Movie Minute

Saw the new Bruce Willis sci fi flick Surrogates last night. Man, I love his taste in science fiction! Shades of Asimov in this one, with just a little Matrix thrown in to boost the quality of the tech. I love sci fi that looks at the question, "If we can, does that mean we should?" (This is a good time to go watch the trailer, linked above, and then come back.) I walked away from this movie totally understanding how humanity could go where the story takes them. For my own reasons, there are times I would love to be able to plug in to a surrogate and use it to take me out into the world, from which I often must keep myself isolated, and can only imagine what a blessing such technology would be to the wheelchair-bound, or bed-ridden. However, I also believe that the film is quite accurate about where such things could lead. Where is that, you ask? Well, for that you'll have to watch the movie, which I recommend you do.

You'll recognize Bruce Willis. He's the pretty little surrey with the fringe on the top.

My Brain

The only good thing about falling down the stairs and hurting yourself badly enough to need an MRI is getting to look at pictures of your brain. I don't know what any of them mean, but that's not the point--it's just massively cool that medical folk can non-invasively look inside your skull and figure out whether you need to worry about serious brain damage. I don't--at least no more than I ever did.

This Cracked Me Up

Here's your chuckle for the day. My husband passed me an email with photos from a tax-related protest in Chicago. One of the signs made me belly laugh. I don't care what your political persuasion is, all right thinking folk must agree that this one is funny: "I listed the Federal Gov't as a dependent on my taxes this year." Have timelier, more appropriate words ever been put to cardboard? Even if you love how the money is getting spent in Washington these days, you have to admit they're going through an awful lot of it.

No agenda here--I just wanted to share a giggle with you for a minute. Carry on.

I've Got An Idea!

So, I'm on the treadmill, cooling down after a run, thinking random thoughts, when it hits me. Let's fix education in America!! Everyone agrees that our educational system is failing a high percentage of students, right? I read a statistic recently (if I remember correctly, it's from the mayor of Portland, Sam Adams', office) that about 40% of the kids in Portland Public Schools will not graduate high school. I've also read that the rate is even higher in other large cities. Seriously, is that even possible? That is just plain scary. This hits home pretty hard with me. I have two nephews who fell through the cracks and dropped out at the end of their sophomore years, and they are both suffering the consequences of the extremely limited options this lack of education leaves them.

I know a lot of factors influence the effectiveness of a child's education, from home life to culture, to teachers and unions, and many of these factors are not things that government can control. However, some of them are things over which government could have more effective influence than it does. Take teachers, for example. (No, I am not saying that government can control teachers.) There are good ones and there are bad ones. Some are engaged, talented and energetic, and some are putting in their time, tired, and counting the days until retirement. (By the way, I don't think that has anything to do with age. I've had great older teachers and lousy young ones. Some teachers are just better than others.) Is it possible for these gifted teachers to be encouraged to stay, while the less effective are encouraged to find employment that is better suited to their abilities? What, if anything, can or should the federal government do to foster that end? Would the teachers union even brook the slightest interference to their hold on power and seniority? No chance, you say? What if internal pressure gave them no choice?

Here's my proposal: Congress passes a law that says that the households of teachers and teaching assistants will pay no income taxes. None--not even at the state level. I'm not talking just the teachers themselves, but anyone who brings home a paycheck in that household (dependants up to a certain age, say 21). Many teachers salaries are low enough that they probably don't pay federal income tax anyway, but you throw in the income from hubby or wife, and you are talking some significant tax savings. Add on the kids' summer job and they've got a tax free college savings plan!! How's that for incentive for the best and brightest to go into education, and their spouses to be supportive of the endeavor?

Here's the condition: Retention of position is completely dependant upon classroom outcomes. If the kids learn to read, write, do math, etc., then that teacher is kept on the payroll, and off the tax rolls. If they do not, then some of the eager talents waiting in the wings get their shot at improving the situation. How many of the teachers currently in the union would not clamber to have this law enacted? Probably just the bad ones who are currently only protected by seniority from getting the boot. The rest of them would find the reward to be high. This isn't a way to break the union (if the union works for the benefit of its members), but a way to benefit both teachers and students so that everyone comes out ahead. Win, win. The union stays intact, but with purer motives, and the future of American education is dramatically improved.

The cost to the federal coffers would be minimal, but the gain to society could be enormous. We'd have a better educated populace, a well-rewarded class of teachers, and future income for the government based on the fact that an educated country is a productive, creative and revenue-generating country. Imagine the day when teaching would become a coveted position in society, only the gifted could get into teaching programs, and only the best teachers fill our public schools. Imagine.

So what do you think? Pipe dream? Too full of impracticalities? Too naive? (Already been thought and tried? It's new to me, but that doesn't mean much.) I like it, but then I was pretty tired when I thought it up. Maybe it was the endorphins talking... Hey, if this works we could do it with police and firefighters, doctors, nurses; the list goes on. Who would be left to pay taxes you ask? How about all the rest of that well-educated populace that chooses not to go into service sector employment? Better yet, how about only the politicians pay taxes? That would ensure that people had a disincentive to commit politics and we might end up with some purer motives there, as well.