Possibility of shorter academic year (Los Angeles, Kennedy: loan, house, purchase)

[Snort]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

A. Teachers are not in SEIU
B. Teachers fund their own retirement.

That's true.
Calstrs does invest that money, and sometimes they do well and sometimes they don't. Brown’s CalSTRS problem | Thoughts on Public Education

From the CTA: "What this means for the pension fund: As the unfunded liability continues to increase, CalSTRS members, the California Legislature and the governor will need to develop solutions to contribution rates that everyone can accept."

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

2009-10 Budget Analysis Series: Revenues


Doesn't mean there is a revenue problem.. just means the corrupt clowns in California's government are short changing everyone and spending money on foolishness

You lost me there, I don't understand how that position is validated in your provided links.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by Snort

That's true enough, but have a look at administration in school districts as well. Not as big a financial burden, but still an old boy's (girl's) network that maintains its own existence while they cut those closest to the students: teachers, aides, supplemental staff.

That as well. So many havens of waste, so little time.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

A. Teachers are not in SEIU
B. Teachers fund their own retirement.

I was referring to other factors decimating the State's monies. But you raise an interesting point, the teachers' unions vote in ways that are inimical to limited government. Union dues at work.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

2009-10 Budget Analysis Series: Revenues


Doesn't mean there is a revenue problem.. just means the corrupt clowns in California's government are short changing everyone and spending money on foolishness

This pretty much tells all regarding the oft repeated claim by the Fabians that Prop 13 is the root cause of all evil. Sure, there are a few old hold outs with low property taxes, but given rates of general turn over especially given all the retirees who've cashed out, on average, the property tax till is ever rising. Only the hit on valuation the past few years slowed its rise.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

You lost me there, I don't understand how that position is validated in your provided links.

Why did i loose you? I provided a link to a graph so it was easy to understand..
Property tax revenue is soaring and has been for a long time...
Income tax revenue has been soaring and has been for a long time ...

The only thing that is stagnant is corporate income tax (because California underhandedly allows corporations to get away with murder to get keep jobs here.. instead it taxes the snot out of regular working class people and gives corps a free ride) i.e this beautiful community star that everyone likes to promote :


And sales/use tax : Given california's insane sales tax, a lot of things are purchased online .. and in general people don't consume alot either because they dont have any money left or because the taxes are so punitive that it doesn't make sense to... I have to say I was shocked when I moved to the valley and noted the raggedy old nature of the appliances in apartments and the general age of buildings/etc.

[NewToCA]

The California General Fund Budget was $91.6 billion in 2005-2006, and peaked in 2007-2008 at $103 billion.

This current budget cycle, 2011-2012, the General Fund Budget is $86 billion.

Doesn't look like it is increasing to me.


Further, regarding property tax, here is a blurb quoting the Wall Street Journal:

Stanislaus County’s assessed property tax values fell 21 percent over the past four years and 4.7 percent this year. This year’s property tax collection of $447 million is 11.6 percent lower than two years ago.



http://www.dof.ca.gov/budgeting/budg...ts/CHART-B.pdf

California’s shrinking property tax revenues

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

The California General Fund Budget was $91.6 billion in 2005-2006, and peaked in 2007-2008 at $103 billion.

This current budget cycle, 2011-2012, the General Fund Budget is $86 billion.

Doesn't look like it is increasing to me.


Further, regarding property tax, here is a blurb quoting the Wall Street Journal:

Stanislaus County’s assessed property tax values fell 21 percent over the past four years and 4.7 percent this year. This year’s property tax collection of $447 million is 11.6 percent lower than two years ago.



http://www.dof.ca.gov/budgeting/budg...ts/CHART-B.pdf

California’s shrinking property tax revenues

I fail to see the significant dip in the budget total columns... Thus, I am not following what you're trying to point out .. The irrational rise in property values was unsustainable .. California did nothing to curtail its spending during that irrational bubble and now it is stuck w/ spending overhang.. This is nothing to warrant increased taxes or a witch hunt for tax revenue .. If anything, California was blessed with a one time windfall of billions of dollars it should not have seen and it should take what it got as well as some $25 extra billion dollars from the temporary tax hikes and be happy. It should be just fine with current revenues (albeit a decrease from the irrational peak) ...

The peak years (based on housing bubble) are outliers ... So, there is no reason to base any trajectory on it... By applying an average you see the general fund has been steadily increasing ...


If you plot a moving average, you will see the revenue trend has been going up and up ... A bubble blew.. It happens.. However, the long term revenue trend was the same...

And I think its deplorable that on another thread where we speak about CAlifornia's 20% dropout rate and people mention there were no Honors/AP courses that you have idiocy like this going on :

New Public School in Los Angeles Named After Robert Kennedy is Most Expensive in American History - ABC News

This state was reckless with its finances both in booms and busts and the citizens pay the most for it ...

California's Fiscal Outlook: The 2010-11 Budget
^ peep that

Excerpts :






Buckle in tight everyone and all those thinking they are going to get rich by selling their overpriced house to the next sucker... Given the crap economy handed to GenX .. People are getting married later.. having kids later... birth rates are falling .. job growth is stagnating .. economy is ...

And Net migration will be negative for some time .. For obvious reasons... Yo can add me to that out migration list as a +1 ...

[NewToCA]

I think our differences are highlighted in post #8, where I pointed out that the public education spending per pupil has declined from about $9,000, almost 10 years ago, to $7,800 in deflated $ today. That is a decrease of about 15%, and when compared to the remainder of the country California is quite a bit below average in expenditure per pupil (see Figure #4):

http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/09f33pub.pdf


Further, if you look at Table #8, you can see the breakout of direct and support expenditures per pupil. Again, California isn't really high at all. Interestingly, if you take a look at the column marked Support Services, California is actually doing fairly well.

I just don't see the main point here, that California is a wasteful state in education expenditures, especially when measured against other states.

[Bulldogdad]

Note all the items that are not included in the cost of education calculations.

My favorites: State contributions to retirement systems on behalf of districts. Facilities acquisitions and construction.

Current Expense of Education - Current Expense of Education & Per-pupil Spending (CA Dept of Education)