U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: How will you vote on COLO Proposition 103?
Yes, raise the taxes for 5 years. 25 44.64%
No, do not raise the taxes. 30 53.57%
No opinion / don't care. 1 1.79%
Voters: 56. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-30-2011, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Golden, CO
2,181 posts, read 5,432,047 times
Reputation: 2069

Advertisements

I should have elaborated on my post: I agree with David and Jim -- I DO value education, but I don't think that throwing more money at problems will fix them. I also think that times are tough for everyone right now.

I also wonder what would happen when the 'temporary' tax increases are set to expire -- would the pro-tax increase crowd then portray the situation as FUNDING CUTS and use that as a way to get voters to approve five more years of the 'temporary' increase?

 
Old 09-30-2011, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Arvada, CO
12,848 posts, read 23,296,184 times
Reputation: 12243
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboyxjon View Post
I should have elaborated on my post: I agree with David and Jim -- I DO value education, but I don't think that throwing more money at problems will fix them. I also think that times are tough for everyone right now.

I also wonder what would happen when the 'temporary' tax increases are set to expire -- would the pro-tax increase crowd then portray the situation as FUNDING CUTS and use that as a way to get voters to approve five more years of the 'temporary' increase?
Sounds like what went on at the national level doesn't it?
__________________
Moderator for Los Angeles, The Inland Empire, and the Washington state forums.
 
Old 09-30-2011, 11:34 AM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,105 posts, read 20,401,913 times
Reputation: 4143
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboyxjon View Post
I should have elaborated on my post: I agree with David and Jim -- I DO value education, but I don't think that throwing more money at problems will fix them. I also think that times are tough for everyone right now.

I also wonder what would happen when the 'temporary' tax increases are set to expire -- would the pro-tax increase crowd then portray the situation as FUNDING CUTS and use that as a way to get voters to approve five more years of the 'temporary' increase?
Many of the colleges and universities need new buildings and the buildings they do have are old and need to be remodeled. That requires money the college system just does not have. The same is true with the K-12 system. So while I agree that "throwing money at a problem" does not always work there are times when more money is needed and unlike the private sector they cant issue bonds to make the necessary improvements without voter approval.
 
Old 09-30-2011, 11:38 AM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,164,419 times
Reputation: 9066
I have very mixed feelings about this. I am a firm supporter of education, however, I see firsthand the inefficiency and waste in the educational system. Unfortunately, a lot of that is thanks to ridiculous federal mandates and the misbegotten notion that schools are a substitute for decent parenting.

I suspect that the initiative will fail because Coloradans labor under the notion that Colorado is a high-tax state. The fact is that Colorado sits about in the middle for its total tax burden. The problem is that the state's entire taxation system is grossly unbalanced. Residential property taxes rates are ridiculously low per dollar of fair market value (usually 49th or 50th in the US) while business and industrial property taxes are fairly high. Any wonder why we have tons of non-productive trophy home crap in this state and a shrinking industrial base? Property tax policy has something to do with it.

Colorado also has one of the most byzantine and insanely complex sales and use tax systems in the United States. In difficulty to administer and difficulty for businesses to collect and comply with, Colorado's sales and use tax system is consistently rated about the worst in the United States. Combined state, county, and local sales taxes are also fairly high in most locales, as well.

Colorado's income tax, by comparison, is relatively low, simple, and straightforward. Ironically, Colorado's income tax rates were higher during most of the state's booming years than they are now.

Nothing of all of it changes the fact that--thanks to uncontrolled development and population growth, most of the costs of which have been cleverly socialized upon the taxpayers by the real estate development interests that control Colorado politics--Colorado is mired in a huge and growing fiscal crisis that will eventually cripple government's ability to provide even basic services like law enforcement, fire protection, etc. Tax increases are going to be inevitable, and anyone who thinks that they can be avoided is living a delusion. Tons of growth that has not paid for itself assures that.
 
Old 09-30-2011, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,105 posts, read 20,401,913 times
Reputation: 4143
^

I think it all depends on the turn out and with this being a off election year it has a better chance of passing.
 
Old 09-30-2011, 12:25 PM
 
1,742 posts, read 2,625,930 times
Reputation: 1923
I agree with Jaz, I have to pay a tax to use my OWN EQUIPMENT.
I've never seen a state with this absurd law. RP
 
Old 10-01-2011, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Colorado
1,706 posts, read 2,933,814 times
Reputation: 1741
I am voting YES!

Colorado teachers make a paltry amount compared to other states. I made MORE as a fourth year teacher with just a bachelor's degree when I taught in Connecticut than I do now with eight years of experience and a master's degree.

Colorado is a state that encourages charter schools. In these organizations you do not see the amount of waste that you might in public schools. That is due to how small they are and how efficiently they are run. At the charter school that my daughter attends they ask the teachers to keep the heat at 65 because they can't afford to have classrooms heated higher. This isn't due to high administrative salaries either, I've seen the salary scales (as you can too with a FOI letter). Nor is it due to excessive amounts spent on construction. When a school asks for copy paper because they can't afford it, it is time for spend more on schools!

Charter schools depend on state dollars ONLY. So for $6400 a student, they have to run a school. It is amazing that any are able to do so!

Colorado is also very close to the bottom when it comes to per pupil spending. For those that say, "throwing money won't help," I ask why don't you think so? If you look at the KIPP schools or Jeffery Canada's school in Harlem, they are multi-million dollar schools with HUGE amounts of donations. They don't just take in the students, they take in the families and are their own version of social services. They are changing an entire culture when it comes to the value of education.

Bottom line, the best schools with the highest test scores and the most students going to college/graduating from high school are also in areas that spend money on education. Just because there is an increase of this size, that will not make us California. Let's just get above Alabama or Arkansas when it comes to school spending.
 
Old 10-02-2011, 10:00 AM
 
1,408 posts, read 2,638,517 times
Reputation: 1709
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_hug99 View Post
For those that say, "throwing money won't help," I ask why don't you think so?
You gave one example. here's another - look at Newark and Camden, NJ. Lots of money thrown at schools with pitiful results.
 
Old 10-02-2011, 10:37 AM
 
20,360 posts, read 37,902,723 times
Reputation: 18163
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarryK123 View Post
You gave one example. here's another - look at Newark and Camden, NJ. Lots of money thrown at schools with pitiful results.
Same for DC, very expensive school system, very poor results.

There's more to this than just how much money we give them, it's how well they do with it. Having lived in the DC area for over 30 years, I know a big part of their problem is leadership and management of their school system. I'm way confident that our school systems here are much better led and managed, and if we give them a few more bucks then I expect we'd get good value for our money. That's why I voted yes.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
 
Old 10-02-2011, 10:46 AM
 
1,460 posts, read 1,615,685 times
Reputation: 1398
If they allowed state wide school vouchers yes, but they never will so no. I moved from colorado 25 years ago..I do not miss it.
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.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top