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.
I 100% support publicly funding education, that doesn't mean I support the current system. Currently the US spends more per student than most other nations. Here in PA education spending has about doubled in the last two decades and that is adjusted for inflation, testing scores have remained flatlined. Current spending here is about $16K per student which puts on par with very small and rich nations like Switzerland.
Where are the results of all this spending?
Well it sure the hell ain't in teacher's salaries.
The quality of education is better when school districts are smaller. You don't want to have large massive consolidated school districts like in California and Nevada. The large number of small districts is why NJ and MA have the best schools in the country. When a school district has more than 50K kids it is no longer able to function.
That's silly and grossly impractical. More 6 figure administrative staff don't correlate to better school districts, how districts use their money to educate does.
I thought Republicans were all for more jobs, not fewer jobs.
More private sector, wealth-producing jobs that actually add to the aggregate economic pie and which do not use tax revenues as payroll. Ayup. Definitely need more of those. Millions more.
More public sector jobs? Not so much. We could stand to lose a whole bunch of those, certainly.
I 100% support publicly funding education, that doesn't mean I support the current system. Currently the US spends more per student than most other nations. Here in PA education spending has about doubled in the last two decades and that is adjusted for inflation, testing scores have remained flatlined. Current spending here is about $16K per student which puts on par with very small and rich nations like Switzerland.
Where are the results of all this spending?
Very well compensated public employees with gold plated pensions and benefits...
They blame the elimination of the state and local income tax deductions I guess. If liberal, high-tax states want to tax away, they are free to so under the new plan, its just conservative low-tax states that respect taxpayers money like Nevada and Texas won't subsidize blue, liberal high-income tax states taxpayers anymore.
I guess that liberals are concerned that since state and local income taxes won't be deductable anymore under the greatest tax reform since Reagan that they will have to cut their excessive state and local income taxes.
California has a 10% income tax and seperate SDI tax combined for taxable income above $53,000 a year that will no longer be able deducted under the President Trump simplified and fair tax proposals.
If you want your state taxes reduced, who is going to pay for your improvement to your infrastructure...state roads, bridges. I hope you don't think the federal government will do that for you. Good luck with your state having the money. Many of my taxes go to cleaning up the Chesapeake bay which most of the state supports.
More private sector, wealth-producing jobs that actually add to the aggregate economic pie and which do not use tax revenues as payroll. Ayup. Definitely need more of those. Millions more.
More public sector jobs? Not so much. We could stand to lose a whole bunch of those, certainly.
Unfortunately for all of us, the tax bill wont help with any of that.
But apparently we are all along for this stupid ride
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.