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.
Iowa has excellent public schools and universities. Indiana (I grew up there), Tennessee, and other low tax states don't have excellent schools. Are Iowa teachers protesting their low wages and insufficient funding for their schools? No.
Those who are working to lower taxes in Iowa come from the party that has a vested interest in making sure that there are enough poorly educated people easily manipulated into voting against their own interests in order to keep the 1% rolling in the dough.
That's changing quickly. The governor and legislature are proposing a trillion dollar tax cut much the same as Kansas/Brownback. The results will be the same. The public Universities are now woefully underfunded and school districts have been hit hard by the previous administration's tax cuts.
"Are Iowa teachers protesting their low wages and insufficient funding for their schools?" Yes.
Iowa has excellent public schools and universities. Indiana (I grew up there), Tennessee, and other low tax states don't have excellent schools. Are Iowa teachers protesting their low wages and insufficient funding for their schools? No.
Those who are working to lower taxes in Iowa come from the party that has a vested interest in making sure that there are enough poorly educated people easily manipulated into voting against their own interests in order to keep the 1% rolling in the dough.
Schools are more of a local issue. I don't think it comes down to taxation exclusively.
If you're living in a "West Des Moines" clone in any state, the schools are going to be excellent. Brentwood and Franklin are very affluent suburbs of Nashville, and the schools are excellent. Carmel is the most affluent suburb of Indianapolis, and its schools are summarily excellent. Likewise, inner city or rural schools that have significant numbers of poor children or those who are coming from sort of social dysfunction are going to struggle everywhere.
With that said, I thought the average person on the street in West Des Moines seemed considerably better educated than where I grew up. West Des Moines is an affluent suburb filled with a lot of educated, professional families. I grew up in a blue collar, manufacturing city that has taken it on the chin the past decade or so. It's not a surprise to see which community is "better."
Iowa did have a tremendous leg up on Indiana in terms of infrastructure. The roads were much better maintained. I've never seen worse roads than in urban Indianapolis. Traffic flowed better (though Indy is a couple times as big as Des Moines). Des Moines had probably 90% of what I did in Indy frequently (with the exception of the NBA, which I've been to dozens of games), at a fraction of the hassle and crime. The roads are much better here in Tennessee, but it's not fair to compare cold weather states to a warm weather one in that regard.
I think property taxes are the biggest problem. The higher property taxes in cities are partially responsible for more people building new houses in suburbs. And then those people in the suburbs go to those cities, using roads and other amenities but not paying for them. I don't have a clue how to solve the problem, but hopefully someone does.
Property taxes are outrageous! It makes owning a home almost unaffordable if you want to be in a good school district! I can't wait to sell my house and go back to Atlanta suburbs!
Schools are more of a local issue. I don't think it comes down to taxation exclusively.
If you're living in a "West Des Moines" clone in any state, the schools are going to be excellent. Brentwood and Franklin are very affluent suburbs of Nashville, and the schools are excellent. Carmel is the most affluent suburb of Indianapolis, and its schools are summarily excellent. Likewise, inner city or rural schools that have significant numbers of poor children or those who are coming from sort of social dysfunction are going to struggle everywhere.
Iowa's a little different. Iowa law limits the per-pupil amount that can be spent on schools. As a result, schools are generally decent, but there are few "really bad" or "really good" schools. Other states do not limit per-pupil spending. They tend to have a much wider disparity in schools. The "really good" schools are truly outstanding. The "really bad" schools are heartbreaking.
I know taxes pay for stuff, but our property tax bill in Iowa is more than double what it would be in Virginia for a similarly assessed house. The schools, roads, fire, police are/were comparable. I guess I'm paying for bike paths?
The population is considerably lower in Iowa than in Virginia and other states being discussed.
If you expect the roads to be as good in a low population state as those in a high population state, taxation will have to be higher on the smaller population.
If you expect the police to be as good in a low population state as those in a high population state, taxation will have to be higher on the smaller population.
If you expect your water supply to be as good in a low population state as those in a high population state, taxation will have to be higher on the smaller population.
If you don't mind living in an overpopulated area, go live there.
Sorry to hear about recent tax cuts harming Iowa's schools.
Our road network is huge compared to our population, because most of the state is farmland, there must be roads to access the fields, lots of gravel roads you would not need in many other states. I do expect the police to not cost anymore, because less population equals less crime, thus, fewer cops needed. Not so sure the above applies to water either, x amount of people need x amount of water, why should water cost that much more for a lower population? The pipes have to be there regardless, for rural areas just like in any other state. Fewer gallons of water need to be treated for fewer people, thus the water plants do not have to be as big. It's towns which grow fast, and outgrow the existing water plant, whom pay thru the nose for the new treatment plant on their water bill.
I'm wondering if the special needs students are sucking up a disproportionate amount of funding to the schools? It seems like the budget for special ed might be getting out of hand. I don't think autistic kids should have any more money spent on them, than the other students. The whole purpose of spending money for education on kids, is so they can get a job immediately after graduation from high school or college, so that they can start paying back into the system and support the next generation (and infrastructure, ect) via taxes. I might be generalizing, but really I don't think most special needs kids are going to do anything but drain the system for the rest of their natural lives, and will never pay any meaningful taxes back into the system to reimburse for what they collect from welfare or whatever. A few of them might have some rainman type gift with music or mathematics, and should be cultivated, but I think that is kinda rare and spending money on anything that will never produce, is wasteful in my opinion.
I wonder where it all goes sometimes, if the teachers are getting below average pay, then where does all the money go? I would like to see pie charts on several Iowa school districts and see the breakdown on what they spend it on. Like itemized lists for athletic equipment, special ed, field trips, building maintenance, heating and cooling, ect. I bet they hide all kinds of stuff and fudge the numbers on many things.
I have special needs too, a special need to keep my property taxes under control.
The population is considerably lower in Iowa than in Virginia and other states being discussed.
If you expect the roads to be as good in a low population state as those in a high population state, taxation will have to be higher on the smaller population.
If you expect the police to be as good in a low population state as those in a high population state, taxation will have to be higher on the smaller population.
If you expect your water supply to be as good in a low population state as those in a high population state, taxation will have to be higher on the smaller population.
If you don't mind living in an overpopulated area, go live there.
Sorry to hear about recent tax cuts harming Iowa's schools.
Ya gets what ya pays for.
I'm not sure this makes sense. There are populated and rural areas in every state, right? And the fewer people, the fewer police needed, etc.
The one difference is do see is business presence. States like Virginia and Indiana have a more significant business presence than Iowa - if business carries more of the tax load, residents carry less.
Our road network is huge compared to our population, because most of the state is farmland, there must be roads to access the fields, lots of gravel roads you would not need in many other states. I do expect the police to not cost anymore, because less population equals less crime, thus, fewer cops needed. Not so sure the above applies to water either, x amount of people need x amount of water, why should water cost that much more for a lower population? The pipes have to be there regardless, for rural areas just like in any other state. Fewer gallons of water need to be treated for fewer people, thus the water plants do not have to be as big. It's towns which grow fast, and outgrow the existing water plant, whom pay thru the nose for the new treatment plant on their water bill.
I'm wondering if the special needs students are sucking up a disproportionate amount of funding to the schools? It seems like the budget for special ed might be getting out of hand. I don't think autistic kids should have any more money spent on them, than the other students. The whole purpose of spending money for education on kids, is so they can get a job immediately after graduation from high school or college, so that they can start paying back into the system and support the next generation (and infrastructure, ect) via taxes. I might be generalizing, but really I don't think most special needs kids are going to do anything but drain the system for the rest of their natural lives, and will never pay any meaningful taxes back into the system to reimburse for what they collect from welfare or whatever. A few of them might have some rainman type gift with music or mathematics, and should be cultivated, but I think that is kinda rare and spending money on anything that will never produce, is wasteful in my opinion.
I wonder where it all goes sometimes, if the teachers are getting below average pay, then where does all the money go? I would like to see pie charts on several Iowa school districts and see the breakdown on what they spend it on. Like itemized lists for athletic equipment, special ed, field trips, building maintenance, heating and cooling, ect. I bet they hide all kinds of stuff and fudge the numbers on many things.
I have special needs too, a special need to keep my property taxes under control.
I don't know if this is still the case, but back in the day most special-needs children were sequestered into their own rooms with their own teachers. Kids with relatively mild disorders (ADHD, Aspergers, etc) were in their own groups (and in this case, it was usually just one or two classes a day), and kids with more severe disorders (full-blown autism, cerebral palsy, Down's syndrome, etc) were in yet another group. The former group was on their own for transportation (unless they lived in a rural area, where they would take the regular bus) and the latter would take the "short bus".
I have no idea if the cost of educating "special needs" students is (or at least should be) significantly higher than that of a "regular" student or not. The teacher probably doesn't get paid significantly more.
Iowa's a little different. Iowa law limits the per-pupil amount that can be spent on schools. As a result, schools are generally decent, but there are few "really bad" or "really good" schools. Other states do not limit per-pupil spending. They tend to have a much wider disparity in schools. The "really good" schools are truly outstanding. The "really bad" schools are heartbreaking.
I know taxes pay for stuff, but our property tax bill in Iowa is more than double what it would be in Virginia for a similarly assessed house. The schools, roads, fire, police are/were comparable. I guess I'm paying for bike paths?
That's one thing I noticed as well. Though I was only there for about a year, the people from small town Iowa seemed to be a little smarter than back where I was from. Iowa is much more homogeneous, and I don't think you'll get the truly bad schools that you see in rural areas of Tennessee and southwest Virginia.
Iowa lowered property tax rates for businesses. That mainly affects local governments, municipalities and counties, as they get their funding from property taxes. The legislature is reneging on the 'backfill' they promised, leaving locals hung out to flap in the wind. Services are being cut (this includes schools) and more is on the way.
Many people don't look carefully at their tax bill. If they did they'd see "TIFF servicing" as a top expense. Gotta compete with the other cities, you know.
However, taxes are nowhere near as high as across the Missouri river. Douglas County, NE (Omaha) has outrageous taxes, well over $4500 for a medium sized house and yard. We'd considered retiring to Omaha until the cousins set us straight.
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.
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.
