Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good lord, The last two posting before "boi2socal". Every post I always read from is always some gripe or moan. "Oh too many people coming to Boise,"" Its getting too big,"It doesn't have enough water.... People think it's so much better here."
Some of you have lived there your whole life and are so biased it's funny. You complain that There are no jobs, there isn't good enough education.
Let me give you some examples.... Meridian Joint school district has 31 Elementary schools and one school district here in Sacramento,ca has 35 Schools. The area this District covers is bigger than meridian and only has 4 more schools then Meridian joint. One city alone in the school district is 14.1 while meridian alone is 11.8. Our avg school class size is somewhere around 28 kids per teacher and sometimes higher. Yet Meridian is somewhere around 22 kids per teacher.
We have had a drought where the City has informed us it is only legal to water your lawn on certain days for this address and other days for this address. If your caught you get something like a 200$ fine billed to you.
Our unemployment is over 13% in Sacramento,ca and the State was about 12.5%. Idaho's rate is 9.8% and boise is 9%. People complain that there are no jobs. Jobs are out there, you just gotta find them. There were jobs out here, but with the influx of unemployed in this area the chances are very little. I applied to a company online and I got called for an interview 40 minutes later. Now, I may be an exception as I have alot of experience in my field. Maybe there isn't enough people in my field with my type of experience. But they are there for people to get.
With the research I have done and the people I have talked to. It "is" alot better than out here.
Idaho's leaders put zero emphasis on education and they almost appear proud of it. The education budget has been brutalized in the past two legislative sessions with the worst still to come. Idaho has plenty of enviable qualities but its attitude towards education is definitely not one of them.
Idaho's leaders put zero emphasis on education and they almost appear proud of it. The education budget has been brutalized in the past two legislative sessions with the worst still to come. Idaho has plenty of enviable qualities but its attitude towards education is definitely not one of them.
When tax revenues are down (as they appear to be almost everywhere these days) and it hinders economic activity (i.e. jobs) to raise taxes, esp. in bad economic times, schools have less money. It's a tough thing, but what can you do when your source of funding dries up?
When tax revenues are down (as they appear to be almost everywhere these days) and it hinders economic activity (i.e. jobs) to raise taxes, esp. in bad economic times, schools have less money. It's a tough thing, but what can you do when your source of funding dries up?
You don't live in Boise, right? I understand revenues and expenses and that really has nothing to do with my point. Very little value is put on education by much of the legislature and schools have taken a disproportionate hit (with the worst yet to come).
The legislature, in my opinion, is more concerned with promoting their independent, god fearing, good ol' boy image and passing religous and politically symbolic measures than they are with the future of their state.
This year's session has just begun so there should be plenty for you and other posters to read up on over the next few months. You may not agree with me, which is fine, but it will go along ways in helping you understand the dynamic of the state (of course their is no substitute for actually living here).
the jest of what I'm reading is that either your state is a 'right-to-work' state or it allows unions. So does this mean that if the state DOESN'T have unions, that it's considered a r-t-w state?
the jest of what I'm reading is that either your state is a 'right-to-work' state or it allows unions. So does this mean that if the state DOESN'T have unions, that it's considered a r-t-w state?
A "right to work" state means that if the workplace is unionized, the employee is not required to join the union to work there. The union still negotiates for pay and benefits for ALL employees and the company must follow all work rules they agreed upon for ALL employees, But employees can decide to join or not join the union without any consequences.
The advantage to employees is they have the benefit of all the negotiated benefits, pay, and work protection rules but don;t have to pay union dues to get it. They know the union will defend them in all company violations of the contract because its a labor agreement, but they didn't have to pay dues for it. Basically they have all the advantages of union protection but none of the expenses.
The disadvantage to the employee is that the union is weaker as a result and that often means having to agree to less benefits for all employees.
Idaho's leaders put zero emphasis on education and they almost appear proud of it. The education budget has been brutalized in the past two legislative sessions with the worst still to come. Idaho has plenty of enviable qualities but its attitude towards education is definitely not one of them.
I haven't seen much convincing evidence that funding schools produces better results. In my home state, school funding was inversely correlated to performance. The state had 17 failing high schools and 14 were in the highest paid school systems in the state. Moreover, rural schools with less funding routinely outperform urban schools with far more funding and resources.
Idaho ranked 21st on the NAEP exam but only two states paid less per pupil than Idaho. On the NAEP exam, Idaho finished well ahead of New York, which spent nearly 2.5x as much per pupil. What does that say? It's hard to say. Funny, states with high costs of living tend to have more spendy educational systems.
From my own experience having attended local state U (not one of the more highly funded ones) and a top 15 private research institution, I really can't say the extra money spent at the latter was really worth it or provided that much more value.
Don't assume that not necessarily wanting to throw money at education equates to not valuing education. I don't place a huge emphasis on spending on education, and I've got an MD and have a mother who is a teacher. Idaho, for instance, gives a great deal of freedom and encouragement to those who'd like to home school. If only our nation was as friendly to parochial schools...but that's another topic.
I've grown up in CA (now 56 years old) and have seen this State go from properous to indebted, many due to gov't. overspending and handouts to many who have developed an entitlement attitude.
There are many who feel CA is about to crash, some of us have tried to keep that from happening via voting and promoting fiscal responsitibility in gov't (and personal)...but when you have a large segment of the voting public who benefit from handouts and gov't. spending, well...
Don't assume that not necessarily wanting to throw money at education equates to not valuing education. I don't place a huge emphasis on spending on education, and I've got an MD and have a mother who is a teacher. Idaho, for instance, gives a great deal of freedom and encouragement to those who'd like to home school. If only our nation was as friendly to parochial schools...but that's another topic.
It's a good point, but I think it's a bit separate from the issues discussed in this thread.
Do teachers make good money teaching in Idaho? Assuredly not. Will paying them better improve education in Idaho? I doubt it... but it might help retain qualified teachers. Finding a way to get rid of bad teachers is a big problem, and Idaho's new education plan hasn't done much to make that happen. Luna(tic)'s new online education program is already a joke: they've already cut it down to two courses, and still there are doubts as to whether those will actually happen or not.
With regard to home schooling: I think Idaho is a good place to do it. Others here will speak to that. But the charter school / private school model here is pretty much an abject failure, as these schools go belly up each and every year it seems.
Let's keep this more focused on the Right-to-Work topic...although these are all good points about the education system here...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
does being a 'right-to-work' state mean . . . .
