Massive waste in Dept of ED

I remember that the for profit charter schools in Detroit supported by Betsy DeVos, the Sec. of Education in Trump's first time performed even worse that the city's already poorly performing public schools. If I'm not mistaken DeVos was also a shareholder in a firm that ran for profit charter and private schools.
The Failure of Betsy DeVos and 30 Years of Corporate Influence on Public Schools! - Nancy Bailey's Education Website
Betsy DeVos’ Record Privatizing Education and Undermining Public Schools

 

100% disagree. It had become a woke mess besides hemorrhaging money.

So, how would you eliminate $2T annual deficit and payoff the $36.25T national debt?

 

Cutting off loans and aid to college students?

Where was the $268 billion spent? Most of the funding for the Department of Education goes toward colleges and universities. Sixty percent, or $160.7 billion of the budget goes straight to the office of Federal Student Aid. The higher education chunk pays for Pell Grants, work-study programs and loans.

 

Nothing woke about that - they are just literally processing student loan and pell grant paperwork.
Your other question is way off topic - start a thread on that if you want.

 

Yeah... Teachers getting implicit bias training costing $2,000 to $10,000 per session and $200M to universities to inject DEI into counseling courses.

Woke as hell!

 

fine cut that then he’s president so whatever. That is not federal financial aid. You understand that right?

 

If you matriculated under DOE, this will end up a good example of not being taught how to spell “pit.”

 

Really?

This how you choose to spend your time?!?

Interesting...

 

Makes it easier for their man to “lead” them.

 

I am a conservative cancer survivor. I was lucky and won my fight… but it has left a lot of scars. I don’t care what side of the political aisle you are on.. what is posted above should disgust each and every one of us.
You are out of bounds Donzo. I do t know you.. maybe you are too young to realize, or just too callous to care… but you last few posts are those of a disgusting human. Reconsider your approach. And maybe consider editing or removing those stains from the board.

 

Like I said, I never posted to the left wing hypocrite before he came it me. I'm just responding to his enmity. Just becausae he says he has cancer doesn't make him a victim when he's the transgressor.

He posts about "good energy, prayers - leaning on faith, family and friends."... That's all BS, he's the opposite of that. He's just another hate-mongering leftist.

 

I am genuinely curious how this move will affect financial aid availability in the short term. My guess is the nuts and bolts of financial aid issuance are still just as firmly in tact as they were a week ago, only under a different department header. Which allows the executive to more easily unwind the DOE. Actual real world impact on student loans and financial aid is probably months, if not years down the road with this move. Basically the only thing that has changed at this point is who the FSA reports to. Like getting a new boss at work. Your job description hasn't changed. You now simply report to Y instead of X.

 

they already cut fafsa staff and SBA staff that’s problem 1, 2. Reorgs are generally disruptive to productivity. 3. SBA has never administered student loans, so in a perfect world they’ll just defer to whomever is coming over from DOE but that almost never happens in reality because new leaders have different goals, ways of working,etc., 4. This assumes nothing else changes which is a big assumption to make with this admin, and 5. Even small changes to fafsa processes in the past have had huge down steam impacts, so suggesting a major reorg won’t have an impact is naive regarding how big orgs function, 6. It’s going to be harder to retain the best staff in this environment.

Assuming nothing else changes and SBA is faithfully empowered to carry out the SFA mission I’m sure things will eventually be fine. I just don’t think that’s how it’s going to play out.

 

You could start by investing money in the defense of Ukraine. Yes, that will mean billions more spending in the short term, but several trillion (over $2.5 trillion, to be precise) in savings over the long term (next ten years). Having a more dangerous world full of superpowers invading other countries sounds exciting, but in reality it is extremely expensive to a country that has the most to lose. We have to defend against all possible forms of attack and be ready at all times, but our opponents only have to master one or two forms of attack and surprise us with them.

Then you could make changes to Social Security to keep it solvent, delaying retirement ages, etc.

Raising minimum wage (gradually) would also be a smart thing to do, if it means that the working poor do not need as much welfare in the future. The working poor have not seen a raise in the federal minimum wage since 2007. It would likely also provide some benefits to the economy, as more people can afford things other than survival expenses.

You could also slowly increase taxes, both corporate and individual. You don't want to go too high with the taxes too quickly, or wealthy people will leave the U.S. and pay taxes somewhere else, while corporations offshore their businesses. Increase usage taxes on things like gasoline (the federal gas tax has not changed since before 1992)--this would also be a big help in slowing down global warming, and giving humanity a better future on this planet.

Then, by all means go after the "woke" spending, the DEI spending, etc., if they are not providing a significant benefit to the country. But do it without destroying government services. Government departments should be cut with a scalpel, not a chain saw. The vast majority of gov't departments provide valuable services that Americans need. Gutting the departments will not improve those services. And if you want the cuts to be maintained by the next administration, do not make the cuts while spouting racist and misogynistic rhetoric that will inspire more DEI spending in the future. Show some class, and show some respect.

Finally, you should realize that the national debt does not need to be paid off. It does need to be controlled and maintained below a certain percentage of GDP (I don't know what an exact percentage it should be, but let's say 50-70%), to prevent inflation from getting out of control. The national debt was steadily growing from 2000-2019, and inflation was only about 2%, which is reasonable. (Covid accelerated national debt growth to as high as 8.6% in 2021.) You never want inflation to go negative, as that will cause deflation, which is fairly destructive long-term to the economy (because it feeds on itself for as long as 20-30 years).

 

He Isn't a leftist. He just hates Trump. I'm a conservative and happen to agree with him.

He and I have interacted on multiple sites for almost 20 years. He is the real deal and very much worthy of our love and prayers.

You should probably quit while you're behind if you want to be able to post here.

The end.

 

“He just hates Trump. I'm a conservative and happen to agree with him.”

So, does the above statement mean you “hate” Trump, too? Just seeking clarification. Thanks.

 

wow. Hand to booty. Hate to see it.

 

Is only 25% of Education Department funding for students? No

 

So, maybe the process is delayed a bit in the short term, but inevitably the functionality will still be there. Probably never a “great” time on the calendar to do this, but the majority of financial aid fulfillment for the 2024-2025 cycle has already taken place, with five months between now and the start of the next academic year. So, if you’re going to do this, it seems like now would be the time to do it.

 

Agree with all that. Hopefully a minimal disruption.