No kids-Why do we have to pay school tax (Dallas: property taxes, income)

[perfctplace3]

Could the poor parents who can't afford to pay for their children's education at least not have 4,5,6 or more children? My parents didn't have a lot of money, but they also only had 2 children. They paid for my education themselves.

[googie2525]

Originally Posted by perfctplace3

Could the poor parents who can't afford to pay for their children's education at least not have 4,5,6 or more children? My parents didn't have a lot of money, but they also only had 2 children. They paid for my education themselves.

You said it, my thoughts eggs-zachary! Boy, we're gonna get it now, "politicaly incorrect" as they say - but this issue is a real thorn in my side as well. My parents were not affluent, lower middle-class actually, so thus had one child (me, 'natch). Our neighbors were in the same boat, but had six children, yes, SIX (food stamps galore over there). Anyhoo, it's just common sense, can't afford a new Porsche? Buy a used Toyota. Can't afford five kids, well, then have two, you know? Basic math. I'm rambling here I know, but, man, if folks would just stop having so many dang kids to overcrowd the school system (AND the planet), we wouldn't be taxed out of our a**es, and we wouldn't be headed the way of some severely overpopulated third world nation with a non-existent middle class ala "Soylent Green" - well, maybe the Soylent Green reference is a bit extreme - but you catch my drift.

An example, my fiance and I have discussed children. We've decided to hold off until we can afford top-notch private education (for a MAX of two children, maybe even one...heck, we may even skip 'em altogether and just travel the world a few years!), and provide them ample clothing, health care, and a jillion other things like music lessons, art lessons, summer camps, etc., things that will enrich their lives. Basically, we want them to have better lives than we had as children. I mean, jeez, really, folks, kids aren't pets.

[wCat]

Guess you can blame this "forefather" for our present tax situation. Thought this would be interesting when you consider the date it was written. (see bottom)



The Want of Schools in San Antonio

"The apathy of San Antonio in reference to the subject of education is reprehensible - is positively shameful. The town is located in the most healthy portion of the State. Two rivers, whose sources are within it's suburbs, send their cool and refreshing currents in every direction throughout its limits. It's population in numbers and in wealth far outstrips any city of Texas and it's corporate facilities are immense. At this moment, San Antonio has property within it's control and ownership exceeding in value the large sum of two hundred thousand dollars.

With such vast means at its command, the deplorable spectacle is witnessed of a large and well improved and prosperous city lying dormant on the most invaluable of all subject - the cause of education. Within short distances, in almost every direction, small towns have sprung up with nothing to sustain them but a sparse agricultural people, and they have built costly edifices and endowed them with the most excellent apparatus, and procured competent teachers from abroad and filled their institutions with pupils. All this causes no blush to opulent, commercial San Antonio that dates its origin near two centuries back.

With no disrespect to the excellent and worthy gentlemen in charge, some two or three day schools are struggling out a sickly existence, pining away for want of patronage. We have in our midst a Nunnery for the education of young ladies, sustained by the unwearied efforts of a religious order.

The stranger, as he views the various improvements, the broad Plazas, the noble structures for mart, and is informed of the vast wealth of the town, is justly shcoked when told that one or two miserably ventilated rooms with a dozen or so of suffocated scholars combine our entire educational resources, and must necessarily form a low estimate of the morals and information of the people.

Our city is noted for it's mercantile energy. A railway scheme summons the masses in convention and elicits copius investment. Trains of interminable extent, loaded with supplies and merchandize of every discription, are constantly arriving and departing. Our citizens are filling their pouches with money, but pay no regard to the formation of the minds and morals of the generation that must soon succeed them. The young of the town are sadly and criminally neglected. And the matter should arrest our attention at once.

Why, the little town of Sequin is already noted throughout the State for it's fine schools, and derives a large revenue from it's foreign pupils, and but a week or two ago we recorded the startling fact that a large number of families had removed to Bastrop solely to procure educational facitlities for their growing families. How shameful and mortifying that we permit these humble places to outstrip us in this important matter.

It's high time that our Common Council should act vigorously to obtain premises. Let the subscription book be put in immediate circulation. Let proper buildings be erected though it plunge the city in debt. Let the stain be removed from our escutcheon!"

- Published in the 2 Sep 1852 edition of the San Antonio Ledger

[Eleanor Rigby]

I love the phrase, "Let the stain be removed from our escutcheon!". It has such a wonderful sound to it.

[pippo]

You have to look at School Tax as not paying to educate your kids but to pay to help educate all kids. You may not have kids but you do "reap" the benefits. The guy or gal at McDonalds needs to be educated to take your money. Also the kid getting the fundamentals needed to go to college so he or she can give you that bypass when your 50 is being funded by your school tax. And yes, my wife and I do not (can not) have kids.

[imaterry78259]

I only want to pay a nominal fee of $1000.00 for school tax. How come my generation got educated and became doctors, lawyers and strippers without this insane school tax? I even walk to school 1.5 miles going and coming each day and carried the girls books home from school.

[F10gear]

Originally Posted by perfctplace3

Could the poor parents who can't afford to pay for their children's education at least not have 4,5,6 or more children? My parents didn't have a lot of money, but they also only had 2 children. They paid for my education themselves.

Don't you think you're generalizing just a bit. Not all poor parents have 4,5,6 or more children. That's like saying all Texans are rednecks. I can guarantee that my school tax dollars are being wasted on some kids in my own neighborhood who will do nothing with their lives. There are abusers of the system on every economic level, so let's not pick on poor families please. Times are also different than when we were kids. You know the old saying: Until you walk a mile in someone else's shoes...

[jules07]

Originally Posted by F10gear

Don't you think you're generalizing just a bit. Not all poor parents have 4,5,6 or more children. That's like saying all Texans are rednecks. I can guarantee that my school tax dollars are being wasted on some kids in my own neighborhood who will do nothing with their lives. There are abusers of the system on every economic level, so let's not pick on poor families please. Times are also different than when we were kids. You know the old saying: Until you walk a mile in someone else's shoes...

Zactly!!! Also, I resent/am offended by the other generalization that this implies; that all parents who have several children are poor/ignorant/not concerned about the environment, etc., etc..... We have 7 children (yes ~ all his, mine, ours), have never once been on welfare, WIC, unemployment, Medicare/CHIPS, used a public jail system/public legal defender, etc., etc. We recycle, drive fuel efficient cars, are constantly looking for/implementing ways to reduce our energy consumption, eat little meat and as much organic food as possible, etc., etc. And up until this year we've always homeschooled our kids, so you all's tax dollars have not "supported" our kids education until now. (And with the few years that these have left in school, even if they do stay in public school {which is doubtful} "you" will still be paying for less years than "you" do for folks with only 3 kids who go to public school all 13 years.) F10gear is right ~ there are abusers of the system on every economic level. There are folks everyday who are taking whatever they can get out of the "system" because they don't see it as our (ALL of our) tax dollars.

{ahem, steps off soapbox }

[bornandraisedSA]

Originally Posted by jules07

Zactly!!! Also, I resent/am offended by the other generalization that this implies; that all parents who have several children are poor/ignorant/not concerned about the environment, etc., etc..... We have 7 children (yes ~ all his, mine, ours), have never once been on welfare, WIC, unemployment, Medicare/CHIPS, used a public jail system/public legal defender, etc., etc. We recycle, drive fuel efficient cars, are constantly looking for/implementing ways to reduce our energy consumption, eat little meat and as much organic food as possible, etc., etc. And up until this year we've always homeschooled our kids, so you all's tax dollars have not "supported" our kids education until now. (And with the few years that these have left in school, even if they do stay in public school {which is doubtful} "you" will still be paying for less years than "you" do for folks with only 3 kids who go to public school all 13 years.) F10gear is right ~ there are abusers of the system on every economic level. There are folks everyday who are taking whatever they can get out of the "system" because they don't see it as our (ALL of our) tax dollars.

{ahem, steps off soapbox }

well said...it's "unfair" on many levels, from many different perspectives - but at the same time, it is what it is - with the alternative (no tax for those not having kids) probably not a better solution.....however I do agree that with the exception of advanced technology, schools are "overbuilt" in terms of "fanciness" (and I am a teacher). I always cringe a bit when the heads of the district seem to "brag" a bit about their "state of the art" (read OVERPRICED) schools being built. Yes, I want them to be nice, but there are many who have gone too far and of course ALOT of waste we can't really "see" (which is probably an even bigger problem than the buildings)

[jules07]

bornandraisedSA - you're right ~ "it is what it is". I mean, public education is just that ~ public. Support by the public, for the public. And it's been that way for how long now?! A darned long time. We all pay taxes for things we don't use. I've never been in jail (same with all the members of my family). My taxes still support the jail system. It's for the common good. We've never used any kind of government assistance (ie welfare, medicare, etc.) but my taxes still pay for them. For the common good. For many, many years, I was with all you childless folks, paying school taxes for public schools which my children didn't use. For the common good. I pay city taxes which support the public library system which I do use. But so do a whole lot of folks who live outside the city limits to avoid paying city taxes.

Every state/city/municipality has a tax system for public services, whether that be state income tax, property taxes, sales tax, gas tax, cigarette tax, etc. etc. And every area supports their public schools through some type of taxation. We're just more acutely aware of how much goes to the public schools because of the way it's broken down on our tax bill. Now, if you want to argue about where the money is going (as bornandraisedSA pointed out), that's another topic and one that might be able to do some good.

(I need to get off and stay off this darned soapbox today!! )