BYOB wrote:

I'm not suggesting that people in the community shouldn't be allowed to raise extra money for their students. I do not, however, believe that everyone in that region should be forced to do it. They should be forced to contribute whatever the equal amount per student comes up to be, but beyond that, it should be individually optional.

I am also of the mind that money usually has very little to do with an individual students performance while they are in school. Money is for functionality of schools, the actual learning is up to the student and their desire or lack thereof to embrace what is being taught to them.

 
Just being a contrarian and asking some basic questions that we should all consider before we crown 76 as the answer to our prayers.

As to the latest twist to this interesting discussion,,,Is there not a democratic process by which the majority in a district can set reasonable priorities?
Must the number be the same throughout the state and nation in order to be acceptable?

BTW, name a tax that is individually optional.
Just spent the weekend doing my income taxes and they're a little higher than I think reasonable

Last edited by Goose (3/30/2015 8:51 am)

BYOB wrote:

Goose wrote:

BYOB wrote:

I'm not suggesting that people in the community shouldn't be allowed to raise extra money for their students. I do not, however, believe that everyone in that region should be forced to do it. They should be forced to contribute whatever the equal amount per student comes up to be, but beyond that, it should be individually optional.

I am also of the mind that money usually has very little to do with an individual students performance while they are in school. Money is for functionality of schools, the actual learning is up to the student and their desire or lack thereof to embrace what is being taught to them.

 
Is there not a democratic process by which the majority in a district can set reasonable priorities?
Must the number be the same throughout the state and nation in order to be acceptable?

BTW, name a tax that is individually optional.

I'm not talking about taxes being individually optional.
Sure, there's a 'democratic' process. It's a school board. But I don't believe it's a democratic decision when someone loses there home becuase of school taxes, and that is the main problem.
 

 
Just being a skeptic and asking some basic questions.
BTW, I've asked this several times and never gotten any data.
How many homes, and family farms are lost each year in PA simply because the tax burden is higher than in other states?

Goose wrote:

BYOB wrote:

Goose wrote:

 
Is there not a democratic process by which the majority in a district can set reasonable priorities?
Must the number be the same throughout the state and nation in order to be acceptable?

BTW, name a tax that is individually optional.

I'm not talking about taxes being individually optional.
Sure, there's a 'democratic' process. It's a school board. But I don't believe it's a democratic decision when someone loses there home becuase of school taxes, and that is the main problem.
 

 
Just being a skeptic and asking some basic questions.
BTW, I've asked this several times and never gotten any data.
How many homes, and family farms are lost each year in PA simply because the tax burden is higher than in other states?

I know. Questions are good! They force one to think harder, which is usually always a good thing.
I did try my damnedest to find some kind of data on the number of family farms lost due to property taxes, but haven't been able to find anything. There might be some data somewhere that chronicles the numbers of farms from year to year, but nothing seems to list why a farm was sold or lost. I'm guessing that they don't track that detail.
 

Interesting discussion going.
I was just looking at a site showing the per student spending by state.
There is a pretty wide spread, which reflects differences in state wealth, and what priority regions put on education.. I know that it's much different than the issue of spending by district, but there is an analogy.

What if we set a state standard of spending per child, and the number is lower than I believe wise or appropriate? Is my only option to use a private school? Why can't I work with local governments to have a funding scheme that I, and the majority of my neighbors find reasonable? After all, we'd be funding it ourselves.

BYOB wrote:

In that scenario, at least you would have another option. There are many who don't. I don't understand why you and your neighbors that want to see more spending on schools than some property owners can bear and still keep their homes, couldn't just donate whatever you want to the school? If you got every single property owner to say o.k. to paying more, it still wouldn't account for the future home buyers that will inevitably settle in the area, who may not have children in school, so therefore may not be buying in that area based on school ratings, but for many other reasons.


Just to be clear, I don't believe there should be a guarantee of outcomes, just a general guarantee of starting platform.

 
I don't think that you could reliably budget and fund on what would basically be an unending series of fund drives. I doubt it would work. But hey, I could easily be wrong.

I sent all of my kids to public schools because I don't like the whole elist, gated community mindset so prevalent in private schools. But I want lots of local control.