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.
It is a well known and researched fact; higher education levels achieved by females equates with lower birth rates.
Latino-Hispanic covers a wide range of persons. As various groups move up the economic ladder, their females tend to follow same path as others; having less children.
Have read accounts from Mexican and other young Latinas who managed to get themselves through college and land decent to good jobs. They all recalled their mothers and grandmothers saddled with large families along with constant worries about money, food, etc... They're not going to repeat that mistake.
It is a well known and researched fact; higher education levels achieved by females equates with lower birth rates.
Latino-Hispanic covers a wide range of persons. As various groups move up the economic ladder, their females tend to follow same path as others; having less children.
Have read accounts from Mexican and other young Latinas who managed to get themselves through college and land decent to good jobs. They all recalled their mothers and grandmothers saddled with large families along with constant worries about money, food, etc... They're not going to repeat that mistake.
LI schools with significant declining enrollment have been steadily laying off and not replacing departing classroom teachers. (Not necessarily the case with admins and SPEC ED/ENL teaching positions.) Very little fanfare and those sorts of savings are insignificant with the huge school district budgets.
Potential great savings comes from any subsequent closure and sale of school buildings within a district. Beyond the savings in building maintenance, physical plant operations, and building administration, property sales generate cash and moving property to the tax rolls (forever) is a real financial benefit to the taxpayers.
But, this wise move is frequently delayed/prevented by competing interests. Northport is a perfect example. 3 empty buildings…and nothing but bickering.
The Northport East Northport school board is pausing a plan to consider selling or leasing some of its buildings to determine if more suitable options are available.
The decision to slow down the process comes from a recommendation from the committee that came up with the idea and a community meeting on Oct. 5 where most speakers said they oppose the plan.
In September the board unveiled several proposals to sell or lease three of its school buildings for housing or other uses, citing declining enrollment and an expected $2 million reduction in revenue resulting from the reduced tax assessment of the Northport LIPA power plant. The buildings that were under consideration for sale or lease include Bellerose Avenue Elementary and Dickinson Avenue Elementary schools and the William J. Brosnan administrative building.
"Wantagh School District has about $15.25 million in the bank, split up among various reserve funds. Some residents say that total is too high. District officials and auditors say the reserves keep Wantagh schools in good fiscal health."
Sooner or later many towns on LI will have to face the fact because it is a fact that post WWII baby and housing boom that largely was responsible for growth is over, and never no more coming back.
This isn't 1950's through say 1970's where scores if not hundreds of families are fleeing NYC with either several kids in tow, and or making that or more once they have a house.
Irony is as other posters have pointed out these towns don't want zoning changes that will bring housing density (which by the way would go far in providing affordable housing so young people born and raised on LI can remain), so they stick their heads in sand and keep saying "there's light at end of tunnel". Well sometimes that light at end of a tunnel is a train!
OTOH as many young people and others flee LI due to affordability issues you have new arrivals (Asians and others) with two or more families living in a house each with two or several children. So you're getting students in public schools but tax base reflect reality of many living in a single family home.
Even though I'm a fan, Long Island is certainly a different place than it was 50 years ago; not the place for working class folk to want to raise kids.
Is this only a local issue? Are there regions of the country where the school-aged population is increasing?
Even though I'm a fan, Long Island is certainly a different place than it was 50 years ago; not the place for working class folk to want to raise kids.
Is this only a local issue? Are there regions of the country where the school-aged population is increasing?
Prolly Amish country
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
Even though I'm a fan, Long Island is certainly a different place than it was 50 years ago; not the place for working class folk to want to raise kids.
Is this only a local issue? Are there regions of the country where the school-aged population is increasing?
Post-war USA you had coming together several unique circumstances that likely won't be seen never no more.
First was a housing policy that saw federal government pump billions into home building (largely in suburbs but urban areas as well) in part to deal with housing shortages that grew worse after WWII.
Part two of above was the baby boom and people needed (or wanted) space for themselves and their kids.
Bringing it all together was vast amounts of land in suburbs or country (farm land, great estates being broken up, etc...) that could be had relatively cheaply. In urban areas there was simply use of Urban Renewal (eminent domain).
USA emerged after WWII as word's superpower (taking that mantle from Great Britain) and entered a period of unprecentated prosperity.
Returning servicemen were offered all sorts of incentives such as GI Bill. Manufacturing shifted from wartime to consumer production and raced to satisfy pent up consumer demand.
Lurking beneath surface and coming to rise by 1960' and certainly 1970's were vast changes in US economy and roles of women among other things. Second to last bit included access to safe and effective birth control (the Pill) and legal abortion.
Working class families soon caught onto what wealthy Protestants had long learned; having excess of children often brings down standard of living. When Catholics of all sorts (Irish, German, Italian, etc... ) stopped having huge families (this regardless of what the Pope said and Church taught) there went one once reliable supply of large amounts of children.
By 1960 US birthrates plummeted and remained low through 1970's into 1980's. Things began to pick-up by 1990's onward but are still largely below historical average.
People complain that working to middle class families aren't having large number or any children. Flip it around and look at huge investment of time and money and you can see why couples don't bother or are highly reluctant.
Maybe back in day a couple would be happy raising three or more kids in a small starter "Levittown" type house. Today that's not a universally welcomed proposition. More so when even a starter house in good part of LI is going to cost dear.
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.
