Exploring the Art & Science of Marketing
| Print article | This entry was posted by Russ on October 23, 2007 at 10:20 pm, and is filed under George Bush, Utah PR Agency, Utah PR Firm, Utah Public Relations. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
Political wisdom of the Clinton campaign
about 5 years ago - 2 comments
Looking at the media relations strategy of the Clinton campaign, they never cease to amaze with their skill. Here’s the headline: Clinton chairman: Obama would be good running mate a) I think they really mean it. b) It positions Hillary Clinton as the President, the winner and the “real” nominee for the Democratic party. c)
Milton Friedman on Greed
about 5 years ago - No comments
In the realm of politics, this is quite an interesting video to watch. Milton Friedman was an American Nobel Laureate economist who died in 2006. Friedman was a very bright man.
Presidential politics: a very misleading headline in the Deseret News
about 5 years ago - 3 comments
This misleading headline is found in the Deseret News of all places. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney it ran via the Associated Press. Headline Huckabee takes big lead in Iowa GOP race, Romney 14 percent to Huckabee’s 47 percent When you read the details you find it’s a blatant distortion of the actual story. The Truth
Could Mike Huckabee be the next U.S. president?
about 5 years ago - 2 comments
Mike Huckabee has passed Mitt Romney in polling numbers in Iowa, and frankly, he’s been doing a better job during the candidate debates. – He’s second in Republican polling right now, and sometimes I think Giuliani has a little too much baggage. – He’s from the same town as Bill Clinton (Hope, Arkansas). Population 10,467.
Do you believe the bible? Republican responses.
about 5 years ago - No comments
I you were in the middle of a presidential debate and someone asked you if you believe every word of the bible, what would you say? Here’s what Rudy, Mitt and Mike had to say, and frankly, I think Mike Huckabee did the best job with this question when put on the spot. It sounds
The truth shows its face on Utah Vouchers
about 5 years ago - 14 comments
$9.3 million was approved by the Utah legislature for use on vouchers until it went to referendum and was voted down. So what’s going to happen to the money? It’s not going to public education because that’s not where the money came from. But again, voucher opponents and many teachers led a lot of people
Utah voucher sign theft caught on video
about 5 years ago - 3 comments
Are you kidding me? What the guy in the video doesn’t realize is that the property owner tied fish line to the sign, which was connected to his house and a ringing bell.
Myth 3: Public education money belongs to public schools
about 5 years ago - 1 comment
This is a continuation of the Myths from the Opposition series. Utah’s Referendum 1: 5 articles you don’t want to miss reading Referendum 1 for Utah? What are the REAL facts? Utah Vouchers: Myths from the opposition Myth No. 2: Vouchers will divert money from schools Myth No. 3: Public Education Money Belongs to Public
Paul Tonks: Draper City’s best choice for city council
about 5 years ago - 2 comments
Even if you don’t live in Draper, Utah to be able to vote for Paul Tonks for city council that’s okay. I still get to voice my opinion and hope that others in Draper will read this and do the same. Why I’m Voting for Paul Tonks for Draper City Council 1 – He’s the
Myth No. 2: Vouchers will divert money from schools
about 5 years ago - No comments
If you’ve been following the “Myths from the Opposition Series,” where I expose the untruths that opponents of the Utah Voucher program are spreading in Utah I’ve got a doozy of a white lie for you today. Get a load of this commonly believed baloney. Myth: Vouchers will divert money from public schools. Fact: This
about 5 years ago
The interesting piece of this argument is that it boils down to whether you believe that the focus of education is “for me/my kids” or “for all of the kids.” Both sides cannot agree because they have a fundamentally different viewpoint.
While I notice that you have a very pro-voucher stance, I don’t think the economics of the voucher program will do any good for the poor schoolchildren or schoolchildren with uninvolved parents.
Schools are mostly a fixed cost enterprise. Papers, pencils, school lunches and other variable costs are a fraction of what the school spends. Schools are planned to service a certain number of expected students in the community.
So if you have a few students trickle out, the school has to find budget for the same amount of fixed costs as before. If enough trickle out (like 9 students @ $3,000 loss each = $27,000 = new teacher salary), the school has to fire a teacher. So now 15 students (assuming a 24 student classroom) get distributed and further overload the other classrooms. IE the class sizes get bigger. As the class-sizes get bigger, teaching becomes more ineffective and more parents pull their kids.
This cascade-effect will kill most schools. What’s worse is that the effect is not immediate, but will take some time to suface. Once it does surface, it will likely be difficult to mitigate.
At sometime, even a good school will go belly-up. What do you do with the remaining kids? Is it their fault that they have poor performing parents or a lack of resources?
I don’t think the voucher program is well enough thought out. I think we need to go back to the drawing board.
about 5 years ago
Here is great response to the oreo ad: The REAL oreo voucher ad
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Kt-i4pmV0)
about 5 years ago
I understand the point that schools have fixed costs. But most of the costs that public schools have are in teacher costs and administrative overhead union dues etc.
Vouchers would offer an innovative way to get rid of a lot of the wasteful overhead and they would work to offer students attending the worst schools an alternative. Granted 3k will not fund a kid entirely but 4-5 k would. Even Utah’s poorest families could swing 1-2k if it means not sending their kid to a horrible public school.