I know. Mr.blm was being recruited heavily last year to help develop the programs centered around a Dallas firm owned by a longtime Bush crony.

Their definition of an "underutilized" elementary school is one with less than 30 students in a class.

That would close down every school my kid's school district here in CA! And it would close down Mitt Romney's fancy prep school, which had a 12 to 1 student teacher ratio.

No elementary school should have more than 24 students in a class. That is how many kids are in each class at my kid's elementary school. Our school is constantly getting awards as the best public school in the County. Gee, wonder why?

Less than 30? When I went to my first public school, that year my graduating class became the largest class of the entire school! And that lasted for over a decade. Even now, perhaps we still hold the record. And what was the size? 32.

That school was next to a much larger school district, with a smaller tax base, and with THEIR definition of "underutilized" they became a major competitor in the city for public education. They even had a better record for quality of education, as well as atmosphere.

Close a bunch all at once so that we get used to the idea they are going to destroy public education and next time it won't hurt so much.
We have accepted charter schools as normal now, so the question is not whether but when.

A bald-face destruction of the public school system.
By a Democrat no less.
The party has been hijacked by corporate owned Republicans.

our private industry is in decline. Privatization merely moves the economic activity that is currently in the public sphere into the private sphere. It moves a number from the column for public expenditures into a column for private expenditures (and profits).

Unless the privatized function costs more or less than the public function, it does not add or subtract from the overall economic activity of the country.

Privatization moves, for example, employment that is now in the public sector into the column for employment in the private sector.

It is a way of making our public/private assets and debts look like we still have a meaningful private sector in this day and age of outsourcing, importing, robot manufacture, etc.

Correct me if I am wrong. But I think that the privatization serves the purpose a) of transferring wealth to the very top percentage in terms of wealth and b) making us look like we are still a viable economy judging from the relationship between our private and public economies on our national ledger sheet after privatization of public functions. The transfer of wealth is also a big motivation, but trying to keep the appearance of having a prosperous economy is, I think, just as important to the powers that be.

His double standard about children reflect capitalist market values, a few of which are that the 'haves' job is to eliminate any competition from uppity newcomers and their children in this society.

As they see it, there are other labor pools to invest in, and America's labor pool has been left to its own "spoiled expectations." The uber rich here think we who live in this planetary tax haven have it too good and haven't done enough with the opportunities we've had.

As I see it, we need to have more fight in our hearts for future generations. Jail over social injustices, voting out all governmental corporate sellouts, and eliminating all money from politics should be our three goals.