The Seattle Times editorial board seems to like Gov. Christine Gregoire’s “Washington Learns” proposal, but…
The elephant in the room, however, is education funding. Sidestepping this massive beast threatens the very underpinning of reform efforts. Gov. Christine Gregoire promised a new way of looking at education and investing in it. The smart, holistic proposals from her committee give us the former. Now, where’s the latter?
[…] Pressure is growing to address the funding issue. Lawsuits are being prepared challenging disparities in state money among districts and over the inadequacy of basic education funding.
The time to tackle the funding beast is now.
Hmm. The Times is editorializing in favor of increased funding for education. Great. But… um… didn’t they just spend most of the past year shilling for an estate tax repeal initiative that would have cut $100 million a year from education spending?
Tell you what Frank, I’ll trade the estate tax for an income tax, and that way we all come out ahead. What say?
No!!
[shoots dog in anger]
Goldy — you gotta admit that the Washington Learns report really doesn’t say anything about education funding. And the law that set up the Washington Learns review process specifically said that education funding should be addressed. Pretty good work for a Democrat governor, Democrat legislature and mostly Democrat committee, wouldn’t you say? With any luck, Republicans won’t recognize the potential openings here, and we can keep on having status quo politics and more of the same problems with education in this state.
Goldy, I’d be in favor of a state income tax, but we cannot trust that the Legislature would permanently eliminate sales and other taxes. All they’d do is dip the tax(es) for a while, implement the income tax and then crank the sales tax right back up again.
state income tax long overdue
if I did not know better – the Times Endorsement Board is suffing from one joint too much or just plain old afternoon martini haze
they lost big time this year
can we all agree – disconnected, searching in the ozone
Frank, we will be laughing for years and years and years
3 Real Mark
That’s my objection (basically) to the fever dreams of flat taxers. If you think it would remain flat, “fair” (without quibbling about meaning), or special-interest-measure-free for ten minutes, let alone ten years, you’re smokin’…
3 Mark
However, a progessive income tax would make the burden of our state tax system fall proportionaly less onto the poor. How about if we couple the insitution of a progressive income tax with the repeal the B&O tax (and reduce the sales tax however much makes it revenue-neutral) ?
I lost all respect for Milton Friedman when I found out that he spent the last 6 years of his life on public welfare.
Income tax for the State of Washington? No, thank you!
Real Mark @3, Daddy Love @6,7,
The Sims proposal did exactly what you wanted. It eliminated the state portion of the both the sales tax and the B&O tax via constitutional amendment, and replaced them with a progressive personal income tax. Note… no B&O tax, and no corporate income tax to replace it. Just a personal income, based on the notion that business owners eventually take profits out of their business.
You know, I often hear objections to an income tax with the caveat “I would be for it if,” as if there was only one way to do it. If the objection is not to an income tax per se, but to particular implementations, then perhaps its time to have a real debate about tax restructuring in which we can honestly look at all the alternatives.
How about an income tax AND an estate tax?
Maybe the Times Editorial board gets its say on everything except the election-time endorsements. That could account for the schizoid nature of the editorials.
The Washington State Learns report is a Trojan Horse. A large hollow object that looks like reform but is most likely to lead to chaos.
Educational reform in this state needs to begin by getting a state wide commitment to educational excellence. Unfortunately, the process Gregoire has undertaken will not go this way because it is tom much of too much for too many. The most that can come of it is an increase in funding that is short term, not likely to have the needed long term effect.
REAL REFORM needsa more focussed and dramatic agenda.
There a several of these that are possible, but not likley they all can be achieved at once:
1. The Constitution
Resolve to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to fully support the K-12 process. We are no where near doing this and it is bizarre that the report avoids this ematy issue.
2. Higher Ed.
The decay at UW is palpable and no amount of monster salaries for the UW President (now propopsed to get $1,000,000), will address this.
As an example, by State mandate, 30% of UW students are now 2 year undergrads! In effect the first two years of the UW are being transformed into community college. There is nothing wrong with the community colleges, but the effect of this is to downgrade a UW education. Similarly, the new campuses in Tacoma and Bothell are Potemkin villages, offering less opportunities for “higher ed” than any of our state colleges.
The State should resolve to maintain the UW and WSU as top level research schools, even if that means making them smaller!
3. A Labor Model
Washington State is quietly developing a large abscess in tis model of governance of education. Recently the State colleges have unionized their faculties. This is going to have profound effects on the direction of great schools like Evergreen and Bellingham but the legislature seems unaware this has happened.
The unions have happened in reaction to bad pay for junior faculty. However, academic unions can also degrade quality in an achievement based system. It is too late to avert the Union movement, but the State should get out ahead of the Unions by assuring that the State colleges have funds for merit promotions.
4. Charter Schools
WADR, there is no rational arguement vs. this concept. Many of our school districts are no more “natural” then the tribal amalgams the Brits and French renamed as countries. Parents should have more control over thenytpe of school their kids attend.
Doing this well requires some form of regulation that defines what can and can not be a charter school.
Let’s eliminate the state sales tax exemption for newspapers.
I’m all in favor of a mixed income-tax with a reduced sales tax, which thereby provides a stable and relatively predictable income flow to government, without penalizing one class or citizens unduly over the other.
But I recognize Mark’s view (fear) that the taxes would creep up so it just becomes an additional tax. We’ll never have an income tax in this state until we find a way to address those fears. The only way I know how to do that is to have a Constitutional limit on the tax rates, but generally I think using the Constitution (or Referendums) to make tax policy is a poor idea.
I wouldn’t give corporations a pass. It rewards the corporate business form, over the partnership, limited partnership, or sole proprietership. Sure, corporate profits get “passed through” to individuals. But a lot gets used along the way for business expenses which are not, as they might say, “really necessary”. A small “C” corproation, if it cooks the books just right, can make a miniscule profit every year, but still arrange to pay for a lot of things for their familiy which other workers have to pay for themselves. Examples: health insurance, life insurance, vacations in Hawaii (err, “Board Meetings in Hawaii”), timeshare dues, home office expenses, etc. Sure, you can do the same things with the other business forms, but its a bit easier under a “C” corporation.
Besides, what makes you assume that the profit passed through a “C” corporation in Washington State is going to go to Washington residents as shareholders, or to be spent in Washington on consumer goods subject to the sales tax? I would do away with the B&O tax completely, and tax businesses in Washington state fairly based upon their net income, not “revenues” under the B&O model.
Goldy’s got a point, though – everyone in this state wants tax reform, but only if it is exactly the way they want it to be reformed. It is almost exactly like the arguments we have over public transportation. You might have 75% of the people might agree to “some sort” of a replacement of the 520 bridge, but only if it is done according to “their preferred design”. Since you can’t get more than a quarter of those to agree on any specific design, and with fierce opposition to any design which they don’t agree with, the bridge has been held hostage by those competing interest groups for the past twenty years, with the price tag for replacement climbing each year.
At the rate its going, we won’t get it replaced until it sinks.
13 Steve
“WADR, there is no rational arguement vs. this concept. ”
Ah, yes, that’s the way to generate reasoned debate: to declare your opponents irrational. Of course, like anyone who says there is no rational argument against their position, you’re dead wrong.
For example, and keeping in mind that we are not discussing a particular piece of charter schools legislation:
– The “autonomy” of charter schools reduces the authority of local school boards, reducing local control.
– Even public schools are wrestling with determining accepted standards and assessment of quality by which to hold schools accountable, which would have to be in place to evaluate charter school performance.
– There has been in general little evidence of increased student achievement in charter schools.
– We run the risk that charter schools will skim the “cream” of the best students and/or exclude poor, minority, and handicapped students.
– If each charter can choose its staff “freely,” this threatens staff certification and almost certainly reduces staff bargaining rights, making charter schools a union-busting tool.
– The existing system, where majority of students remain, would lose funds.
Those are a few, all quite rational.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002016.php
Another republican crook goes to jail.
I can’t wait for the Times to cover Goldy and his NorthWest Division of Libtard Moonbats having their Orgasm for Peace. Maybe they’ll have it on Tuesday night after their drinking librully. Got to get dem lib girls drunk to screw you dweebs! I guess the organizer said you don’t need a partner!
Knowing this is why Pelletizer never shows up to a Drinking Librully. He can’t drink so he’ll recognize what he is next to in the morning, and it won’t be a “rabbit”!
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/l.....12551.html
18 bud
Like they say, waging war to make peace is like fucking for virginity.
All progressives need to start pushing for a state income tax. Our current system is laughable. The pols I have spoken to are all for it, but Sims and Howsegowa aside, they are waiting for the public to lead them to the promised land.
It’s that damnned leadership thing revisited. Let’s lead, troops. Write, email, fax, and yell at our legislators and make it happen.
Oh Puddybud,
lashing out against orgasms eh? We know what that means.
Ohio Fundraiser Gets 18 Years in Prison
By JOHN SEEWER
The Associated Press
Monday, November 20, 2006; 10:56 AM
TOLEDO, Ohio — A former GOP fundraiser at the center of a scandal-plagued state investment in rare coins that helped Democrats seize power in the midterm elections was sentenced Monday to 18 years in prison.
Tom Noe, a prominent coin dealer accused of taking at least $2 million, was convicted last week of theft, corrupt activity, money laundering, forgery and tampering with records.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00097.html
Here is a selection of 50 quotes from President George W. Bush, for entertainment or for meditation:
1.”We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe.”
George W. Bush
2. “It’s time for the human race to enter the solar system.”
George W. Bush
3. “The vast majority of our imports come from outside the country.”
George W. Bush
http://english.pravda.ru/opini.....rge_Bush-0
Wasn’t the original question about educational funding? Most of the above responses sure sound a lot like deadbeat parents rationalizing their failure to meet child support.
were doomed
Puddybud, Puddybud, Puddybud:
******Deep Sigh******
You’re still angry over the elections aren’t you? Did you realize that every sentence in your post @ 18 contained some sort of insult?
Since it’s apparent that you and your like-minded hardcore conservatives haven’t figured it out yet, the American public is fed up with the constant personal attacks in politics. Hence, the Blue Wave that swept the country. Futhermore, it wasn’t a repudiation of Republicans per se as much as it was a rejection Ronald Reagan conservatism.
It’s high time you stopped with the “moonbat” “librul” spew and get on board with bipartisanship to move our country forward.
PUDDYBUD, YOU’RE A LOSER, A WASHOUT. YOU CAME TO HA.ORG DURING THE ELECTION CONTEST. CALLED THE LIBERAL LEGAL AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS A BUNCH OF NAMES. REALITY STRUCK. YOU SANK LIKE A WOUNDED STEER, SHRUGGED IT OFF AND KEPT ON CALLING NAMES. NOV 2005 CAME ALONG. YOUR WET DREAM WAS I-912 AND LITTLE DAVID IRONS THE MAMA BEATER. REALITY STRUCK. THE AILING STEER TURNED MORPHED INTO A SQUEALING BOAR. FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES YOU WELSHED ON A BET LIKE MTR. NOW NOV 2006 COMES AND YOU’RE QUIET. YOU WERE PRAYING FOR ROVE TOTALLY IGNORANT THAT ROVE IS AN AGENT OF THE DEVIL. THEN CAME MARK FOLEY. THEN CAME TED HAGGARD. BEFORE THAT ALL THE CORRUPTION.
YOU’VE LOST. YOUR IDEOLOGY IS BANKRUPT. YOU’RE AN UNREPENTANT REALITY DENIER LIVING IN A DELUSIONAL BUBBLE. THE PEOPLE REJECTED MIKE STEELE AND KEN BLACKWELL. THEY SEE THROUGH YOUR RIGHT WING HALLUCINATIONS LIKE ABLE DANGER. THEY WANT RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE NOT A FUTURE OF ENDLESS DEBT AND WAR AND RUSH LIMBAUGH CARRYING WATER FOR GREEDHEADS ON THE RADIO.
Per student spending has increased 6.3% per year for the past 16 years; well ahead of inflation. Throwing more money at a broken system is NOT going to fix the problem.
Maybe a few of you big minded libruls would like to read another analysis of the problem rather than insist that guys like me have even more of our money stolen from us. If so, go here and educate yourself:
http://www.effwa.org/files/pdf.....202005.pdf
MTR IS THE POSTER BOY FOR WHAT THE RIGHT WING IS ALL ABOUT – PUTS A CHALLENGE OR BET, LOSES AND RUNS AWAY LYING AND WHINING.
IT PEOPLE LIKE MTR WHO HAVE SUNK THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO PERMANENT MINORITY STATUS LOCALLY AND ON THE VERGE NATIONALLY.
PAY YOUR FUCKING GAMBLING DEBT.
MTR’s Moonbat Poll:
How many of you think that the primary job of government is to give people things?
Goldy, since we’ll never get an income tax in this state I think we should raise the estate tax. :)
30 I think Goldy should leave government out of it and subcontract the collection of your gambling debt to the mob.
2 Richard Pope says: Pretty good work for a Democrat governor, Democrat legislature and mostly Democrat committee, wouldn’t you say? With any luck, Republicans won’t recognize the potential openings here, and we can keep on having status quo politics and more of the same problems with education in this state. — 11/20/2006 at 1:00 am
Absolutely, Richard! We’ll come up with proposals, and then when Republicans in the legislature vote against an income tax and/or increased estate taxes, we’ll tell the voters they obstructed “education reform.” You like? That’s the Hastert/Frist model of political bullshit. If it’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for us! Why should Republicans have all the fun?
3 Surreal Mark says: … we cannot trust that the Legislature would permanently eliminate … other taxes … they’d … crank the sales tax right back up again. 11/20/2006 at 2:27 am
Roger Rabbit replies: You’re forgetting one little thing, Mark — the voters.
Anonymous says: Oh Puddybud, lashing out against orgasms eh? We know what that means. 11/20/2006 at 11:01 am
Headless Looser posing again?
If I wasn’t already married, I’d tell you to send the wife my way. She’ll learn within a few what a REAL Orgams is.
Now what will orgasms for peace accomplish. If everyone did that, the BAD ARABS will visit you while you are shaking! Think abot it.
GBS: Great to see you flying with the othermoonbats. I guess the truth will set you free GBS.
Angry over the elections? I’m sad the libruls are again in charge. But not angry. The people spoke although some donk are wolves in neo-con clothing. So this will be a two year moonbat orgasm.
GBS I know you are well read. Have you ventured to the Middle East sites and Investors Business Daily? They post what the Bad Arabs think of Ms massamoonbat Pelosi’s comments. I know you read them GBS. You are one of the few LEVEL HEADED ones here. They declare victory when we cut and run. The rest of Goldy’s NorthWest Division of Libtard Moonbats couldn’t determine up from down without signs.
Once the peeps see the absurd policies in place by Ms massamoonbat Pelosi, 2008 will be interesting if Jesus doesn’t come back first.
YOS LIB BRO says: – This should say Clueless says:.
Clueless I will not answer your rants anymore. Using capital letters doesn’t change thoughts or sentence style. You are IGNORED!
So do you moonbats agree with Michael Richards rant? Now we see the real moonbat mind coming out of their self-imposed exiles after the elections!!!
For you moonbats just above idiot savant level intelligence, the Bad ARABS aka islamofascists want us out of Iraq too. So they wanted moonbats to win in congress. GWB is still killing them eventhough the war isn’t going great guns. How do you moonbats propose to stop islamofascism? Talk nicely to them?
Daddy Love says:
3 Real Mark … That’s my objection … to the fever dreams of flat taxers. If you think it would remain … special-interest-measure-free for ten minutes, let alone ten years, you’re smokin’… 11/20/2006 at 6:02 am
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Now Mark, ask yourself this? Who gets the special-interest tax breaks? The people with money to pay lobbyists, of course. And who would those people be? The people with money, of course. Under a progressive tax system, the moneyed set ends up paying, at best, a rate more or less equal to the rest of us; under any flat tax system, they are sure to be undertaxed.
And that’s what we have now. Washington’s bottom 20% pay 17% of their income in local and state taxes, while the top 20% pay about 4% … that’s why progressivity has to be built into tax rates, so it comes out “flat rate” in the end.
9 Libertarian says: Income tax for the State of Washington? No, thank you! 11/20/2006 at 7:20 am
Then how do you propose to make the top 20% pay their fair share? Or is it your position that a system which taxes the poorest people at 4 times the rate it taxes the richest people is “fair?”
13 As an example, by State mandate, 30% of UW students are now 2 year undergrads! In effect the first two years of the UW are being transformed into community college.
You’re assuming there’s no qualitative difference between classes at U.W. or community colleges. This simply isn’t true.
Part of the problem is the state constitutional provision guaranteeing STATE funding of K-12 education, which should be repealed, because it has everyone focusing on “making the state pay its share” (when that clearly will not happen) and diverts attention and discussion away from funding options that have been successful in other states.
In all other states, K-12 public schools are funded from local taxes and the money doesn’t go through a state budget or agency. This has its own set of problems such as disparate funding levels between poor and rich districts, but Washington hasn’t done any better on that score with its unique system of mandated state funding that is perpetually underfunded.
The constitutional provision turns out to be nothing more than an unenforceable and unfunded mandate that cuts off local-based funding options that work elsewhere. The constitutional provision needs to go, and we need to get the state out of the school funding business, and do it the way everyone else in the country does it.
13 On the whole, this post is nothing more than the usual wingnut anti-union, pro-voucher rants, dressed up in slightly more sophisticated rhetoric.
Let’s take this argument, for example: “Charter Schools … there is no rational arguement vs. this concept.”
Oh yes there is: (a) no curriculum standards, (b) no accountability of how funds are spent, (c) no obligation to accept special-needs students or those harder to teach, (d) no public input or control over how these schools are run, and, not to be overlooked, (e) numerous cases around the country of poor quality, and fraud and embezzlement of funds by those running the charter schools.
Once again, we’re hearing the mantra “reform” being chanted as a cover for right-wing snake oil and irrelevent profiteering (such as the Alliance for Education and its army of $10,000-a-day “consultants”).
Let’s face up to the real issue at hand: Education costs money!!!!! It costs more now than when us baby boomers were kids ourselves, but back then the heavy lifting was being done by public school teachers making less than garbage collectors and Catholic nuns who got $50 a month and all they could eat. Furthermore, back in the Sputnik era, there was a high priority on cranking out well-trained scientists and engineers for the military-industrial complex. Had to go to take that “one small step” on the Moon and make nukes to aim at the Rooskies, ya know? Now, we outsource all that shit, and all the business world really wants is knuckle-dragging burger flippers and Wal-Mart greeters.
“Some educators are concerned that for-profit charter schools are inherently flawed, as they divert part of the funding that in a traditional public school would be spent entirely on education to maintain profits.
“For-profit charter schools rarely outperform traditional public schools, even when the charter receives higher funding. …
“On August 16, 2004, the Department of Education released the first national comparison of test scores among children in charter schools and regular public schools as part of the National Assessment of Educational Progress of 2003. … The study shows that charter school students scored lower than traditional public school students in virtually all categories. …
“On August 22, 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a report which found that students in charter schools performed several points worse than students in traditional public schools in both reading and math on the National Assessment of Educational Progress test. …
“Nearly all charter schools face implementation obstacles, but newly created schools are most vulnerable. Some charter advocates claim that new charters tend to be plagued by resource limitations, particularly inadequate startup funds … charter advocates claim that their schools rarely receive as much funding as other public schools. But in reality, this is not necessarily the case in the complex world of school funding. …
“In addition, public-school advocates assert that charter schools are designed to compete with public schools in a destructive and harmful manner rather than work in harmony with them. …
“Educators who are motivated enough to create and manage charter schools could easily be burnt out by a process that demands increased accountability while providing little professional assistance.
“Critics feel that it is unacceptably difficult to enforce the provisions of the charter, which they say makes charter schools essentially accountable to no one. … Charter schools can theoretically be closed for failing to meet the terms set forth in their charter, but in practice, this can be difficult, divisive and controversial. …
“In addition, even greater concerns arise when … charter schools are run for profit. Many educators worry that education will suffer when funding is split between profit and educational spending, rather than going completely toward teaching as is done in traditional public schools. Studies have already shown many instances of charter schools cutting programs or refusing the educate students with special needs so as to maintain profitability. Charter schools in Michigan, where for-profit charters are common, have largely been poorly implemented and students have performed at a much lower level than their traditional public school counterparts.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_school
Roger Rabbit Commentary: While the validity of the above studies is disputed, the mere fact that charter schools remain highly controversial strongly indicates they are not guaranteed to perform better than public schools and are not a proven panacea for educational problems.
15 But I recognize Mark’s view (fear) that the taxes would creep up so it just becomes an additional tax. We’ll never have an income tax in this state until we find a way to address those fears.
I don’t agree. This is a non-issue in most income-tax states. Why? Because they have a fixed-rate state income tax (say 2%) that never goes up.
The reason we don’t have a state income tax is simple. Our current tax system overwhelmingly favors the people with the most money and political influence. Any meaningful state tax reform, whether it’s via an income tax or any other means, will shift tax burden from overtaxed small businesses and lower income households to this group. Otherwise, it’s not reform. And of course the politically powerful wealthy class will oppose any shifting of taxes to them. You have to overcome their opposition to get tax reform in this state, and that’s hard to do when you’re fighting against the folks who make 90% of the political contributions to candidates.
The task force’s report is being justly criticized as just another “wish list” of spending items that can’t possibly be funded under our existing tax system.
Washington does lag behind other states in per-pupil funding, not to mention public funding of higher education, and the problem can’t be solved by shifting spending within the state budget because other state programs have already been cut to the bone.
Our education problems can’t be solved without new revenue, and as long as we have the public responding to the incessant “no taxes, no way, no how!” drumbeat of the anti-tax crowd it won’t happen. The only way it will ever happen is if the majority of voters turn a deaf ear to the anti-tax propaganda and do to the anti-taxers what they just did to the GOP congress.
18 You’re right, I quit going to DL when I woke up in the sack with your mother.
26 You’re still angry over the elections aren’t you? Did you realize that every sentence in your post @ 18 contained some sort of insult?
FYI, I consider it an honor to be insulted by that wingnut POS. And, of course, I insult him right back.
28 Per student spending has increased 6.3% per year for the past 16 years; well ahead of inflation. Throwing more money at a broken system is NOT going to fix the problem.
Try subtracting population growth first. The remainder is what’s available to keep up with inflation. Over the period you mention, Washington’s population has grown faster than the U.S. average.
Wingnut logic in action:
1.Businesses need qualified people to compete.
2.Public education is “failing”, not meeting this need.
3.Wingnuts cry “throwing more money at education will do no good.
4.Most training is conducted on the job.
5.Therefore child labor laws should be repealed.
Off Topic:
Today security filings for KB Homes indicated that Bruce Karatz, who recently resigned as CEO as part of the “back-dated stock options” scandal, will receive about $175 million in severence pay, pension benefits, and stock options.
Actually, he did much better than he would have if he had stayed with the company. Of course, supporters of McGavick and other CEO’s who receive such end-of-employment windfalls will argue that he “earned” every penny.
Please. This is part of the recent wholesale raiding of shareholder value to benefit only the CEOs and Boards of Directors (who sit on each other’s boards, and mutually support each other’s excessive compensation packages). Sure, some of the shareholders are rich, but the real losers are the ultimate beneficiaries of shares held for retirement accounts – either as individual investment funds, IRA’s, 401(k)s, or pension funds.
At one point I thought we should control this by making executive salaries in excess of 10X the national wage-earner average to be non-deductable to the corporation. But on further reflection, I doubt that would have any impact – it would just add to the damage to shareholder value, as the cost to shareholders would increase by the taxes the corporation would pay on the non-deductable portion of CEO salary.
Anybody else got a better idea?
According to the official state data book, K-12 public school enrollment grew from 894,756 in 1992 to 1,025,190 in 2005, an increase of 14.6% or about 1.04% a year, compared to population growth averaging 1.01% a year over the same period. So, population growth lops more than 1% off your “inflation” figure, Redneck.
wabbit,
per capita spending, k-12, 1990: $1,173
per capita spending, k-12, 2004: $1,438
Amounts inflation adjusted to 2004 dollars.
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/tables/fig509.asp
38 Puttybrains: I don’t reply to “terrorists love Democrats” comments anymore. It’s a waste of time. Go fuck yourself.
It’s great to see Puttybutt so angry about the election results! I love it!!! :D :D :D
Pud — please work yourself into a rage and give yourself a burst aneurysm — you can’t drop dead soon enough to suit me.
@47
Roger, I am glad you are still for tax fairness!
rhp6033: Sure. There are plenty of ideas kicking around. Since governments charter corporations (i.e., set the rules of the game), here are a couple:
Reform shareholder voting procedures.
End staggered Board terms.
Limit the number of director’s seats at publically held corporations any one person can hold at the same time.
Higher marginal tax rates at the highest income levels.
Public disclosure of compensation committee meetings.
CEO pay subject to annual shareholder approval.
There’s a lot more.
PtbaA @ 55,
Thanks for the link. It’s interesting that MtR used 1990, right before a large, temporary increase in spending. Since the mid-90s, per capita spending has flat-lined so that we are now below the 50-state average.
It is also worth noting that we are funding at a lower rate per $1000 in personal income than 1990 (or any time since the mid-80s): http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/tables/fig510.asp
55
That’s an average increase in per-pupil spending of 1.5% a year over the period of the Computer Revolution.
Which seems affordable, as inflation-adjusted per-capita personal income grew an average of 2.0% a year over the same period.
Thus, the income of Washington residents grew faster than per-pupil spending during that period.
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/databook/economy/ct02.asp
Here’s the inflation-adjusted per-pupil figures from the link @55:
2004 $1,438
2003 na
2002 $1,411
2001 na
2000 $1,403
1999 $1,392
1998 $1,377
1997 $1,331
1996 $1,332
1995 $1,310
1994 $1,325
1993 $1,389
1992 $1,313
1991 $1,259
1990 $1,173
You are right spending is flat (well a very small increase), in real terms (inflation adjusted). Is there a reason that education spending should grow faster than inflation?
All this chart shows is that personal income has been growing at a faster rate than inflation, since education spending has pretty much tracked inflation since 2000.
PUDDYBUD: LIKE THE KLOWN YOU ARE IRRELEVANT. THE RIGHT WING BULLSHIT AIN’T GOT LEGS ANYMORE – IT’S SLOUGHING OFF INTO THE SEWER WHERE IT BELONGS. AT LEAST THE KLOWN HAD THE SENSE TO HANG UP HIS BOZO SHOES. YOU WON’T STOP UNTIL THE MEN IN THE WHITE COATS COME BY TO PEEL YOU OFF YOUR KEYBOARD AND TAKE YOU TO WESTERN STATE HOSPITAL. OVER THERE YOU CAN HOOK UP WITH YOUR BRO MWS.
MIKE STEELE – WHAT HAPPENED?
KEN BLACKWELL – WHAT HAPPENED?
THE RIGHT-WING REALITY DENYING LOSING STREAK LEADS ONLY TO THE LOONEY BIN FOR PUDDYBUD. IT’S A TRUE HOMECOMING!!!
Rabbit – Don’t be a fucking idiot… if you can help it. Spending PER STUDENT has increased 6.3%. Total dollars is the 6.3% PLUS population growth.
Redneck — Don’t be a fucking welsher. Pay your gambling debt to Goldy!
YOU GOTTA REPEAT IT A FEW TIMES FOR IT TO SINK IN TO THESE RIGHT-WING WASHOUTS:
YOU ARE LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSERS!!!
16 Daddy Love
Some of your comments need clarification please. The NEA on their website at http://www.nea.org/charter/index.html says: “NEA believes that charter schools and other nontraditional public school options have the potential to facilitate education reforms and develop new and creative teaching “methods that can be replicated in traditional public schools for the benefit of all children. Whether charter schools will fulfill this potential depends on how charter schools are designed and implemented, including the oversight and assistance provided by charter authorizers.”
Could you explain your comments and provide some facts please in relation to the NEA comments or were you only voicing your opinion:
“- The “autonomy” of charter schools reduces the authority of local school boards, reducing local control.
– Even public schools are wrestling with determining accepted standards and assessment of quality by which to hold schools accountable, which would have to be in place to evaluate charter school performance.
– There has been in general little evidence of increased student achievement in charter schools.
– We run the risk that charter schools will skim the “cream” of the best students and/or exclude poor, minority, and handicapped students.
– If each charter can choose its staff “freely,” this threatens staff certification and almost certainly reduces staff bargaining rights, making charter schools a union-busting tool.
– The existing system, where majority of students remain, would lose funds.”
Thanks!
One thing about statistics. If you only look at the ones that make your point, someone else is likely to come along and find some that disagree.
For example:
Education spending per $1,000 Personal Income, k-12, 1990: $48.59
Education spending per $1,000 Personal Income, k-12, 2004: $44.25
Amounts inflation adjusted to 2004 dollars.
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/tables/fig512.asp
So, as a percentage of our income, we’re spending less on education than we were in 1990, and since teachers (like the rest of us) feel that their incomes should rise with the overall economy, it could easily be argued that the “percentage of income” figure is a better yardstick than the “dollars per capita” figure.
In the real world, neither of these figures is much good by itself, and there is little doubt in anyone’s mind that at least some of our education expenditures could be put to better use.
The problem with that is that nobody seems to agree on exactly what parts can be eliminated. Personally, I think that an expensive sports program is a waste of money, but I’d bet that the sports teams at my local high schools might disagree.
You might think that music and drama programs are an expense that we can do without. I would disagree.
The one thing we might be able to agree on is that schools, regardless of the level of funding, tend to be much more effective when parents and the community get involved. Unfortunately, this is generally easier for those of us that are relatively affluent than for those with limited means. As the percentage of households with two wage-earners rises, along with the percentage of one-parent households, education expenses will rise as well, since the schools will have to take up some of the duties that normally can be performed by parents.
Single parent households, 1990: 23.7%
Single parent households, 2000: 27.1%
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/tables/fig204.asp
There are no easy answers, and certainly just “throwing money” at the problems won’t make them go away.
But, since you probably aren’t willing to quit spending money on football teams, and I’m not willing to quit spending on music and drama, and the percentage of single parents (whose children tend to require more help) isn’t going down, I’m thinking that we might just have to consider simply spending a bit more overall.
23 The Socialist
Please take a look at http://www.snopes.com/quotes/candidate.asp for misquotes as you are possibly attributing the wrong person in you post. And yes George Bush did say: “More and more of our imports come from overseas.”
68 sillyguy
As the NEA said, though they were more circumspect because they don’t want to seem to be dimissing charter shcools in teh absence of a conrete proposal, but I concur: the effects we would see would “[depend] on how charter schools are designed and implemented”
My comments were prefaced with a statement that I was speaking in the absence of current legislation on which to comment. That being the case, what else could it be but my opinion, informed as it may be? Keep in mind that the last charter school measure in this area was soundly defeated, so don’t look for another one soon.
I’ll comment on a couple of your questions:
“The “autonomy” of charter schools reduces the authority of local school boards, reducing local control.”
Charter school measures are forever touting that the new schools would be able to try innovative practices and new approaches. Since the local school boards approve public school curriculum, I don’t see how they’ll achieve that innovation without granting somewhat less power to local boards over charter school curriculum, lest the charter schools be denied their sacred right to innovate. If particular legislation addresses this issue, I’d of course consider its merits.
Do you think that public schools have settled the issues of determining accepted standards and assessment of quality by which to hold schools accountable?
“There has been in general little evidence of increased student achievement in charter schools.”
RAND did a study, among others, in which they concluded
“At least as effective?” Then why replace public schools that perform as well?
“We run the risk that charter schools will skim the “cream” of the best students and/or exclude poor, minority, and handicapped students.”
From the RAND study: “…they are less likely than matched conventional public schools to offer some types of programs (e.g., gifted). Start-up charter schools have a smaller proportion of special education students than do conventional public schools and are much more likely to mainstream their special education students…” Savvy?
“If each charter can choose its staff “freely,” this threatens staff certification and almost certainly reduces staff bargaining rights, making charter schools a union-busting tool.”
This is on certification and not union-busting, from RAND (I’m in a hurry and am not taking an hour to survey all the relevant literature). This is how they keep their costs down, but there’s a price to pay:
“Charter school teachers have less experience and fewer teaching credentials than those in public schools…“
CF @ 64,
All this chart shows is that personal income has been growing at a faster rate than inflation, since education spending has pretty much tracked inflation since 2000.
It’s true that it shows what you say, but it shows a bit more than that too. It demonstrates that our capacity to fund at a higher rate has increased at the same time our actual funding has stablized. Of course, there are other issues (notably, our property wealth) that impact our capacity to fund schools, but MtR was being disingenuous in claiming our per capita funding has grown at an unusually high rate.
All was a poor choice of words on my part.
I’ll let you take that up with him.
So do you think spending growth for eduction should grow faster than inflation?
The primary reason that spending is down, in terms of personal income, is that personal income in Washington has grown much more rapidly than inflation. So, I think it makes those numbers misleading.
Per capita spending has had a compound annual growth rate of nearly 3.0% a year, in real terms, between 1990 and 2004. How much more real growth in spending would you consider to be a “bit” more?
no income tax. never!
ok…. how about income tax only on people making 250k a year – we’re all about weath re-distribution here anyway, right?
Yes, but there are also the factors of higher costs to educate due to the higher percentages of single parent households, along with the higher cost to hire and retain teachers and other personnel because the higher personal income levels in the industries competing for personnel require schools to offer higher wages and benefits in order to attract qualified personnel.
While many folks enter teaching because they feel a personal calling in that area, there is also an economic incentive (or we wouldn’t need to pay teachers at all).
When wages and benefits in other industries rise, school systems need to raise wages and benefits to attract and retain quality people. The intangible benefits of teaching only go so far.
Additionally, we’ve had considerable population growth in many areas, requiring additional schools and infrastructure. Increases in property aquisition costs in the areas with the most growth have far outpaced inflation.
Since the largest percentage of education costs go towards personnel (81% of the budget for the Peninsula School District) you can see some of the problem. Of the overall budget, 78% of the money goes to regular instruction, special education, CTE/Vocational instruction, and compensatory education programs.
We can work to reduce the 22% of the budget that goes to administration, transportation, maintenance, extra curricular activities, etc…, but there is only so much blood that can be squeezed out of that turnip, as many of those “extras” are required by law.
(One of the benefits of living in a small town is that the school board is not some faceless entity spending money as fast as possible. The school board here includes neighbors and friends.)
Source: http://www.peninsula.wednet.ed.....e06-07.pdf
So do you think spending growth for eduction should grow faster than inflation?
The question is absurd. A priori judgments about taxing and spending are not to be taken seriously. Whether or not spending on education should grow faster than inflation depends on the baseline spending, the needs of the educational system, and our capacity to fund those needs. When someone expresses outrage at the increase in spending over the last 16 years (and, by the way, ignoring the stability of spending over the last 12-13 years), as MtR does, without considering any other factors, that person should be ridiculed and scorned.
Regarding an income tax, many people are now working two or more jobs. You are no longer taxing progressively just wealthier people. You are putting a greater tax burden on labor than ever before. Someone who works 60 hours a week to afford a home will be vulnerable to an abusive tax rate.
Our social dynamics have changed. And Gary Locke himself said that states with income taxes are having the same problems as we who are subject to sales taxes.
I’m all for a higher sales tax. Tax unearned income and corporate income. It doesn’t all trickle down . . . some of it gets absorbed into less CEO and managerial pay.
Fvck an income tax!
We’ll end up with income tax PLUS sales tax.
**Just think seat belts.**
Hey! I’m breathing….let’s tax air, yeah good idea.
How about my first born son while you’re at it you socialist klowns
Hang tall Puddy. These libtard whack-jobs are still drunk with their win. Now that they’re in power in less than 8 weeks we’ll see how their 100 hours of cleaning the house comes about. Without earmarks how will Charlie Rangel bring the pork to new york? (Nice rhyme the pork for new york!) How will Robert The Klansman Byrd build another highway?
Regarding education, I am all for spenign wisely to get the students educated. The problem is the PC in the classroom. We went from 1st in 1967 to 23rd today? Why? The libtards controll the classrooms with PC, dumbing down to the clueless ones in the classroom. Watering down curriculum where Bill Gates said he has to get labor overseas because our schools are producing dummies (more like mind-numbed libtards!).