this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
87 points (97.8% liked)

Ukraine

12255 readers
352 users here now

News related to Ukraine

Matrix Space


Community Rules

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦ Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

🌻🀒No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

πŸ’₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

🚷[Combat] videos containing footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW

No AI slop

❗ Server Rules

  1. Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
  2. No racism or other discrimination
  3. No Nazis, QAnon or similar
  4. No porn
  5. No ads or spam (includes charities)
  6. No content against Finnish law

πŸ’³ Defense Aid πŸ’₯


πŸ’³ Humanitarian Aid βš•οΈβ›‘οΈ


πŸͺ– Volunteer with the International Legionnaires


See also:

!nafo@lemm.ee

!combatvideos@SJW


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The two issues have little to do with each other. Teacher pay is handled at local and State levels. US Foreign Aid is a Federal issue.

[–] kozy138@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Just because it's handled at state level, doesn't mean it has to be handled at state level.

The federal government could easily give money to states with the stipulation that x amount is used to pay teachers.

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

This would go one of two ways:

  1. States would take the money, and money being fungible, State budgets for payroll would ultimately go down by that same X. Teacher pay might get a short term bump, but the long term result would just be States relying on the subsidy and using the extra budget room to do other stuff, without meaningful long term changes to teacher pay.
  2. The money comes with regulations around teacher pay (to prevent the issue above) and many States refuse to take the money to avoid the regulations. The whole thing becomes a political football and nothing really changes.

Ultimately, the US is a Federal system which means a lot of stuff is handled at the State and Local level. A wholesale takeover of those responsibilities by the Federal Government is not as simple as "hand money to the States". Decentralized authority has long been both a feature and a bug in the US system, but it's not one which is likely to be changed anytime soon. The upshot of this decentralization is that States can use their authority to push and demonstrate policies before there is a national consensus on those policies. The downside is that some policies need to be fought on a State by State basis, which is a lot harder than a top-down, command style government.