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.
Texas has robin hood financing. All the money goes to the state and the state doles it out to school districts.
The affluent districts are complaining though; they want to keep all their money and let the poor districts figure out another way to raise money.
That is what is driving an effort to appeal robin hood financing.
Another thing the affluent school districts are doing is pooling their personal money through the PTA and hiring their own teachers for their schools.
New building and stadiums are bond issues voted on by the residents.
Any city can vote to build a new school but the financing is via municipal bonds and the poor districts just don't have good bond ratings and investors wouldn't buy them.
Booster clubs for everything
Look at Austin School District, compared to Lake Travis, Eanes, Just over the hill.
From the link:
" The trend emerged gradually over the past three decades but accelerated during the worst economic slump since the 1930s. Now, enrollments at pricier private schools are climbing. Parents are bidding up home prices in top public school districts. Pay is surging for SAT tutors, who now average twice the median U.S. hourly wage of $24.45.
Between 2007 and 2011, enrollment at private elementary and secondary schools whose annual tuition averaged $28,340 jumped 36 percent, according to federal data. The intensified reach for the costliest schools occurred even as enrollment in private schools overall fell."
Without real progressive income taxes wealth will always concentrate into the pockets of the already wealthy at the expense of the workers that actually generate the Value Added that is wealth. Once the wealthy have the wealth they will do everything they can to get more and to pass it on to their heirs. The logical result is one family owning all the productive investments to the exclusion of everyone else.
One way to eliminate this bias in the system is to implement an Income Tax based on all income from all sources. Such a tax should have a base deductible equal to at least the 80th percentile of all incomes with the rates on incomes above the deductible varying from 20 to 80%. As corporations are now considered citizens for political speech they would also be considered individuals for tax calculations. Corporations would have to sum all their income from sales and subtract their expenses, including dividends, and pay at the appropriate rate based on their retained income.
The primary advantage of this system is those with the most to protect would pay the government the most for that protection. The only negative of this system would be a buyer's market in luxury mansions and similar excesses. That is a small price for them to pay for the rest of us to have real economic freedom.
Without real progressive income taxes wealth will always concentrate into the pockets of the already wealthy at the expense of the workers that actually generate the Value Added that is wealth. Once the wealthy have the wealth they will do everything they can to get more and to pass it on to their heirs. The logical result is one family owning all the productive investments to the exclusion of everyone else.
The wealth gap is not growing because of taxes, it's growing because of Fed/government policy.
Quote:
]One way to eliminate this bias in the system is to implement an Income Tax based on all income from all sources. Such a tax should have a base deductible equal to at least the 80th percentile of all incomes with the rates on incomes above the deductible varying from 20 to 80%.
You are arguing to treat the symptoms as opposed to the disease. It makes no sense to create billions that overwhelmingly harm one group (poor/middle class) while helping others (wealthy) and then tax the wealthy. Just don't do it in the first place.
Quote:
As corporations are now considered citizens for political speech they would also be considered individuals for tax calculations. Corporations would have to sum all their income from sales and subtract their expenses, including dividends, and pay at the appropriate rate based on their retained income.
It's been noted over and over that corporations do not pay taxes, their customers do and all this will do is raise prices that those already being harmed are having trouble paying now.
Quote:
The primary advantage of this system is those with the most to protect would pay the government the most for that protection. The only negative of this system would be a buyer's market in luxury mansions and similar excesses. That is a small price for them to pay for the rest of us to have real economic freedom.
Simply stating this does not make it factual. Using what appears to be non biased information the richest school district is 1) Scarsdale Union Free School District, N.Y.
Now granted they pay more than the very poorest school system which is listed as 1) Barbourville Independent School District, Ky.
The average income in the top school is $238,000 and the average teacher pay is $62,108. Granted a decent wage but the average property tax is $31,000. That is well over half the teachers income after other taxes. So how well off are these teachers actually?
The average income in the Ky district is $16,607. The average teacher pay is $43,411. The medium home price is $81,000 so a teacher in that district is actually doing pretty darn well.
So, I will ask, is your assumptions here actually true? Where would a teacher be better off?
There's a sick joke that resembles reality in affluent high schools relative to the cars in the parking lot. The teachers are driving used Hondas while many of the kids have tricked out new Jeeps, Mercedes and there's always a dash of a few Hummers.
You make a huge assumption that teachers can afford to live in the affluent districts they teach. In the rare case when they do, it is almost always because they live in a two income household and have enough equity in prior homes to swing it.
None of this takes into consideration that teachers in affluent districts tend to have multiple full time assistants/aids. There was a huge uproar in Briarcliff Manor a few years ago, when the board fired all teaching aides and replaced them with substantially less costly assistants, unemployed teachers, a reflection of the" take whatever job you can get" reality. The district saved $10-15,000 a year, per aide, plus benefits.
The district saved money and put the burden on the state and federal government and then blame government for the welfare state. The decreed teaching qualified assistants make a tad more than minimum wage teaching and supporting the children of affluent parents.
And this is good....to some extent. Until such point as the broad middle class starts to crump, and then the whole shebang begins to crumble.
Education is so vitally important and so key to the future welfare and prospects of our people, the very best should be available to all. Or at least the opportunity to get the very best.
The middle class would like this, but doesn't know how to get it.
And that's why they're not the rich.
The money is there, but the middle class either doesn't know or doesn't want to know how to get it.
There's a sick joke that resembles reality in affluent high schools relative to the cars in the parking lot. The teachers are driving used Hondas while many of the kids have tricked out new Jeeps, Mercedes and there's always a dash of a few Hummers.
You make a huge assumption that teachers can afford to live in the affluent districts they teach. In the rare case when they do, it is almost always because they live in a two income household and have enough equity in prior homes to swing it.
You are the one making assumptions, I never made any.
What's happening is the reliance on local property taxes to fund schools has become unsustainable for poorer districts. States have been reducing the amount of money they are giving to school districts and forcing local governments and districts to make up the difference. No biggie if you live in a wealthy area with high property values, but a huge deal in you live in a district with high levels of poverty and or low property values, which in turn creates absurdly high millage rates which further depresses the value of property.
The affluent school districts around here are building $100 million+ high schools and turning out senior classes with 98% college acceptance rates while the middle class and poor districts are laying off teachers and barely keeping the lights on. It's a huge problem.
I pay some insanely high property taxes, but I also have a reasonable expectation of a good education for my children. That said i believe it's a shame that the quality of a public school facility and the education received in it is based on a childs address and the amount of taxes his or her parents can afford to pay. It's a failure that perpetuates income inequality in this country.
Be glad you don't live in TX, where "Robin Hood" means that property-wealthy districts have to throw a good chunk of their money at poor districts along the border and other places within the state.
It's been found unconstitutional, but they haven't come up with anything to replace it.
All districts should be able to keep all of the money generated by local property taxes for THEIR schools.
As it is, they have to cut back because so much of their money went to some poor district. It is patently unfair that they have to subsidize other districts that don't pay nearly as much.
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.
