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.
So what are the kids to do all day at home if they are doing on-line schools? Supervision is still required.
I never said to shut down the schools!!! But rather pare down on the number of teachers and also have subjects be taught more uniformally. Online content can be viewed on a big screen for the whole class at once, or individually. And if the student doesn't understand right away or lose concentration, the lecture could be watched again anytime and at home. Maybe even in the company of their parents.
With online content, the presentation will not only even the playing field for students all over the US, but a quality production will have maximum appeal to the students. Teachers will save time because they won't have to agonize over creating a charismatic and exciting new lecture every day for their classes.
Teachers want higher pay and better benefits. Parents want quality classes. Students don't want boring classes that they fall asleep over and don't want to do the homework for. Taxpayers don't want their taxes to go up (actually they would love to see their tax burden go down!). So turning to more online teaching methods and using less teachers and support staff to do it would seem to be a win on all levels.
Linked to some degree? 75% of my property tax bill is "schools" (Town and state).
Personally, I will resist every type of reform which involves making it easier for Concord to extract more revenue from residents, increasing our total tax burden.
You don't have to look far to find states where they implemented sales and/or income tax on the promise of relief to residential home owners, only to see spending increased to match or exceed the new "income" stream; after a few years property tax rates climb back where they came from, if not even higher.
So, I'm not sure where you stand here.
Is your solution to do nothing?
Are you happy or content with the ridiculously high property taxes?
No action is NO action....I think we all agree that SOMETHING has to and should be done....
Unfortunately Concord has to be the one's that do it....The people elect them and guide them but that's where it gets done....If it doesn't get done or done right then shame on we the people...
I don't think anyone is in favor of or brought up a way of giving "Concord" more power or ability to take as much as they want....I never saw anything here that lead me to believe that.
Quite the opposite...
I for one believe that they get more than enough to do what they need to do.
They just need to spend it smarter.
It's where they get it from that bothers me.....
Property owners pay the bulk of the tax burden placed on the citizens of New Hampshire.
That is fundamentally wrong and indisputable.
The ridiculous notion that renters take part of and pay their fair share of the tax burden placed on the citizens of New Hampshire is laughable and completely unfair...
So maybe there is some sort of rental tax, added school participation without property ownership tax...call it what you will but there has to be a better and fair way to share in the burdens of the miss handled and over priced tax bills sent out and distributed to the people of New Hampshire.
It's where they get it from that bothers me.....
Property owners pay the bulk of the tax burden placed on the citizens of New Hampshire.
That is fundamentally wrong and indisputable.
The ridiculous notion that renters take part of and pay their fair share of the tax burden placed on the citizens of New Hampshire is laughable and completely unfair...
So maybe there is some sort of rental tax, added school participation without property ownership tax...call it what you will but there has to be a better and fair way to share in the burdens of the miss handled and over priced tax bills sent out and distributed to the people of New Hampshire.
To think that Renters are not paying property tax as part of their rent is ridiculous. Do you think these landlords just say, oh crap we cant pass that property tax bill off as higher rent to the renters because they are renters...
Have you seen what it costs to rent a 2 bedroom apartment in Manchester? you can get a mortgage for that!
Bad things happen under the flag of "SOMETHING has to and should be done!"
Funding towns (schools) via property tax rates set at the local town level has an upside: If you don't like the way your town budgets and spends or feel oppressed by the high taxes, you can take control of your own destiny by taking action locally -- get involved in the town meeting process, move to a less valuable home, or to another town with lower tax rates and lower valuations.
Shifting revenue extraction from town property taxes to statewide systems of income/sales tax eliminates that control.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy G
So, I'm not sure where you stand here.
Is your solution to do nothing?
Are you happy or content with the ridiculously high property taxes?
I am fine with the status quo -- my mostly rural town has basically zero apartments for rent; everybody either pays property tax directly, or rents a house and pays property tax indirectly via their rent.
Short of reducing school spending (or billing parents for tuition), any proposed "solution" will ultimately result in our total tax burden increasing. So yeah, I am opposed to changes which are designed to extract more revenue from my household!
Short of reducing school spending (or billing parents for tuition), any proposed "solution" will ultimately result in our total tax burden increasing. So yeah, I am opposed to changes which are designed to extract more revenue from my household!
To think that Renters are not paying property tax as part of their rent is ridiculous. Do you think these landlords just say, oh crap we cant pass that property tax bill off as higher rent to the renters because they are renters...
Have you seen what it costs to rent a 2 bedroom apartment in Manchester? you can get a mortgage for that!
No. Renters just aren't paying for their fair share of educating THEIR children.
If each child in NH costs $14k a year to teach... you do the math. NH has to lower the costs of public education OR find more income streams. And adding income tax and/or state sales tax would greatly help with that.
And the only downside to having a sales tax would be the big box stores would sell less to MA residents. So just keep the sales tax rate lower than our surrounding states.
Or in lieu of a state sales tax, tax the big box stores a lot more.
If we want to keep school funding managed locally, we need to decrease the cost of schooling, not create new tax regimes
My town is mostly owner-occupied or house rentals, the town takes every lawful measure to discourage "apartment" buildings other than age 55+ retirement homes. So renters in my town are not evading property tax.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miu
And the only downside to having a sales tax would be the big box stores would sell less to MA residents. So just keep the sales tax rate lower than our surrounding states. Or in lieu of a state sales tax, tax the big box stores a lot more.
The state already pulls in significant revenue from "big box stores" via existing taxes.
Zero is the magic number -- any sales tax at all would significantly reduce sales made to ME, VT, MA residents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miu
No. Renters just aren't paying for their fair share of educating THEIR children. If each child in NH costs $14k a year to teach... you do the math. NH has to lower the costs of public education OR find more income streams. And adding income tax and/or state sales tax would greatly help with that.
Did you mean to say parents aren't paying for their fair share of educating THEIR children? If you want parents to pay their fair share, find a way to tax school-age children.
I strongly believe each town should fund their local schools with local revenue. I doubt most NH residents want the state to extract another billion dollars a year (in addition to the $1B currently collected by the state for K-12 school funding) in new taxes, with state-level politicians deciding how much to allocate to each town to fund the local school. This desire to keep school funding/budgeting local eliminates sales and income tax as an option for funding schools.
I agree, New Hampshire's cost of $14,969/pupil is much too high, we need solutions to reduce school spending, not new ways to get more money from residents.
Everyone wants to trim school costs until their kid needs a service that isn't available.
I'm just across the river in VT. We just passed a school budget that is 0.XX% LOWER than last year after 2 or 3 years of X.0% lower budgets. We are a small PK-12 but we are serving a very good education (our top kids go to top schools, including the Ivy league) for financial numbers that are very conservative for New England in general, and Vermont in particular.
We still have people online and at town meetings complaining about the school budget being "too high" and encouraging folks to say NO to everything.
At the same time, our area towns are being told by the state to close small schools, consolidate into more efficient student body sizes, and people are FREAKING OUT about it, fighting it every step of the way. (google VT Act 46)
Well all it costs is money. {shrug}
At some point, the "just trim the fat" folks need to step up and actually offer some realistic, actionable solutions.
I strongly believe each town should fund their local schools with local revenue.
That would be fine if each town were allowed to decide how much to spend, but that decision is taken out of the town's hands by regulations passed down by Concord and Washington +/- other towns in the same district. Being told by someone else what our school tax rate has to be is completely unacceptable.
[quote=Nonesuch;51259838]My town is mostly owner-occupied or house rentals, the town takes every lawful measure to discourage "apartment" buildings other than age 55+ retirement homes. So renters in my town are not evading property tax.
I strongly believe each town should fund their local schools with local revenue.
Yes. Because of NH having no income tax or a sales tax, and being so dependent on property taxes, the majority of properties should be owner occupied and NOT rental units. And rental units for vacationers or older people without school-age children. Somehow parents need to pay something, anything extra towards paying for the added costs of educating THEIR children.
But locals paying for local schools doesn't work when the parents flee the town with the good schools as soon as their last child graduates from high school to some town up north which has bad schools but much lower property taxes. Therefore, public schools should be funded more from the state coffers.
Or what about a high tax penalty for real estate sales when it can be shown that the parents are selling their properties within 10 years of their children graduating from the town's school system. They should at least stay in the town paying for the education of others' children.
Quote:
I agree, New Hampshire's cost of $14,969/pupil is much too high, we need solutions to reduce school spending, not new ways to get more money from residents.
Because NH is a small rural state, parents should not be expecting all the school perks that a much more densely populated state such as MA. Move to MA if you want their school system for your child!!! Or pay for a private education.
It's really too bad that NH can't attract more manufacturing jobs or Amazon. But since we can't, NH is what it is and we should not be spending tax dollars like a MA wannabe.
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.
Bad things happen under the flag of "SOMETHING has to and should be done!"
If we want to keep school funding managed locally, we need to decrease the cost of schooling, not create new tax regimes
