We have these temporary 'Technology Coaches' who are supposed to help our teachers with the smart boards and the TV-on-the-smart-board and all of that crap. Today we had one in class as we were using DIGITAL CAMERAS. Ooooooh. :roll: These cameras are apparently brand-new. They are some sort of Sony Coolpix cameras, and do not have memory cards... They can take a max of 3 pics at one time. The school bought at least 50 of these. And 'personal' netbooks for every 6th-8th grader, which they will continue buying new each year indefinitely. These netbooks have a total net cost (to the user, if you break it beyond repair or lose the whole thing) of $660. They forced anyone who wanted their student to be able to take it home (which is pretty much required, because they won't let them take them to different classes either, apparently) to pay a non-refundable 'insurance' payment of $30 ANNUALLY.
And the superintendent says we'll be 'in a desperate situation' next year, with potential layoffs and stuff. Supposedly in our original bond issue, which was passed in 2002ish, there was money in there to buy technology. I'm not sure if it was specifically labeled 'computers for student use' but if it wasn't why don't I have the INDUSTRY STANDARD, where anyone who goes into the workforce will be expected to be able to use, most colleges use assignments using these programs, WHY DON'T I HAVE MICROSOFT OFFICE? Why am I forced to suffer with third-rate, awful and really almost unusable software, OpenOffice.org?
Maybe I was indoctrinated on Microsoft Office, maybe I was raised on it (they're both the same really). But it was truly the right choice, I can't find anyone who has naught but good things to say about OpenOffice. They've all had some sort of [rather large] issue with it.. I am an avid Firefox and GIMP user, I know good (free, open-source) things when I see them. OpenOffice is NOT a good thing; it's a real case of 'you get what you pay for'.
Next on the docket: A Senate committee allows a bill which levees an additional $4,000/yr tax on the people.
It hasn't been passed by the Senate/House yet, but has exited the 'committee' stage where the bill is written, revised, and finally given to the rest of the Senate/House to vote on. This bill taxes the companies which provide 'Cadillac' insurance to their employees. This includes the company my dad works for.
A little bit of background. My dad is a software developer; he doesn't work on a manufacturing line, but the company has plenty of employees who do, in the US even! The Democrats have never gotten this, and probably never will; when you levy a tax on a company, the company has to pass the tax on to its employees and customers. The employees benefits will go down, or they'll pay a lot more for them, and the customers will have to pay more for the company's goods/services. Even 'the little guy' who works 9-to-5 down on the line will pay a lot more, and they get paid a lot less than my dad does. Supposedly this is who the Democrats are supposed to be looking out for. (By the way, this insurance is group insurance, with an included dental and vision plan. We pay $100 a paycheck for coverage estimated at $12,000 worth of coverage a year. My mom's employer does not and can't offer an insurance program until she retires.)
I have type one diabetes. I have a great endocrinologist, who looks out for me and writes prescriptions for perhaps more than I need each month, but when you have a life-threatening disease that's a good thing. A vial of 50 blood glucose test strips is $50. I go through about five a month. That's already $250. My insulin (I go through 5 100mL vials a month) is $120 a vial, after insurance company 'haggling'. Straight up, it'd cost about $200 each. Luckily, our co-pay is only $20 and we actually get a flex spending account which works on dental, some orthodontia (a first payment on one set), and some glasses (1 pair per family member every two years; only at places on an 'accepted' list.).
If this makes it through, our vision insurance will go out the window, the dental program won't be included anymore, and our deductible and out-of-pocket expenses will go up. We need health care reform, but this is not the way to go about it. We desperately need tort reform. If we lower the amount patients can get, lower the things they can sue for, we lower the amount of unnecessary tests doctors perform to be absolutely sure they have an alibi should they be sued. Therefore, doctors pay less in malpractice insurance, and they charge patients less. My grandma recently had cataract surgery done, on both eyes. It was $3500 an eye. $1700 of that for malpractice insurance. This is why our society pays so much for health care and yet gets so little out of it. Not so desperately, we need a high-risk insurance pool for those of us with pre-existing conditions who can't get coverage anywhere else or choose not to (most states have a carrier who has to take you, but you can wait up to 60 days and be subject to even higher costs than a high-risk pool.) We need to place more emphasis on healthy living, prevention and education is key. For those diseases which can't be prevented, or have no proven cause (type 1 diabetes, other autoimmune disorders, autism and other learning disabilities, some cancers) we need to provide money for research, to cure it or find more effective treatments.
Once again thanks for reading, if you made it this far. I'm off to play some Guitar Hero: Van Halen, we got it free since we bought GH5. Win.
