools. With the stimulus funds we will spend $11,200 next year. Without the stimulus we would have spent $10,900 PER CHILD.

SC taxpayers are basically buying a car for every student each year. The only difference is with the stimulus you can throw in floor mats. Education has more than enough cash no matter what.

By: Liberty for me

Liberty for me — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:41:06 +0000

The States and the Fed will all come crashing down in the next couple of years…Then we can go back to bare bones government.Those contributing to this perpetual mess should, and will be held accountable.The writing is on the wall…Only the ones looking through socialists lenses cant read it.

By: Silence Dogood

Silence Dogood — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:13:51 +0000

FITS you belittle what 1.6% of the budget is (I calculated 358 million as 1.73%, but nonetheless), it appears this was an insubstantial amount to you now because Sanford lost the argument. When Sanford was arguing for it, there was really no cry from your blog about how insignifcant the money was then. All I can figure is that sour grape juice does not go down as well as the voka used to?

1.7% of an entire state bugdge – the second largest in total dollars, according to you – is a TREMENDOUSLY big deal, it is almost 2 of every 100 teachers, 2 of every 100 school buses, 2 of every 100 state troopers, 6 feet of every 100 yards of highway repaved, about one third of a digit of Joel Sawyer, and on and on ad nasuem through until the end of the budget.

If you think this is a small deal, you are really out of your mind.

By: 4Education

4Education — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:15:24 +0000

Believe your logic is flawed – we were not looking at 1.6% across the board cuts but cuts that would have been more targeted to services like education, correct?

By: BIN News Editorial Staff

BIN News Editorial Staff — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:59:59 +0000

Sour grapes. Bad manners. Huffing and puffing.

Typical from sic(k) willie.

This was a sanfraud publicity stunt from the start. We all know it.

He got very bad advice. Now he looks like a f@@l.

Almost like when he fired sic(k) willie.

No one on the BIN Staff is in to gambling, but if we were we would wager that the odds of sanfraud getting the republicrat nomination for President just went from 50:1 to 50000000Brazillion:1 which is not a good bet.

And his supporters will also suffer at the polls. Tom, Nikki, Nathan. You have hitched your wagon to a sick mule. That’s worse that a lame duck.

By: CNSYD

CNSYD — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:22:02 +0000

I am not trying to belittle $20.7B but you always have to put it in perspective. You say it is the second largest spending plan. Remember this is 2009 dollars we are talking about. The latest inflation data available is thru year 2008. So $20.7B 2008 dollars equals $15.7B 1998 dollars or $11.5B 1988 dollars. I do not know what the previous budgets were so I can’t make the comparison. Maybe you have that data.