Separate public education from property tax

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by winkosmosis

Something no one has discussed so far is that property tax is extremely regressive. Income tax for education and everything else makes far more sense.

Most low income people are not property owners (they are renters) and do not pay any property taxes. How is that regressive?

Income tax is the most volatile of all. If you want an unpredictable revenue stream for governments to operate with - use income taxes. A recession kills income, and the taxes that are driven off it. During recessions business profit goes to zero or negative. Any business income tax disappears.

[markg91359]

Originally Posted by Costaexpress

Instead of everyone paying for public education, we could have a public school tax. Those who use public schools and services would pay the tax to the extent of the services they want. The right people, paying the right tax, for the right services. We need particularization.

You sound like another person who got his education at the public's expense and now wants to pull up the ladder behind himself.

Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: "Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society"

No one likes the property tax or any other tax. However, we choose to fund public schools through taxes rather than through private user fees (as you essentially suggest) because we realize there is public benefit to all the children being educated. There are either no places or very few places left in American society for uneducated people anymore. An educated child is likely to become a productive taxpaying member of society and that is the justification for asking the public to pay to run public schools. Whether parents should have more children than they can afford to educate is another discussion. We don't penalize the children in the process.

There is unfairness created by the property tax in the sense that even those without children are required to contribute to public education. However, my point is that everyone benefits from the fact that young people are taught to do useful things and prepared for a future. Even people without children likely attended the public schools at some point in their life. Now, it is their turn to contribute.

Sadly, the ideology you express of "I've got mine, now let's keep others from getting theirs" is becoming way too acceptable in this country. I only hope others can see through this sham that you call "the right tax".

[lycos679]

Originally Posted by ragnarkar

Not necessarily.. we could eliminate the public education aspect of property taxes and levy a flat tax on all families with children attending public schools (say 3% per child or whatever number works.)

You could only do that if you have 50 amendments to the various state constitutions. As it stands, practically all states require a free public education system. Taxing each user is the opposite of free.

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Most low income people are not property owners (they are renters) and do not pay any property taxes. How is that regressive?

Are rental properties exempt from tax in your area? In most places they aren't.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by lycos679

Are rental properties exempt from tax in your area? In most places they aren't.

No they aren't. So property taxes are embedded fractionally in rent as a cost of doing business. I'll argue that most renters have no clue about that - one reason they are politically mute on property tax issues.

[cvap]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

No they aren't. So property taxes are embedded fractionally in rent as a cost of doing business. I'll argue that most renters have no clue about that - one reason they are politically mute on property tax issues.

Correct, renters are ignorant to property tax, and many people with mortgages have their tax and insurance buried in a monthly bill which they don't pay attention to, and even when you buy health insurance you don't care what the procedure costs.
Not paying attention to the details at the single person level is what allows the waste to happen, and all tax, school, property, and Ins. premiums rise every year, regardless of the cost of running the business.

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Most low income people are not property owners (they are renters) and do not pay any property taxes. How is that regressive?

You think renters don't pay property tax?!

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Income tax is the most volatile of all. If you want an unpredictable revenue stream for governments to operate with - use income taxes. A recession kills income, and the taxes that are driven off it. During recessions business profit goes to zero or negative. Any business income tax disappears.

Nope, wrong again. Sales tax is most subject to business cycles. During recessions, upper income earners do phenomenally well compared to the rest of the country. Income tax is the great stablizer. As inequality becomes more perverse, more income comes from the heavy hitters.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated

You think renters don't pay property tax?!



Nope, wrong again. Sales tax is most subject to business cycles. During recessions, upper income earners do phenomenally well compared to the rest of the country. Income tax is the great stablizer. As inequality becomes more perverse, more income comes from the heavy hitters.

All you have to do is look at California's fiscal situation. Where did California take the biggest hit in tax revenue during the most recent recession? Income tax.

I agree sales tax rises and falls strongly with the economy. Texas saw this (and Texas derives a high percentage of revenue from sales taxes). But it is still less volatile than income. Business income taxes can disappear entirely during a recession when a business moves from profitability to break even or loss.

As for renters - do they write a check for property taxes? No. As I have said before - are the property taxes paid by the landlord/owner embedded in the cost of rent? Yes. But renters don't "feel" property taxes, and tend to ignore them when they make decisions on local spending at the voting booth.

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

All you have to do is look at California's fiscal situation. Where did California take the biggest hit in tax revenue during the most recent recession? Income tax.

I agree sales tax rises and falls strongly with the economy. Texas saw this (and Texas derives a high percentage of revenue from sales taxes). But it is still less volatile than income. Business income taxes can disappear entirely during a recession when a business moves from profitability to break even or loss.

Funny you would bring up California. Its revenue soared after increasing taxes on the 1%. Their fiscal outlook went from negative to positive since doing so.

Originally Posted by hoffdano

As for renters - do they write a check for property taxes? No. As I have said before - are the property taxes paid by the landlord/owner embedded in the cost of rent? Yes. But renters don't "feel" property taxes, and tend to ignore them when they make decisions on local spending at the voting booth.

"Feel" is irrelevant. Tell the police department, library, fire department, or schools that I don't pay property taxes.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Costaexpress

Instead of everyone paying for public education, we could have a public school tax.

A sales tax would work.

Originally Posted by eddiehaskell

I wonder what the tax rate would actually be once all home owners not using public schools are out of the picture. Are we talking 25% higher property taxes or 100% higher?

Closer to 400%-500%

Originally Posted by Costaexpress

Just because everyone "benefits" from public education doesn't mean that it's the same benefit at the same meaningful level.

If no one is working, then no one is paying FICA payroll taxes to fund Social Security.

Originally Posted by Mnseca

Right, that makes a lot of sense. I think you clearly did not benefit from public education enough. Have you ever been to a country where public education is not widely available? Do you understand the effect that has on a society? I'm guessing no.

The effect of Propaganda and Indoctrination? Sure I do.

Originally Posted by roadrat

The nation as a whole needs to modernize its outdated education model.l

Which nation would that be? The Cherokee Nation or the Miami Nation? Or the Zuni Nation, the Navaho Nation. The Sioux Nation?

Comrade, you'll need to be more specific since this federation has more than 100 nations --- mostly tribal groups -- within it.

Originally Posted by Hemlock140

Yes, and with a high tech online education system the poor performing students would be even worse, because no one would be making sure they actually participated.

That is a non-event.

One function of public education is to socialize people -- to help them develop social skills to interact.

Being on-line is not interacting.

Originally Posted by cvap

Correct, renters are ignorant to property tax,....

Property taxes are built into the price paid for rent.

Your pay $9,000 annually in property taxes on your condo, so naturally you'll rent it out at $700/month, right?

I'll bet you're not a CEO.

No-risk gambling...

Mircea

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Petunia 100

Are communities like yours the majority of voters? If so, you're golden. If not, you might be in trouble should OP's idea take root.

That's the great irony, isn't it?

If you're familiar with Jeffersonian Republic (Jefferson only used the word "democracy" like three times in his entire life), then you know that Jefferson and others desired to have pure democracy practiced at the township level.

The Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 created townships.

In addition to all townships being exactly the same size in area, they had one other thing in common and that was land set aside and dedicated specifically for public education.

What you effectively have is a study in Free Market Communism: the Economic System is the Free Market, and the Property Theory is Communism, right?

The people -- of the township --- own the land and are responsible for it. They would vote to make Capital improvements to the land, by building school buildings and related facilities as necessary using taxes or they could have Officers of Missim and everyone work 30 days for the township -- for free.

Then using the Free Market, you would provide competitive pay and benefits in accordance with that specific Labor Market to hire the best teachers.

And then, if you applied D Russell Lee's philosophy, you would pay the most experienced teachers a lot, and then you would pay the youngest and brightest teachers with less than 7 years experience a lot, but not as much as the experienced teachers, but for those teachers in the middle --- the journeyman teachers -- you would cut their pay each year, to force them to quit.

Why? Because they're of no value to you. After they get a job at another school and teach for a few years, acquiring more knowledge, more experience and a different perspective.

If they come back to you, then you pay them a lot (because that is of value to you).

Given that the two mission of Public Education are education and socialization, what grade would you give Public Education?

Education: F

Are you into the 5th Level Economy? No, you're not. You should have been there in the mid-1990s. For every 10 jobs in the 2nd Level Economy (manufacturing) that you lost, they should have been replaced by 8-9 jobs in the 5th Level Economy. But, that's not happening, and you are 20+ years from it happening beginning with the day you implement real education reforms.

What would you like to do next?

Seeing how Ford and others are in a rush to build auto plants in India, what does that tell you?

Right, that tells you that India is preparing to enter the 2nd Level Economy. American jobs will be outsourced to India. As India moves into the 2nd Level Economy, China will move from the 2nd Level to the 3rd Level and then your 3rd Level industries can all be out-sourced to China.

If you wait and do nothing very slowly, in about 20 years 2nd Level Economic activity will begin in Central Asia. And then 3rd Level Activity from China will move to India, and then all of your jobs in the 4th Level Economy can be out-sourced to China.

Perhaps it will be best if you waited until 2nd Level Economic Activity moves to sub-Saharan Africa.

Don't you agree?

Think about it.....all of your 2nd Economic Level jobs are gone, so you won't lose any, and then the remainder of jobs in your 3rd Level Economy will be outsourced to Central Asia and India, and then India and China will take most of your 4th Level Economy jobs.....and when China moves into the 5th Level Economy, you won't lose any jobs at all, since you still won't have a 5th Level Economy in the first place.

Socialization: F

Funny how school shootings coincide with the rise of school district mergers and the mega-districts.

Do you think a child would have an easier time socializing in a small school, or in a Super-Sized Mega-School?

How'd that work out for the kids at Columbine?

Bigger is not better.

Oh, and class-room size. That was never an issue at smaller schools.

Anyone who espouses "equality" while simultaneously supporting huge schools is an hypocrite, since "equality" is nonexistent at large schools.

Schools cannot guide students to think and act independently, and then also to think and act as a team-member in a group, and to interact with other using interpersonal communications skills if students are lost in the paperwork shuffle.

Like I keep saying, if you want to survive and not end up like Belarus, then you need to re-invent yourselves.

Part of reinventing yourself is a total restoration of the Constitution, and that means ending the Department of Education and returning schools back to the States where they belong, and then States pushing power down to the townships through the counties.

You'd be surprised at how much money you save --- and you all desperately need that money, while simultaneously improving the quality of education.

Pedagogically...

Mircea