State Feeling Pinch of Lost Corporate Tax Revenue, expected to exceed 538 million annually starting in 2018 (school, income)

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by ftbowie

More funding doesn't equal better results...

It does when you're at the same funding level as Mississippi. Eventually, trimming the fat becomes hitting the bones.

[GeneR]

Originally Posted by ftbowie

More funding doesn't equal better results...Some of the States with the highest spending have the worst schools and other States with low funding have excellent schools. The most important factors are cultural and money won't solve that.

This is exactly the point although there are some in the political class who believe it's all about input rather than output. No matter the results, if more money is spent that must mean a problem is being solved. Intentions are more important than results.

Businesses (yes, even corporations) pay more attention to output (results). This is why capitalism is so successful because it is all about getting the most output for the smallest input. It is THE most efficient system in the world today.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by GeneR

This is exactly the point although there are some in the political class who believe it's all about input rather than output. No matter the results, if more money is spent that must mean a problem is being solved. Intentions are more important than results.

Businesses (yes, even corporations) pay more attention to output (results). This is why capitalism is so successful because it is all about getting the most output for the smallest input. It is THE most efficient system in the world today.

This would be a good point if our output was good. But it's not.

We have low input with low return.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by GeneR

This is exactly the point although there are some in the political class who believe it's all about input rather than output. No matter the results, if more money is spent that must mean a problem is being solved. Intentions are more important than results.

Businesses (yes, even corporations) pay more attention to output (results). This is why capitalism is so successful because it is all about getting the most output for the smallest input. It is THE most efficient system in the world today.

Capitalism without controls (checks / balances) is just as bad as pure socialism, in some cases it's much worse.

Did you know the lead industry was actively working to change building codes to *require* lead pipes until the mid 1970's, even though many cities were removing lead pipes as early as the 1920's?

School taxes pay to create the next generation of well-trained employees, as well as citizens who are capable of telling the difference between sloganism and real ideas. Why are the corporatists so afraid of an educated populace if their ideas are so wonderful?

[GeneR]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

This would be a good point if our output was good. But it's not.

We have low input with low return.

There are numerous criteria for measuring "success" in education. The more prominent measures include the amount of money spent per student. Again this goes to intent rather than results. The assumption being that the more you spend the better the school. Finding criteria that does not include this measure is difficult. U.S. News uses data that does not include the factor of "intent":

"A three-step process determined the Best High Schools. The first two steps ensured that the schools serve all of their students well, using their performance on the math and reading parts of their state proficiency tests as the benchmarks. For those schools that made it past the first two steps, a third step assessed the degree to which schools prepare students for college-level work."

There are many other means tests for rankings but I've found a primary measure of schools, almost without fail, includes how much money per student is spent. Apparently when this measure is removed AZ does quite well in preparing students. According to the criteria stated above AZ ranks 26th nationally* ahead of such education braggarts as IA, MN and OR which rank 41, 47 and 27 respectively.. AZ input in education may close to the bottom but output is apparently doing quite nicely.

*AZ has 3 schools ranked in the nation's top 20 high schools.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by GeneR

There are numerous criteria for measuring "success" in education. The more prominent measures include the amount of money spent per student. Again this goes to intent rather than results. The assumption being that the more you spend the better the school. Finding criteria that does not include this measure is difficult. U.S. News uses data that does not include the factor of "intent":

"A three-step process determined the Best High Schools. The first two steps ensured that the schools serve all of their students well, using their performance on the math and reading parts of their state proficiency tests as the benchmarks. For those schools that made it past the first two steps, a third step assessed the degree to which schools prepare students for college-level work."

There are many other means tests for rankings but I've found a primary measure of schools, almost without fail, includes how much money per student is spent. Apparently when this measure is removed AZ does quite well in preparing students. According to the criteria stated above AZ ranks 26th nationally* ahead of such education braggarts as IA, MN and OR which rank 41, 47 and 27 respectively.. AZ input in education may close to the bottom but output is apparently doing quite nicely.

*AZ has 3 schools ranked in the nation's top 20 high schools.

The practical consequence of reduced State funding to public schools is that the overall funding to schools doesn't necessarily go down. But what happens being that districts begin to rely on localized funding instead of state funding for their school districts. That means that where the State cuts, USDs where there is a wealthy population, like Northern Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, and Chandler the schools come out alright, they have the money, the active population etc.

What the consequence becomes is those school districts serving poor and rural areas. For example, if we look at a school district in Coolidge or some comparable area, they lose state funding, their citizens can't afford tax hikes and their schools suffer.

When we say we are cutting funding from the State what we are doing is shifting the tax burden from the State to individualized areas. See Pima County. That usually amounts to a tax hike on ordinary people, and poor people in rural areas being hit especially hard in this regard. But at the same time, the State has no issue committing to items like HURF Sweeps in rural counties in order to fix urban highways in Phoenix, how else do you think we are one of the only Metropolitan areas able to afford such vast state funded highways?

So the State has no issue taking money in sweeps for rural roads, yet also has no issue reducing their funding to schools affecting rural areas, who then have to increase their taxes.

Ideologically we can say that areas should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc. but your rural Arizonan isn't sending their child to Basis as you are purporting.

Because the most recent funding cuts, and likely future education funding cuts, schools outputs will reduce, the 26 figure is before the most recent budget, and before it has had time to set in. It also falls in line with my post, it isn't that every school itself is underfunded by way of lack of State funding, it's that wealthier areas will necessarily have much better school at increasing paces as the State continues to cut the budget. As always, where there is a state budget cut, it is minimized in Maricopa County but is more practically affected in almost every other area of the State.

Thus poor inputs, poor outputs by the state. Controlling the inputs is based on localized attitudes, and financial abilities.

[ftbowie]

Hogwash....Asian students of every economic level excel because of their culture and values. There is no causation between funding and test scores. DC spends more than anyone and has terrible schools. Some of the top States for education spend very little. A certain segment of the population explains everything in terms of money and funding and it's a fallacy.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by ftbowie

Hogwash....Asian students of every economic level excel because of their culture and values. There is no causation between funding and test scores. DC spends more than anyone and has terrible schools. Some of the top States for education spend very little. A certain segment of the population explains everything in terms of money and funding and it's a fallacy.

Care to expand and explain what you are saying in this otherwise thought provoking and reasoned post?

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by ftbowie

More funding doesn't equal better results...Some of the States with the highest spending have the worst schools and other States with low funding have excellent schools. The most important factors are cultural and money won't solve that.

Absolutely right! More funding only results in more money being swiped from taxpayers' wallets to subsidize a beast of burden that accomplishes nothing except creating more bureaucracy. Education should be privatized and run like any other business entity. Keeping it operated by the government makes it costly & ineffective, and produces little in the way of quality.

Originally Posted by Zippyman

School taxes pay to create the next generation of well-trained employees, as well as citizens who are capable of telling the difference between sloganism and real ideas. Why are the corporatists so afraid of an educated populace if their ideas are so wonderful?

School taxes accomplish what you stated only in a person's dreams. The reality is that public schools are places for lazy parents to send their kids as their free daycare service, and they are costly burdens for responsible people who choose to not have kids. Nobody is afraid of an educated populace. Most people, including myself, are all in favor of an educated populace ... however, the only way to successfully accomplish this is to get the government out of education all together and let private enterprise take over.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Absolutely right! More funding only results in more money being swiped from taxpayers' wallets to subsidize a beast of burden that accomplishes nothing except creating more bureaucracy. Education should be privatized and run like any other business entity. Keeping it operated by the government makes it costly & ineffective, and produces little in the way of quality.



School taxes accomplish what you stated only in a person's dreams. The reality is that public schools are places for lazy parents to send their kids as their free daycare service, and they are costly burdens for responsible people who choose to not have kids. Nobody is afraid of an educated populace. Most people, including myself, are all in favor of an educated populace ... however, the only way to successfully accomplish this is to get the government out of education all together and let private enterprise take over.

the system you envision allows only the wealthy to obtain education, even if their intellectual abilities would normally relegate them to bagging groceries. So people who aren't even capable of stringing together a sentence go to Harvard, and the poor get nothing, even if they're geniuses. That's an awesome system for the 1% - until the pleebs start chopping their heads off & burning their castles. We're already fairly close to your ideal if Bush the 2nd was any indicator.