[canudigit]

Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28

How many MORE kids from Bloomfield, Birmingham ect (where they spent TWICE the state foundation money $12K vs. $7K) go on to college after graduation compared to kids from places like--FLINT, DETROIT, DOWNRIVER, ect...

Interactive | Michigan 2009 per-pupil funding by district | The Detroit News

Why does the wealthier suburbs OUTSPEND the standard blue collar suburbs? OH..because they want their kids to have more field trips? It has nothing to do with college, graduation or education.

And it has nothing to do with the fact that the parents in those districts value education and support their kids' learning endeavors? That is the key to the whole thing, not how much is spent per student. Look at your average parent in Flint, River Rouge, or Detroit, then compare them to your average parent from Bloomfield Hills, Birmingham, or Troy. Now whose kids are going to value education, succeed in school, and go on to college, the child of a drug dealing high school dropout who lives in chaos and squalor, or the child of, say, an attorney and a stay at home mom who lives in an upscale subdivision in a safe suburb? You do the math. If you look at a lot of smaller, more rural school districts that don't spend as much per pupil as Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, etc., districts such as Chelsea and Blissfield, the graduation and college attendance rates are also above normal, not because of spending huge amounts, but because areas like that still have many intact families who value their children and put them first and teach them to value themselves and their futures. It's not rocket science.

Another case in point: Look at how many homeschooled kids excel far beyond their public school peers. I know many people who homeschool and don't even spend $1,000/year on curriculum, yet their kids excel, do far above average on college entry tests, and go on to attend some very prestigious colleges and universities. Our dd, who has been homeschooled since the fifth grade, received a 28 composite score on her first attempt at the ACT without studying, and we are going to take a campus tour of U of M Ann Arbor, which has expressed an interest in her. If she had attended our local public high school and had $6,000 or $7,000/year spent on her education by the state, I doubt if she would be doing as well as she is.

School performance is one area that is probably less about the money than most other areas in life. It's about parents and self worth. Kids used to come out of multi-grade one room schoolhouses with better educations than they have coming out of some public schools now. How much money was spent per pupil then?

[TaylorRothschild]

Isn't it ironic that Snyder's opponents began a recall campaign within 90 days of his term? And these same critics excuse Obama for several years because he's "only cleaning up Bush's mess. . ." Talk about a double standard.

Snyder is great for the state of Michigan right now. Trimming the fat is of utmost importance considering the amount of people we've lost and the dwindling tax revenues. He's taken hard stands in difficult situations, he's been true to his campaign promises. Although I'm Libertarian, Snyder has impressed me a lot in the past months, he seems to have what the leadership in Washington lacks. . .cojones!

Michigan is on the right track.

[chiroptera]

Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28

How many MORE kids from Bloomfield, Birmingham ect (where they spent TWICE the state foundation money $12K vs. $7K) go on to college after graduation compared to kids from places like--FLINT, DETROIT, DOWNRIVER, ect...

Interactive | Michigan 2009 per-pupil funding by district | The Detroit News

Why does the wealthier suburbs OUTSPEND the standard blue collar suburbs? OH..because they want their kids to have more field trips? It has nothing to do with college, graduation or education.

Correlation is not causation....

[Dave Wojo]

I think he's doing what he said he would do, and that his policies will do as expected.

The basic premise, as I understand it: First, decrease spending to a level the government can presently afford. Then, create a business environment which lures start ups and companies from other states, which in turn creates jobs, which in turn employs your current population and lures workers to/back to MI, which in turn decreases spending on unemployment and entitlements and enlarges the tax base, which in turn provides funding for government programs and infrastructure improvements.

This feels very much like common sense to me. The horse before the cart, so to speak. I just can't get behind any plan that does not look first at drastic and painful cuts in spending, while at the same time addresses the lack of jobs/tax base. Governor Snyder's and the republicans' plan, in my opinion, is the only one that addresses both. For the life of me, I just can't wrap my mind around how we can spend our way out of this. What happens when the bills come due? How can jobs be added if we don't attract the companies that provide those jobs? We can't beg them to come to MI. We can't force them to come to MI. We must lure them to MI by making MI more attractive, or at least as attractive as other states.

I believe in Governor Snyder right now because he is making decisions that tell me that he believes in capitalism. This country was founded on capitalism, and it rose to its height of power due to capitalism. Capitalism affords all an economic environment which grants the individual the opportunity to strive and to achieve for themselves. I fully acknowledge that some individuals must work harder than others to achieve the same desired goal. The playing field is not level for all, no doubt, but all individuals can strive for and achieve more than they currently have.

[michigan83]

Finally, I found some concrete reporting about all of the recall talk.

When I heard the talk about recalling Snyder, my first thought was, "who is behind this?" I just wasn't seeing evidence of a grassroots movement to get rid of the governor.

It sounds like there are unions and other groups that are behind the movement. Even a group from Kentucky! Kind of interesting...

Metro and State | Gov. Snyder, 15 GOP legislators target of recall efforts | The Detroit News (http://www.detnews.com/article/20110609/METRO/106090385/1409/Gov.-Snyder--15-GOP-legislators-target-of-recall-efforts - broken link)

[HighlandsGal]

Originally Posted by Bydand

I have 4 kids in public schools right now, and frankly am not worried about it. It all depends on the individual districts and how they plan their budget and how they are going to use the money they have. Education levels are not going to drop, unless the school districts choose to use what money they do get, to keep frivolous programs going instead of their core curriculum up.

I would guess that most of the posters on this thread bashing education funding do not have students attending an urban school district like Grand Rapids or Detroit or Flint, nor do they teach in them.

I teach in Denver Public Schools and when I lived in Grand Rapids, I taught at a private Catholic school. Totally different. I also grew up in a GR suburb that has good test scores, great sports programs, etc. I feel like I have had a nice variety of experiences in different educational settings, so I speak with first hand knowledge, unlike most of the posters here.

I am sorry but I don't consider valuable subjects like art, technology, health, P.E., and foreign language to be "frivolous programs" -- they are extremely important to providing a well-rounded education to our students, particularly those from lower socioeconomic areas. Not to mention necessary services that will get cut like ESL programs, less special ed aides in the classroom, larger class sizes, etc. because of decreased funding. My sister has her Master's plus 30 and teaches ESL in Wyoming, MI. She has taught for 7 years and will most likely be out of a job for next year with these cuts. I think it stinks.

[michigan83]

Originally Posted by HighlandsGal

I would guess that most of the posters on this thread bashing education funding do not have students attending an urban school district like Grand Rapids or Detroit or Flint, nor do they teach in them.

I teach in Denver Public Schools and when I lived in Grand Rapids, I taught at a private Catholic school. Totally different. I also grew up in a GR suburb that has good test scores, great sports programs, etc. I feel like I have had a nice variety of experiences in different educational settings, so I speak with first hand knowledge, unlike most of the posters here.

I am sorry but I don't consider valuable subjects like art, technology, health, P.E., and foreign language to be "frivolous programs" -- they are extremely important to providing a well-rounded education to our students, particularly those from lower socioeconomic areas. Not to mention necessary services that will get cut like ESL programs, less special ed aides in the classroom, larger class sizes, etc. because of decreased funding. My sister has her Master's plus 30 and teaches ESL in Wyoming, MI. She has taught for 7 years and will most likely be out of a job for next year with these cuts. I think it stinks.

One question:

Do you think that a big increase in funding to GR Public Schools would suddenly turn it into a good school district?

I think we both know that the answer is no. The problems in GR Public go way deeper than per student funding. My sister did some teaching at GR Public, and she never complained about "lack of funding" that made her job difficult. What made her job difficult was that she had no control over the home lives of the students. She could only influence them for a few hours per day, but they would go home to environments that were not conducive to learning (or anything productive, really). This is terribly sad, but it's not a funding problem. Money is not the answer for our failing urban districts.

[HighlandsGal]

The programs that will be cut because of less funding will be terribly detrimental to urban school districts. (and a lot of suburban ones) These programs are needed........

Things will go from bad to worse, just wait and see.

[MI-Roger]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

........... I especially liked the proposals to limit welfare benefits after 4 years. .............

That is the only thing he has proposed or has had enacted that I agree with.

[Bydand]

Originally Posted by HighlandsGal

I am sorry but I don't consider valuable subjects like art, technology, health, P.E., and foreign language to be "frivolous programs" -- they are extremely important to providing a well-rounded education to our students, particularly those from lower socioeconomic areas. Not to mention necessary services that will get cut like ESL programs, less special ed aides in the classroom, larger class sizes, etc. because of decreased funding. My sister has her Master's plus 30 and teaches ESL in Wyoming, MI. She has taught for 7 years and will most likely be out of a job for next year with these cuts. I think it stinks.

Where do I say I think Art, Tech, Health, PE, or foreign language are frivolous programs? I am speaking about football, basketball, cheer leading, competition cheer leading, Bowling, etc.... The programs that do nothing for rounding out a childs education or help develop different ways of using their minds. Those are what I was referring to, please don't put words in my mouth if you don't know what I was talking about... just ask.