Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay: Conservapedia Questions for the 2008 Presidential Candidates"
(Tax Credits for Homeschoolers) |
(Comment from Philip J. Rayment) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
''What is your position on tax credits to help pay for homeschooling?'' | ''What is your position on tax credits to help pay for homeschooling?'' | ||
Most homeschoolers I know do NOT want tax credits. With money comes government oversight, which is the last thing we need. In particular, getting the federal government involved in defining homeschooling would be problematic (due to differing state laws, some of which do not include a formal "homeschooling" option) and would not, IMHO, end well for homeschoolers. I suggest we do NOT ask this question. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 22:47, 16 September 2008 (EDT) | Most homeschoolers I know do NOT want tax credits. With money comes government oversight, which is the last thing we need. In particular, getting the federal government involved in defining homeschooling would be problematic (due to differing state laws, some of which do not include a formal "homeschooling" option) and would not, IMHO, end well for homeschoolers. I suggest we do NOT ask this question. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 22:47, 16 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Comment from Philip J. Rayment == | ||
| + | I was asked by the author to comment on this, so here are my comments! | ||
| + | |||
| + | On the whole it looks very good. I'm sure that there could be some fine-tuning in the approach, although I don't have anything specific in mind, and given the timescale it may not be practicable to spend much time on that. | ||
| + | |||
| + | It says that questions should not be removed unless inappropriate. I'm guessing that they can also be removed after discussion on the talk page, but if so this should be clarified. I also wonder about the number of questions. How many is it appropriate to expect the candidates to answer (given everyone else who will be asking also)? Not that I think there is necessarily too many now, but once it is thrown open to others to add their own, there is a possibility of the number increasing dramatically. Which gets back to the need to be able to remove questions that, for example, others consider too trivial. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I don't like to exclude personal questions if they relate to the candidate's integrity and values (for example, if he lies to his wife, how do we trust him to be truthful to the country?), but unless the questions are ones that are applicable for both candidates, then I guess it's fair enough to exclude them from this project. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Not having a huge amount of interest in the American election, I'm not going to comment on many of the questions themselves (and I guess I wasn't being asked that anyway), but I'll comment on a couple. | ||
| + | * The one about school prayer perhaps doesn't make clear, if indeed this is what is intended, that it is asking what the candidate thinks ''should'' be the case if there were no constitutional/court-decision hindrances. Otherwise they might fob the question off by saying that it's not allowed, and not actually answer the question. | ||
| + | * The one about the legality of selling tobacco seems to assume that it's a black-and-white question: either it's allowed or it's not. Perhaps the question would be better framed along the lines of what they are going to do about ''reducing'' tobacco use. No government is going to ban tobacco overnight; there would be too much of a backlash and the next administration would reinstate it. Instead, the better approach is to minimise its use, and only after it has largely fallen out of fashion would a government then get away with banning it. (This is my opinion, anyway.) | ||
| + | [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:51, 16 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:51, September 17, 2008
Tax Credits for Homeschoolers
What is your position on tax credits to help pay for homeschooling? Most homeschoolers I know do NOT want tax credits. With money comes government oversight, which is the last thing we need. In particular, getting the federal government involved in defining homeschooling would be problematic (due to differing state laws, some of which do not include a formal "homeschooling" option) and would not, IMHO, end well for homeschoolers. I suggest we do NOT ask this question. --Hsmom 22:47, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Comment from Philip J. Rayment
I was asked by the author to comment on this, so here are my comments!
On the whole it looks very good. I'm sure that there could be some fine-tuning in the approach, although I don't have anything specific in mind, and given the timescale it may not be practicable to spend much time on that.
It says that questions should not be removed unless inappropriate. I'm guessing that they can also be removed after discussion on the talk page, but if so this should be clarified. I also wonder about the number of questions. How many is it appropriate to expect the candidates to answer (given everyone else who will be asking also)? Not that I think there is necessarily too many now, but once it is thrown open to others to add their own, there is a possibility of the number increasing dramatically. Which gets back to the need to be able to remove questions that, for example, others consider too trivial.
I don't like to exclude personal questions if they relate to the candidate's integrity and values (for example, if he lies to his wife, how do we trust him to be truthful to the country?), but unless the questions are ones that are applicable for both candidates, then I guess it's fair enough to exclude them from this project.
Not having a huge amount of interest in the American election, I'm not going to comment on many of the questions themselves (and I guess I wasn't being asked that anyway), but I'll comment on a couple.
- The one about school prayer perhaps doesn't make clear, if indeed this is what is intended, that it is asking what the candidate thinks should be the case if there were no constitutional/court-decision hindrances. Otherwise they might fob the question off by saying that it's not allowed, and not actually answer the question.
- The one about the legality of selling tobacco seems to assume that it's a black-and-white question: either it's allowed or it's not. Perhaps the question would be better framed along the lines of what they are going to do about reducing tobacco use. No government is going to ban tobacco overnight; there would be too much of a backlash and the next administration would reinstate it. Instead, the better approach is to minimise its use, and only after it has largely fallen out of fashion would a government then get away with banning it. (This is my opinion, anyway.)
Philip J. Rayment 22:51, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
