U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [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: Would you be able to afford to Educate your child under a fully privatized system?
Yes 40 59.70%
No 27 40.30%
Voters: 67. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-02-2008, 06:42 AM
 
372 posts, read 760,869 times
Reputation: 126

Advertisements

1) The conversation didn't just end up changing tracks, you purposely drove it there. Within the first page of these posts, you change your arguement from whether or not you would be able to afford it, to whether it would cause discrepencies in educational services based upon economics.

2) As a nation we have a negative savings rate. Incomes are not based upon how many children you have. Conversely, if we have a negative savings rate then as a whole, the citizens of this nation are spending their entire paycheck, regardless of how many children they have.... they simply prioritize differently. While you may constantly be buying clothes for your growing children, I might spend more on luxury items. To say parents with children contribute 4x as much to the GDP without anything to back up your claim is lame.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-02-2008, 07:02 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
5,217 posts, read 4,112,847 times
Reputation: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasNootz View Post
1) The conversation didn't just end up changing tracks, you purposely drove it there. Within the first page of these posts, you change your arguement from whether or not you would be able to afford it, to whether it would cause discrepencies in educational services based upon economics.

well..they go hand in hand.. Duh.. look at schools already in a wealthy neighborhood as opposed to schools in a poor neighborhood. Those that can't afford an education will get the worst kind of education or none at all.. not too difficult to understand.

If you don't like the way the conversation went.. they why even bother responding.

2) As a nation we have a negative savings rate. Incomes are not based upon how many children you have. Conversely, if we have a negative savings rate then as a whole, the citizens of this nation are spending their entire paycheck, regardless of how many children they have.... they simply prioritize differently. While you may constantly be buying clothes for your growing children, I might spend more on luxury items. To say parents with children contribute 4x as much to the GDP without anything to back up your claim is lame.
Yup.. I spend my entire paycheck..but I don't have many luxuries.. that's right.. and maybe you have more luxuries.. good for you.. so see.. you benefit from NOT having children in one way or the other. Every stop to think that the reason the savings rate is so low is because the cost of things has gotten out of hand while salaries have been stagnant?

You're right.. I have no real data to back that claim up becasue it doesn't exist.. But as a mother I can tell you this much.. having kids is a huge expense. Your luxury purchase now and then may equal out my purchases on a daily basis to support my kids.. but I doubt it... Unless you have kids you wouldn't undrestand that statement or the cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 08:40 AM
 
372 posts, read 760,869 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
Makes sense.

But let me bring up one point a lot of people that don't have children don't think about...

A household with 2 adults and 2 children will consume 4x's the amount of goods and then some then the single individual. That means that we will most likely end up contributing 4x's more than the single household to the state sales tax.. which are used for a multitude of things .. including education. We are also contributing 4x's to the GDP of the nation. Every time we buy our children clothes (which is often... they grow like weeds) or a toy to entertain, or school supplies etc etc etc. And the portions that don't go to pay for school go to other things in the state that many of those without children are benefiting from.. like infrastructure, etc. So in the end we DO pay more in taxes and contribute more to things than the single person and they get to benefit from them.

Don't know about your area, but property taxes are also based on property values which can be tied into how big the home is. A home with 4 Bedrooms and 2 baths will certainly be taxed higher than say a 2 bedroom 1 bath home. A family would most likely (although not always) live in a home that is bigger and therefore taxed higher.. so we are contributing more into the school tax, then say the single person that owns a condo or small home. This is not always going to be true.. so it's not absolute.. BUT the sales tax one is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
Yup.. I spend my entire paycheck..but I don't have many luxuries.. that's right.. and maybe you have more luxuries.. good for you.. so see.. you benefit from NOT having children in one way or the other. Every stop to think that the reason the savings rate is so low is because the cost of things has gotten out of hand while salaries have been stagnant?

You're right.. I have no real data to back that claim up becasue it doesn't exist.. But as a mother I can tell you this much.. having kids is a huge expense. Your luxury purchase now and then may equal out my purchases on a daily basis to support my kids.. but I doubt it... Unless you have kids you wouldn't undrestand that statement or the cost.
Saying that if I dont' have children, I can't possibly understand is a foolish arguement. As is stating that if I disagree with the way you've steered this thread, I should just stop reading. You're looking more and more like a child throwing a temper tantrum... if you don't like my rules I'll take my game and go home.

You're above quoted posts indicate that you're opinions are in self conflict... I've always found it's best to rationally think an arguement through before rashly posting.

Back to the steered topic at hand... I don't need to be a parent to read a balance sheet. I'm completely capable of understanding that children cost money to raise. Let's not forget that you also get tax credits and/or deductions that single tax payers do not get. In essence, I think it's fair to say that a single tax payer earning the same income and spending the same amount will pay more in taxes.

Why has the cost to live gotten so out of hand compared to salaries? I think it's because we've become a service based economy that produces very little. We emphasize wants instead of needs. Twenty years ago there weren't monthly cell phone bills, cable bills, high speed internet, etc. We've also become a nation of increase entitlements. What we cannot afford, we expect the government to pay for, forgetting that the government works from our funds. We also freely criticize the government for raising our taxes, after we've reached to them with our hands out for so many projects. Every year I hear the same thing at local school boards... if we don't spend it, somebody else will. It disgusts me.

"Accept certain inalienable truths, prices will rise, politicians will philander, you too will get old, and when you do you'll fantasize that when you were young prices were reasonable, politicians were noble and children respected their elders." - Mary Schmich
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 09:19 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
5,217 posts, read 4,112,847 times
Reputation: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasNootz View Post
Saying that if I dont' have children, I can't possibly understand is a foolish arguement. As is stating that if I disagree with the way you've steered this thread, I should just stop reading. You're looking more and more like a child throwing a temper tantrum... if you don't like my rules I'll take my game and go home.

You're above quoted posts indicate that you're opinions are in self conflict... I've always found it's best to rationally think an arguement through before rashly posting.

Back to the steered topic at hand... I don't need to be a parent to read a balance sheet. I'm completely capable of understanding that children cost money to raise. Let's not forget that you also get tax credits and/or deductions that single tax payers do not get. In essence, I think it's fair to say that a single tax payer earning the same income and spending the same amount will pay more in taxes.

Why has the cost to live gotten so out of hand compared to salaries? I think it's because we've become a service based economy that produces very little. We emphasize wants instead of needs. Twenty years ago there weren't monthly cell phone bills, cable bills, high speed internet, etc. We've also become a nation of increase entitlements. What we cannot afford, we expect the government to pay for, forgetting that the government works from our funds. We also freely criticize the government for raising our taxes, after we've reached to them with our hands out for so many projects. Every year I hear the same thing at local school boards... if we don't spend it, somebody else will. It disgusts me.

"Accept certain inalienable truths, prices will rise, politicians will philander, you too will get old, and when you do you'll fantasize that when you were young prices were reasonable, politicians were noble and children respected their elders." - Mary Schmich
'

The cost of living has gotten so out of hand becuase "trickle down economy" is BS! The only thing that trickles down is the company losses. Funny.. the ones with their hands out the most are Wall Street and big coroporations. We've become a corporate welfare nation! The economy was booming.. so why wasn't salaries? Because the companies were too busy handing out millions of dollars in bonues to 1 guy, the CEO rather than awarding their employees for the company success. They were too busy keeping money at the top and NOT trickling it down! They were greedy.. and now that they are in trouble they are looking to the little guy on Main Street to help them out!

The ONLY tax deduction a couple with children get is a child credit. I don't nor can i write off anything that I purchase for my child.. t he extra food, the clothes, the school supplies. I get a $1000 tax credit for the thousands I contribute when I pay for my childs consumption (which I'm not complaining about, btw..).

There are plenty of tax deductions that anyone can have depending on what they do with their money. If your single and you own a home, you get to write off the interest you pay every year.. so does a couple with or without children. IF you have a 9-5 job, there isn't much you can write off anyway. If you work for yourself you can write off a lot of things.. single, married or with or without a child.

I don't expect the governmnet to pay for anything I have or want. I pay for it myself, thank you. The Middle class does not have their hand out asking the government to subsidize their lifestyle. The middle class contribute , but is the group of people that get the LEAST from government. Why? Because we don't have disposable income to invest in things that give us the tax breaks the government allows. We don't have expendable income for 'tax shelters" that the rich have. We can't "hide" our money like those in the higher brackets, so we take what little deductions we can (mortgage interest, child tax credit) and pay the entire bill we're handed.

The poor.. they don't make enough for anything and so the gov't gives them things from our tax dollars.. be it medical insurance, food stamps, ect and college education. The middle class make too much money to qualify for any assistance for any of it, but do not have enough to pay for things without going into hock. The wealthy.. well they have it all covered... they can pay for things without having to go into hock. Yes, they pay more taxes, but paying those taxes doesn't eat into their grocery budgets.

And that brings me to the entire point of privitization of schools. All it will be is leaving the middle class of this country out in the cold. Again..we make too much money to qualify for any government assistance yet will not have enough to finance our childrens elementary and secondary education without going deep into debt. The wealthy will be able to easily afford the education and then some. They'll buy up all the spots in the good schools with their money and leave the rest of us out.

ANd just as a little aside.. for some of us cell phones and internet is vital.. it is for me in my business. Is it ifor all? That's not up to me to say. In a society that is increasingly modernized the line between what was once a "luxury" can easily blend into what becomes "needed". It all depends on individuals circumstances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 09:24 AM
 
372 posts, read 760,869 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
I don't expect the governmnet to pay for anything I have or want. I pay for it myself, thank you.
Including education?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 09:26 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,366,957 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
'The ONLY tax deduction a couple with children get is a child credit. I don't nor can i write off anything that I purchase for my child.. t he extra food, the clothes, the school supplies. I get a $1000 tax credit for the thousands I contribute when I pay for my childs consumption (which I'm not complaining about, btw..).
There should be no child tax credit whatsoever - if one has children, it was by personal decision and the child tax credit is nothing more that rewarding that decision
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 09:48 AM
 
372 posts, read 760,869 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
The ONLY tax deduction a couple with children get is a child credit. I don't nor can i write off anything that I purchase for my child.. t he extra food, the clothes, the school supplies. I get a $1000 tax credit for the thousands I contribute when I pay for my childs consumption (which I'm not complaining about, btw..).
The thousands you contribute when you pay for your child's consumption? What county do you live in? The average sales tax rate in NYS is around 8% To be paying $1,000 in sales tax you'd have to be spending $12,500 on "consumables" for your child each year. To have "thousands", as you've claimed, you'd have to be spending at least twice that. Are you spending over $25,000 on your child's consumables? If so, it's time to repriortize wants and needs then.

If by "contribute" you don't mean pay taxes, and rather mean recirculate to the greater economy, I think we've already covered that a single person can spend just as much by purchasing luxury items.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
5,217 posts, read 4,112,847 times
Reputation: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasNootz View Post
The thousands you contribute when you pay for your child's consumption? What county do you live in? The average sales tax rate in NYS is around 8% To be paying $1,000 in sales tax you'd have to be spending $12,500 on "consumables" for your child each year. To have "thousands", as you've claimed, you'd have to be spending at least twice that. Are you spending over $25,000 on your child's consumables? If so, it's time to repriortize wants and needs then.

If by "contribute" you don't mean pay taxes, and rather mean recirculate to the greater economy, I think we've already covered that a single person can spend just as much by purchasing luxury items.
Yes. I pay for education through property taxes and sales taxes... so education is NOT FREE. !!!

And yes.. a person who is single can buy "luxury items".. They can also take their money and invest it wisely into tax shelters or other things that would give them a write offs.. so if they choose to blow their money on Luxuries rather than purchase income growing items that shelter their money from taxes.. that is their choice.

If I had expendable income I would invest too to help my money grow and to shield my money from taxes.

Bottom line of this debate still remains the same

Having an educated population is what keeps a country on top .
Privatizing education would put the ability of many in our population out of the ability to afford said education thereby leading to a larger uneducated population.
Private schools are in existance today.. so parents can choose to send their kids to private school if they so choose and if they can afford the extra expense. No one is forcing anyone into public schools
It has been proven that private schools have equaled public schools.
Voucher programs in existence in many cities or municipalities around the country have dissappointed and failed to prove that the difference is significant enough to shake up our entire education structure and hand it over to private entities.. whose ONLY motivation will be to make money.. and NOT on education.

I asked a few posts back if you can name 1 country that has a completely privatized school system? If so, how much of their population is uneducated vs. educated and where they rank in the world on the economic and innovations level. NO one has answered!! Why? Because all the top school systems in the world are government run and government and publicly funded and I've proven that. Yes.. our government is not doing the greatest job at the moment, but that doesn't mean it can't or won't. It doesnt mean that we now have to turn schools over to private corporations thereby setting our schools back to the days where only the rich were educated leaving the rest behind.

Last edited by TristansMommy; 10-02-2008 at 10:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 11:24 AM
 
372 posts, read 760,869 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
Yes. I pay for education through property taxes and sales taxes... so education is NOT FREE. !!!

And yes.. a person who is single can buy "luxury items".. They can also take their money and invest ist wisely into tax shelters or other things that would give them a write offs.. so if they choose to blow their money on Luxuries rather than purchase income growing items that shelter their money from taxes.. that is their choice.

If I had expendable income I would invest too to help my money grow and to shield my money from taxes.
Just like having and raising a child is your choice.

You've already indicated that it costs $16,640 to educate each child per year in your county. If you're not directly paying at least $16,640 in taxes per year which are directly going to the education system, and not to pay for roads, bridges, military, welfare, or any other government policy, then you are directly asking the government to pay for your child's education. This again contradicts your statement that, "I don't expect the governmnet to pay for anything I have or want. I pay for it myself, thank you."

Face it, your child's education, the roads you drive, the police and firemen that protect you, and all other gov't services are subsidized by those same corporate pigs that you despise so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2008, 12:32 PM
Status: "Done with the 100s (hopefully)?" (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: East Central Phoenix
5,411 posts, read 8,297,980 times
Reputation: 5760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
There should be no child tax credit whatsoever - if one has children, it was by personal decision and the child tax credit is nothing more that rewarding that decision
Absolutely right! The $1,000 tax credit for every child is really nothing more than another government entitlement program disguised as a tax break for parents. Translation: WELFARE!

mod cut: personal banter removed

Last edited by scirocco22; 10-02-2008 at 02:29 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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 > General Forums > Great Debates
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