Economic Segregation?
Seems the author should have expanded on what seems to be a very important point concerning the creation of smaller districts; property taxes will need to be increased in these smaller districts in order to fund them. That in turn will force poorer homeowners to move out of the newly formed district.
http://money.msn.com/business-news/a...06&id=17328094
Should economic segregation be treated differently than racial segregation?
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
No, it's still discrimination. Gentrification, white flight, suburban sprawl, gated communities.....they've had racial undertones for decades. I'm old enough to remember forced busing to integrate public schools, states experimenting with county-wide school district funding, and changing municipal/property tax models.Originally Posted by Being
The fundamental problem is that we fund public education in 50 different state ways, but predominantly through local property taxes. In essence, that means childhood education depends on their parents' ability to buy education via housing. It's similar to gerrymandering voting districts. It's possible to do....but it's a flawed concept, with horrible outcomes .
Also, it's become patently silly to work on the outer edges, with school vouchers or lotteries, that can go to private, parochial, or charter schools. That doesn't change the fundamental structure of educational funding...it just makes it more palatable for political reasons.
IMO, "public education" shouldn't be an oxymoron. It really bothers me that the US can't figure out how to make this work--- in states, in the nation, or as a global leader.
sounds like the by product of institutional rot.
Is there any other country in the world where education funding is determined by local property taxes? The idea simply doesn't make sense in a modern world. It's one thing to allow states to set education funding, but to let neighborhoods do it seems like an incredibly asinine idea. This system should never have been created, but now that it exists, I don't see a way of persuading parents from the middle and upper class to allow funding from schools in their neighborhoods to go schools from poorer ones. Perhaps the whole thing can be gradually phased out.
Hope is the denial of reality
Yet another (albeit ancillary) reason why property taxes are immoral.
Good point.
Also this whole mess can be fixed with a voucher system.
Good question. Does anyone know?
It probably made sense when "neighborhood" schools were the norm, but the policy process didn't adapt as housing/population changed over time. It's even more complicated in states that still have 'provincial' government (Commonwealths like PA) with boros or small towns that want to act like cities, with their own Mayors and schools. They fight against incorporating with larger cities, or even county-wide districting....because they want to maintain an 'independence'.... that also doesn't work in a modern world.The idea simply doesn't make sense in a modern world. It's one thing to allow states to set education funding, but to let neighborhoods do it seems like an incredibly asinine idea. This system should never have been created, but now that it exists, I don't see a way of persuading parents from the middle and upper class to allow funding from schools in their neighborhoods to go schools from poorer ones. Perhaps the whole thing can be gradually phased out.
Dread, taxing property ownership plus use/purpose is not immoral. How did you come to that conclusion?It's a logical way to fund public things no individual (or business) could afford on their own. Most glitches or failures are in the process or its politics, not the principle.
School vouchers won't "fix" how property or home ownership is taxed, or how we fund Education.
It won't fix home ownership taxation but it will fix education. Want your kids to go the nice school - that's fine you have education dollars for it. Want you kid to be home schooled? Great you have education dollars for it. School crappy? No problem just move to another one. At the same time the teacher's union can be broken and teachers can start being paid for how well they teach kids. Vouchers would solve a ton of problems (or at least go along way towards solving them) in one swoop.School vouchers won't "fix" how property or home ownership is taxed, or how we fund Education.
It won't really fix the problem of schools in poor neighborhoods being grossly underfunded though.
Hope is the denial of reality
Saying school vouchers (or charter schools) will "fix" public education is ludicrous. It's an experiment conducted at state "laboratory" levels, but it's not a panacea.
Lewk, it's pretty rich to claim teachers would be paid as professional educators, when you lump them in with Home Schoolers. WTF.
Possibly those school would shut down. But since educational dollars are fixed on a per pupil basis (not tied to property taxes) schools that work get more money then schools that don't regardless of location.It won't really fix the problem of schools in poor neighborhoods being grossly underfunded though.
They might work more, but they're still not going to get more money...Below a certain point, schools have to make serious cuts to building maintenance, staffing levels, AP classes, extracurriculars, tutoring, etc.
Hope is the denial of reality
Well, I think schools that "don't work" (low test scores, high drop-out rates, etc) should get more funding. And it shouldn't fall to impoverished places to provide their own extra funding.....while wealthier or more fortunate folks try to distance themselves at the same time. That's the pull yourself by your own bootstraps mentality that doesn't make any sense.
It would be nice to see legislation that distributes local increases state wide rather than to just the local district. If a district wants more money they pay more into the overall pot and get some (not all) back.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
That just creates incentives to fail.Well, I think schools that "don't work" (low test scores, high drop-out rates, etc) should get more funding. And it shouldn't fall to impoverished places to provide their own extra funding.....while wealthier or more fortunate folks try to distance themselves at the same time. That's the pull yourself by your own bootstraps mentality that doesn't make any sense.
Seems like a reasonable compromise, but I don't see the middle class parents willingly making it. And who's going to go against that constituency just to help the poor (who either don't vote or reliable vote for the same party)?
Hope is the denial of reality
It's no surprise that we have political divisions, but I think politicians underestimate the decimation of the "middle class"...and what that means for their constituents. Helping the poor has a new meaning for a majority of people, because they're closer to falling into poverty than climbing into the "middle class", let alone the top 10%.
There will always be poor people and middle class people. It's a function of how the classes are defined. Which means there will always be parents who don't want their tax money going to help the children of poorer parents.
Hope is the denial of reality
Sure, but they may be outvoted someday.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
No, they won't. Because even if half the middle class becomes poor, there will be poor people who are less poor than other poor people. The only way you get rid of economic classes is if you have complete equality.
Hope is the denial of reality
I believe as income disparity increases more people will realize their schools need support that can't come from inside their district and there will eventually be more voters needing outside support than there are voters wanting to restrict support to their own district.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
The people who are truly rich don't care about funding for their local public schools because their kids aren't going to the public schools. So whose money are these people going to take?
Hope is the denial of reality
But the goal isn't to get rid of economic stratification, or have "complete equality" by outcome. The goal is to have a nation of 50 states with 1st class education, and equality of opportunity. That means a poor kid from Mississippi can get the same high quality education as rich kid from Manhattan.
In case you weren't paying attention, the second the current system was created, very strong incentives were put in place to encourage middle class parents to seek to perpetuate the system. And we're talking about middle class in relative terms, so it doesn't actually matter how well off they are in absolute terms.
Hope is the denial of reality
People whose children attend private or charter schools are a minority and probably won't play a significant role in the debate one way or another. I'm sure they, along with home school advocates, vote against local funding increases anyway.
Last edited by Being; 02-09-2014 at 03:24 AM.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
People who are "rich"---either come from inherited wealth (old aristocracy) or have used our publicly funded institutions to become the middle class, or nouveau riche. Veterans used the GI bill to get a college education. Entrepreneurs used small business loans. Self-employed used tax codes. Following generations used Pell Grants, Scholarships, State/Federal financial aid, cheap educational loans.
What's going on in the US, some sort of economic amnesia?
"This system" is what incentivized your parents to emigrate, and you have personally benefited. Do you really want to get into the relative vs absolute terms?
As you have fewer students fewer teachers are needed. At some point if a school fails bad enough new management should step in.
if there are fewer students because of poor grades, then no, this is not what is needed
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote