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.
Firstly, the "other state" example I was using was Texas, not California. Texas has a different taxing scheme and has a different economic situation.
"Have you looked at Los Angeles lately? I live here and see it everyday." While I have only been to LAX Airport, I have read a lot about the LA school system and have posted a bit on the LA forums.
Firstly California school taxation was affected by California Proposition 13, and tax revenues into schools began to drop at that point. There is a debate over how Prop 13 has affected all California schools, but nonetheless it is an attribute.
Now, when you say "Los Angeles USE to be in the top 5 now the school system here is around 49th." - Top 5 in what of what? When did it change? That sentence leaves a lot out, so it is not useful to someone not from the area.
Also Los Angeles is a special case. The community didn't build new schools in a timely manner, and the district used forced busing to alleviate overcrowding, which aggravated communities in other areas. NOW LA is building new schools to accommodate a population of people who moved there a long time ago.
When the Latin American immigrants came to Houston en masse, the school district re-opened closed schools and opened new schools in a more timely manner. The voluntary magnet system allows people to go to schools outside of their neighborhoods, but because it is voluntary, the motivated students and the kids with motivated parents are the ones doing the moving around.
"Have you heard about the city trying to DOUBLE our property taxes due to the school system being millions of dollars in the hole?" When I searched "Los Angeles School property taxes" in Google News, the first page of hits did not show any news related to that. If you do have an article in mind, please post it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mading6
YOU Are Wrong!! Have you looked at Los Angeles lately? I live here and see it everyday. Los Angeles USE to be in the top 5 now the school system here is around 49th.
Have you looked at all the new rennovations they have done to the schools? Have you heard about the city trying to DOUBLE our property taxes due to the school system being millions of dollars in the hole?
Texas now faces big budget problems also. It's true that Texas is doing all it can to attract more and more illegals and force the property taxes to even more ridiculous levels.
Texas now faces big budget problems also. It's true that Texas is doing all it can to attract more and more illegals and force the property taxes to even more ridiculous levels.
The state itself is facing some budget problems; they aren't to the degree that other states are experiencing. I know a place where it can cut some fat, though. The prison system is one of the largest state entities and is very costly. The state could close some prisons and the budget shortfall would be erased as the state makes money from the sale and no longer has some non-violent offenders under its care. To my knowledge it is the prison system, and not the education system which is truly straining Texas's budget. http://raymondville.our-hometown.com...t_deficit.html = the prison system is the place where Texas will cut its budget.
If the expenditures from education on illegals overall do strain the state, the newspapers will mention that the education budget would be bursting at the streams. Instead the newspapers generally talk about Texas closing prisons. After doing a Google News search, the newspaper archives dating to July 23, 2010 to now do not mention education as being a particular point of interest with the state budget. -- I used the search words "Texas," "education," "taxes," and deficit"
For that matter California, in my view, should close San Quentin and sell the land.
BTW Texas Governor Rick Perry signed legislation allowing illegal immigrant university students to pay in-state tuition: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...c.2b28090.html - Legal status isn't an attribute in how someone is taxed in Texas. I wonder if Rick Perry thinks the concept of trying to get illegals to pay more for university is trying to get blood from a turnip. Nevertheless if the education spending goes over budget I would support making illegals pay out of state tuition. BTW Malamute, you are right - the situation demonstrated by the news article shows that the Government of Texas does want illegals in the state.
The concept behind public education in Texas is that some people pay less into the system than others, and that the people who buy more luxuries subsidize those who don't buy as many luxuries. Even if illegals do not pay say $8,000 per year, through rent and through buying McDonald's they may pay a fraction of that.
I decided to look at the report, but first checked the authorship. The journal itself is published by John Tanton. The Southern Poverty Law Center recovered documents on Tanton: The Tanton Files | Southern Poverty Law Center - His motivations are out of racism, and that inherently damages all attempts from that individual to make a report against illegal immigration. Unless Tanton wins in a libel suit against the SPLC, I will take the SPLC document here as the truth. As for Rubenstein, the person who wrote the report, this SPLC article examines him and another report he wrote: Immigration Report Being Released Today Linked to White Supremacists | Hatewatch | Southern Poverty Law Center
- Who are these legal scholars? What are their standing in the legal community? How do you define judicial activism, or for that matter negative judicial activism?
The cites coming from VDare (why cite VDare?) or from FAIR (That is a case of one citing himself, like Jack Chick tracts citing works from Chick Publications - FAIR is also a creation of John Tanton) are 3 and 4 (VDare) and 7 and 10 (FAIR) - And then an editorial by Rich Lowry is cited for 16.
For instance the paper says
"Even Justice Brennan, in his majority opinion, admitted that "public education is not a 'right' granted to individuals by the Constitution."4" citing it to 4. Why cite a VDare report when they should have cited the original document in which justice Brennan commented? Were they afraid that if somebody saw the paper, they would see clarification and reasoning that would explain this? They should have directly cited the Supreme Court document or news source.
"Most legal scholars see Pyler v Doe as a naked usurpation of Congressional powers, an attempt to make up for the legislative branch's inability or unwillingness to deal with the illegal alien problem. Yet it stands as a monument to judicial activism." isn't sourced. It doesn't explain who these legal scholars are.
"Nearly two-thirds of the children of illegal aliens enrolled in U.S. schools were born in the U.S." isn't sourced.
"Illegal alien enrollment varies greatly among the states. California is widely acknowledged to have the heaviest concentration, with more than 15% of public school enrollments comprised of children of illegal aliens. In five other states-Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Nevada and Texas-at least one-in-ten students have parents who are illegal aliens. More than 5% of students are children of illegal immigrants in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, and Washington." - Cited to FAIR. By citing oneself or of "preaching to the choir" sites, it just obscures how the data was prepared, as the reader has to do more work to determine where the information came from. If there was a certain process, the publication should explain how the process what achieved in all of its original reports.
This is just a taste of what I feel about the report.
Let’s not turn this thread into a discussion of the SPLC, John Tanton, FAIR, or VDARE. The SPLC, once a reputable organization, has succumbed to greed and abandoned their traditional mission. In my opinion, they are no longer credible. We have discussed these hate profiteers at length on this forum. In fact, you and I have debated this issue. Why do you wish to rehash? Or, have you forgotten our previous discussion? Furthermore, I don’t reference VDARE.
Quote:
WASHINGTON, March 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- After the collapse of the Senate amnesty bill in 2007, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) joined with the National Council of La Raza and others to launch a campaign to smear the three largest mainstream groups making a case for tighter enforcement and lower immigration.
You cannot offer a cogent defense to justify the financial burden illegal immigration has inflicted on U.S. taxpayers. It is estimated there are 5.5 million children of illegal aliens living in this country. I don’t know the percentage of K-12 enrollment, but I would venture to guess at least 3 million are attending our public schools. Granted, some are the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. Nevertheless, NONE would be here, nor would our tax dollars fund their education, had their parents not chosen to disrespect this country by violating our laws.
Even if we calculate by using the lower $7,000 figure, 3 million children x $7,000 per child = 21 billion dollars annually. That doesn’t qualify as negligible by any stretch of the imagination.
Quote:
In the District, the spending figure cited most commonly is $8,322 per child, but total spending is close to $25,000 per child.
The state itself is facing some budget problems; they aren't to the degree that other states are experiencing. I know a place where it can cut some fat, though. The prison system is one of the largest state entities and is very costly. The state could close some prisons and the budget shortfall would be erased as the state makes money from the sale and no longer has some non-violent offenders under its care. To my knowledge it is the prison system, and not the education system which is truly straining Texas's budget. Texas eyes prison closures to cut budget deficit | www.raymondvillechroniclenews.com | Raymondville Chronicle News = the prison system is the place where Texas will cut its budget.
If the expenditures from education on illegals overall do strain the state, the newspapers will mention that the education budget would be bursting at the streams. Instead the newspapers generally talk about Texas closing prisons. After doing a Google News search, the newspaper archives dating to July 23, 2010 to now do not mention education as being a particular point of interest with the state budget. -- I used the search words "Texas," "education," "taxes," and deficit"
For that matter California, in my view, should close San Quentin and sell the land.
BTW Texas Governor Rick Perry signed legislation allowing illegal immigrant university students to pay in-state tuition: LULAC applauds court ruling on Arizona law, braces for fight in Texas | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Breaking News for Dallas-Fort Worth | Dallas Morning News - Legal status isn't an attribute in how someone is taxed in Texas. I wonder if Rick Perry thinks the concept of trying to get illegals to pay more for university is trying to get blood from a turnip. Nevertheless if the education spending goes over budget I would support making illegals pay out of state tuition. BTW Malamute, you are right - the situation demonstrated by the news article shows that the Government of Texas does want illegals in the state.
Not all cities of Texas are rolling in the dough like Houston might be.
EL PASO -- Dozens of master teachers in the El Paso Independent School District will be reassigned or see their pay reduced next year as part of widespread budget cuts.
District officials say they would cut $10 million from the budget by eliminating 86 central-office positions by the end of the 2010-11 school year.
And that is in spite of incredibly oppressive property taxes in the El Paso area.
1. The discussion should not solely be about any of those topics and so it shouldn't veer into too much detail about them, but they can be referenced in relation to the school spending report compiled by The Social Contract. I used the FAIR-Social Contract stuff brought up by SPLC to attack the credibility of the report you referenced. In addition I did not like the self-referencing business going on (as I looked at the citations).
I read the specific SPLC documents I mentioned, and I came to the conclusion that the motives held by Tanton do not help with the credibility of his organization and any reports produced by them. The SPLC's content stands unless Tanton successfully sues the SPLC in court for libel, slander, and/or defamation.
2. While we did discuss this earlier in that thread, the SPLC response to the FAIR report discussed in the thread still stands without a new FAIR response, and so the SPLC got the last word. If you want to continue the discussion about that particular issue in that thread, that is fine with you
Using an estimated 3 million, it is a bit of money to educate people who were born from illegals. My guess is that the US federal and/or state governments decided that it is penny "foolish" and pound wise if it is able to co-opt a significant number of the US citizen children into its society, and cause them to adopt an American identity and become taxpayers. There is a 2007 editorial from the Daily Advance that says "Editorial: Education good for illegals, good for N.C." - http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/...ckval=GooglePM - Unfortunately it is a pay access one, so unfortunately I can't read it. Someone at a library might be able to read it for free. I'll see if I can find other editorials that are favorable towards illegal immigration, so then you guys can go through its reasoning and see what you agree and disagree with what what logic is sound and what isn't.
Now as for the real cost of public schools: The spending figure is "$8,322 per child, but total spending is close to $25,000 per child" - This applies to DC. It may differ from state to state. In Texas, according to Michael Quinn Sullivan of the political advocacy group "Empower Texans" (his figure was posted by the National Center for Policy Analysis) the figure is about 11,000 per child, with less than half towards instructional expenses: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar
Let’s not turn this thread into a discussion of the SPLC, John Tanton, FAIR, or VDARE. The SPLC, once a reputable organization, has succumbed to greed and abandoned their traditional mission. In my opinion, they are no longer credible. We have discussed these hate profiteers at length on this forum. In fact, you and I have debated this issue. Why do you wish to rehash? Or, have you forgotten our previous discussion? Furthermore, I don’t reference VDARE.
You cannot offer a cogent defense to justify the financial burden illegal immigration has inflicted on U.S. taxpayers. It is estimated there are 5.5 million children of illegal aliens living in this country. I don’t know the percentage of K-12 enrollment, but I would venture to guess at least 3 million are attending our public schools. Granted, some are the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. Nevertheless, NONE would be here, nor would our tax dollars fund their education, had their parents not chosen to disrespect this country by violating our laws.
Even if we calculate by using the lower $7,000 figure, 3 million children x $7,000 per child = 21 billion dollars annually. That doesn’t qualify as negligible by any stretch of the imagination.
1. The discussion should not solely be about any of those topics and so it shouldn't veer into too much detail about them, but they can be referenced in relation to the school spending report compiled by The Social Contract. I used the FAIR-Social Contract stuff brought up by SPLC to attack the credibility of the report you referenced. In addition I did not like the self-referencing business going on (as I looked at the citations).
I read the specific SPLC documents I mentioned, and I came to the conclusion that the motives held by Tanton do not help with the credibility of his organization and any reports produced by them. The SPLC's content stands unless Tanton successfully sues the SPLC in court for libel, slander, and/or defamation.
2. While we did discuss this earlier in that thread, the SPLC response to the FAIR report discussed in the thread still stands without a new FAIR response, and so the SPLC got the last word. If you want to continue the discussion about that particular issue in that thread, that is fine with you
Using an estimated 3 million, it is a bit of money to educate people who were born from illegals. My guess is that the US federal and/or state governments decided that it is penny "foolish" and pound wise if it is able to co-opt a significant number of the US citizen children into its society, and cause them to adopt an American identity and become taxpayers. There is a 2007 editorial from the Daily Advance that says "Editorial: Education good for illegals, good for N.C." - Daily Advance | dailyadvance.com - Unfortunately it is a pay access one, so unfortunately I can't read it. Someone at a library might be able to read it for free. I'll see if I can find other editorials that are favorable towards illegal immigration, so then you guys can go through its reasoning and see what you agree and disagree with what what logic is sound and what isn't.
Now as for the real cost of public schools: The spending figure is "$8,322 per child, but total spending is close to $25,000 per child" - This applies to DC. It may differ from state to state. In Texas, according to the National Center for Policy Analysis, the figure is about 11,000 per child, with less than half towards instructional expenses: TEXAS SCHOOL SPENDING TOPS $11K PER PUPIL
The number of U.S.-born vs. foreign-born children is irrelevant. They remain the children of illegal aliens. In other words, people who have no legal right to be here. They ARE a burden, whether you choose to accept this reality or not.
Will you, or will you not, answer my question? Why should we assume this astronomical burden for the children of illegal aliens?
1. The reference from the Pew Hispanic Center broke down the number of US citizen children vs. non-citizen children of illegals. I was, and am, fully aware that both groups are children of illegals.
2. Will you, or will you not, take No. 3 as an answer? No. 3. is my supposition of why a state may want children of illegals to receive educational services.
For that matter http://www.news-press.com/article/20...s-long-overdue , an editorial, argues that children of illegal immigrants will become productive Americans if they are allowed to receive educational services. This matches the argument I thought of for point 3.
The editorial says: "Culturally and socially, these kids are as American as Mom’s pie. They grew up pledging allegiance to our flag and have little or no connection to any other country. It is unjust and inhumane to deny these kids the chance to continue building productive lives under the Stars and Stripes." and "But it is both just and fiscally sound to give these kids a chance to legally become what they have grown up to be: Americans." This is what the editorial is arguing. This is what you need to counter.
As an additional piece of information, Education Week concluded that most English language learners in the U.S. school system do NOT have at least one illegal parent; this is after Education Week analyzed reports from FAIR and the Pew Hispanic Center: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learn..._children.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar
The number of U.S.-born vs. foreign-born children is irrelevant. They remain the children of illegal aliens. In other words, people who have no legal right to be here. They ARE a burden, whether you choose to accept this reality or not.
Will you, or will you not, answer my question? Why should we assume this astronomical burden for the children of illegal aliens?
1. The reference from the Pew Hispanic Center broke down the number of US citizen children vs. non-citizen children of illegals. I was, and am, fully aware that both groups are children of illegals.
2. Will you, or will you not, take No. 3 as an answer? No. 3. is my supposition of why a state may want children of illegals to receive educational services.
I’m not interested in the state’s position. I asked for your opinion. Why do YOU believe we have an obligation to foot the bill for their education?
I’m not interested in the state’s position. I asked for your opinion. Why do YOU believe we have an obligation to foot the bill for their education?
In that case I'll state my personal opinion: By providing education services to a child of an illegal immigrant, this is the potential:
* He or she has the potential to have allegiance to the country as he or she was socialized in our culture and taught the values of American culture and the duties of citizenship
* He or she may get a scholarship for higher education (or work a job to get money to pay for school, or both) and proceed to at minimum become a well-respected contributing worker, paying taxes that make up for whatever was spent by the state(s) and the federal government to educate him or her from K to 12 - If the child becomes successful he or she could introduce a new business or scientific concept and enrich the country's knowledge base (political, scientific, etc.) - Historically the country has gained intellectual strength from immigrants and children of immigrants - The children likely will have little motivation to live and work in their parents' countries.
* When children are in the USA, the family (or the branch of the family that remains in the USA) becomes assimilated as the older immigrants die and as the second generation gives birth to the third
* By creating more assimilated Americans, the American citizen population growth rate will remain in the positive - Several European countries have had problems with negative growth rates.
* For the US citizen children, even if they live and work abroad, the US federal government still tries to tax them - Here is a taxation guide for US citizens living abroad: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p54/index.html
Out of the, say, 3 million children who are sons and daughters of illegals in the United States who are attending K-12 schools, there is a good possibility that at least a few of them will make a lasting significant contribution to the fabric of this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
Not all cities of Texas are rolling in the dough like Houston might be.
EL PASO -- Dozens of master teachers in the El Paso Independent School District will be reassigned or see their pay reduced next year as part of widespread budget cuts.
District officials say they would cut $10 million from the budget by eliminating 86 central-office positions by the end of the 2010-11 school year.
And that is in spite of incredibly oppressive property taxes in the El Paso area.
It's a problem when the district is cutting special needs budgets, because those often need the money. I can live with admin positions being cut (oftentimes they can and should be cut). But there is a problem when special needs is cut. I understand that EPISD may have students who are residents of Mexico but may falsify addresses to attend EPISD schools. Because they don't contribute property tax money into the EPISD system, they should not be attending EPISD schools. If the students have grandmothers or aunts in the EPISD side, they should make the grandmothers' or aunts' households into their primary residences so they are considered to be "taxpayers" in the EPISD system. Or if they want to live in Mexico but attend EPISD, they should pay tuition.
Last edited by Vicman; 07-30-2010 at 02:00 AM..
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.
