Wake County Manager David Cooke is recommending giving less than half of the $8.8 million funding increase requested by the school system.
Cooke's $941.5 million budget presented today would give the Wake County school system $318.3 million, a $3.9 million increase in funding. The school board, working on the budget developed by Superintendent Tony Tata, asked the county for $323.2 million.
Cooke's budget would not raise property tax rate. Instead, he'd boost spending by using $22 million in increased revenue in property, sales and other taxes.
For instance, Cooke wants to use $6 million of the $22 million to pay off county debt on capital projects. He'd use $5.9 million to boost criminal justice and EMS spending.
Cooke also wants to give county employees a two percent, performance-based raise.
The budget is now in the hands of the Wake County Board of Commissioners, who will vote on it next month.
If the school board can't get the additional $4.9 million, they'll face tough decisions.
For instance, should the school board take even more out of the fund balance? It stands at around $5 million after removing more than $28 million in savings to replace the loss of federal EduJobs money,
Should the board scrap the $5.3 million increase in the teacher salary supplement?
Should the board restore the $2.1 million cut in school instructional supplies?
Comments
starting over up here
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 11:48 — turnerk1The thread I'm replying to was getting kind of cramped, so I'm starting over up here. Shearetw, Bob Scone and I were discussing funding levels. Shearetw is advocating no more funding for the school system because (and correct me if I'm wrong) he doesn't like the current size and organization of WCPSS, thinks it does not use the money it has well, and doubts the small amount of money we are talking about will really make a difference in educational outcomes anyway. He challenged me to prove that spending more money really improves education and to find a comparable system that is doing well, because he believes no system our size does a good job no matter what is spent.
Well, I think it is very easy to prove that the quailty of education is directly influenced by funding levels. Every biology student who does not dissect a frog because the school doesn't have enough money for the experiment, has had her education negatively impacted. Every third grader who doesn't get to go on a field trip to the science musuem because the school can't afford to pay for the bus, has had his education negatively impacted. Every band student that didn't get to play a new piece of music (exposing him to the most recent compositional styles and instrumental techniques) because there is no money for new music, has had his education negatively impacted. Every middle school student who is given an outdated social studies textbook, with countries listed that don't even exist any more, has been negatively impacted. Will any of those examples result in a lower EOG score? Maybe not, but make no mistake, that doesn't mean that their education hasn't gotten worse. We talk about EOG scores as if they tell us about whether a school is good or not, but that is because this paltry and inadequate measure is the only one we've got. All the EOG scores tell us is how a group of kids, on a specific day, do on a specific test which assesses a very narrow field of study in a very specific way. Can a child do a particular word problem and pick out the right answer from a set of four possible answers? Can a child figure out from a reading comprehension multiple choice question how a test designer wants them to understand a passage? It doesn't even tell us if the child comprehends the reading, only if they comprehend the reading in the way someone else did!
Shearetw points out that we haven't been losing teachers due to their low pay. Maybe that's true for our current faculty, but for every brilliant math student who decides not to be a teacher, and to become an engineer instead because he wants to be able to raise a family on a living wage, well, then every one of the students he might have had are the losers.
So, yes, funding matters. It doesn't really matter how other systems do it, how our system is organized, or anything else. Lack of money has consequences whether we can see it on the EOGs or the SATs or not.
OK, here we go. First, to
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 12:36 — shearertwOK, here we go. First, to Bob, size of the system absolutely matters. The larger the system, the less it can be customized to individual needs of the students in their local schools. That is huge. Second, to both, I don't disagree that funding matters but we're talking about margins here. 3% more or 3% less. WCPSS has a lot of "extras" now. Different magnet programs, classes I've never heard of in public schools, transportation this way and that... Lot's of little programs that may or may not be helping anyone. In my opinion, frogs and up to date text books are more important than all of those things.....as is teacher compensation. But we still have those other things! That tells me, we're not prioritizing correctly. When I see spending on stupid stuff and not spending on frogs...then I'm thinking we may not need to be giving any more funding.
Don't get me wrong, I think all those extras (field trips, band instruments, speaking Chinese) are nice to have and certainly improve the quality of education but so would a trip to the moon. Sometimes, you have to prioritize what's important. I don't think we're doing that.
The bottom line is....I don't believe in the education model we have in WC (which is similar to the failed systems across this country except in many cases, we do even more stupid stuff). I believe if we give WCPSS 5% more funding, they'll waste 80% of that meaning we'll get a 1% improvement for 5% increase. They'll also not get the message that they need to change education dramatically.
I don't doubt that a lack of funding is hurting the educational quality of WCPSS. However, I also don't believe that's the most effective use of my money. For example, I can keep it and send my kids to private school or an educational camp in the summer. Why give WCPSS another $1 of mine when they'll waste 80 cents? Why shouldn't I just keep the whole dollar and spend it taking my kids to the zoo? That doesn't just apply to me. Everyone who pays taxes would be better off keeping that money and doing something more productive with it. Donate to a charter school. Donate to a church. Send a poor kid to summer camp, etc. Putting money in a system, any system, that is wasteful is not an effective use of money....no matter how noble the cause.
Well . . Ok . . .
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 12:39 — Bob_Sconce(1) Here is the Superintendent's proposed budget: http://www.wcpss.net/budget/2012-13-spb/ . Please point, by page number, to the things that should be cut to make up for the $5M difference between what the board is asking for and what David Cooke want to spend.
(2) Recognize what we're talking about: Cooke wants to spend money in one way; the district want to spend it in a different way. Why do you believe that Cooke's way is better? In particular, do you think that it makes more sense to give county employees a raise or give the money to the school district? Do you think it makes more sense to retire county debt early, or give the money o the school district?
Holy SMOKES....I'm glad you
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:02 — shearertwHoly SMOKES....I'm glad you sent me that link! Look at the PPE rates between Wake and CMS (from page 16)! These rates exclude "nutritional services" and we know what that means.
Solon you see this! In other words, we're basically spending the same operational amounts per student as CMS but have 50% less ED students which we know are more expensive to educate......AND CMS is doing a better job with ED students than we are. Isn't a larger system supposed to be "more efficient" anyway? Aren't we the largest system in the state? What does that say Bob?
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Charlotte, NC $7,568
Wake Raleigh, NC $7,561
can you share the link?
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 09:48 — jenmancan you share the link?
In my post...
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 10:03 — Bob_Sconcehttp://www.wcpss.net/budget/2012-13-spb/ It.s just the budget.
I see
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:32 — Solon77I see and your comment just reaffirms how little you know. Sure any entity can cut to the bone and get by in the short term and this is what CMS has done the last two years. They are basically riding the wave of the investment that was made years ago. Development of students by 4th grade is essential. These are the students who received the benefit 4-6 years ago that are now in middle school and high school generating the improved test scores and graduation rates. Wake County has never been able to make such an investment, thanks to the forward thinking of people like yourself with the Norquist mentality of starve the beast.
I do find it incredible our funding is below Cumberland County. BTW - CMS is asking for a $40m increase in county funding for the 2012/2013 year.
We don't need to have any further discussions. You have made it clear that your philospohy is to starve public education to increase demand of charter schools.
Apparently I didn't make it
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:42 — shearertwApparently I didn't make it clear....that's not my philosophy at all. My philosophy is to change the current public school model to a charter school model. I would do this by fostering an environment where charter and private schools can thrive. That would be an environment where we don't spend lots of tax dollars on a failed public school model as that is counter productive. This may include vouchers along with charter schools. That's not "starving" public education, that's giving people the power to choose what they want with all on equal footing.
Sure sounds
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:51 — Solon77From your post
Every cut will increase the demand for charter schools which is better for education in WC.
Sure sounds like starving to me.
That would be a possible
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:58 — shearertwThat would be a possible (but not intentional) side effect of not continue to dump money down the current public school model rat hole, but a desirable side effect which was the point I was making. If we put charter schools on equal footing as the current public school system, the demand will be there without any need to do anything. In fact, I believe the demand for charter schools already outpaces the availability and they're the ones being "starved".
Rat hole
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 15:26 — Solon77So you think charters are the savior ? Take a look at NC Charters, it is not all of the rosey picture you are thinking it is. Get your mind away from Raleigh Charter, Magellan, and Endeavor.
With regards to New Orleans - see below a blog post from someone in the trenches.
BTW - is your vision of a chart school one that is staffed by Teach for America, kids out of school and moving on every two years ?
You have applied to the local charter schools haven't you ?
Wow! You found a naysayer on
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 15:37 — shearertwWow! You found a naysayer on a blog. That's incredible!
FYI- Have no idea what Teach for America is.
Is anyone being forced to attend a charter school?
FYI-The New Orleans Charter School system only began AFTER Hurricane Katrina which occurred in Aug, 2005. I'm thinking they can't be blamed for the "Greater New Orleans area prison pipeline"? That does, however, speak to where the NO school system was BEFORE the charter schools....
So far, the experiment appears to be working. Before Katrina, two thirds of students were attending schools deemed failing by state standards, notes Leslie Jacobs, a New Orleans education-reform advocate; in the 2010–11 academic year, she says, it will be less than one third. “The fact that we haven’t gotten everything right yet shouldn’t take away from the fact that we’re getting a whole lot more right,” she says. New Orleans schools are still performing below the state average on achievement tests, but according to Jacobs’s analysis of state data, the gap between New Orleans and the rest of the state has basically been cut in half.
from
Necessity Is the Mother of Invention
Aug 26, 2010 1:00 AM EDT Sarah Laskow
Wow - found a supporter
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 21:34 — Solon77For every supporter I can find a naysayer. For every successful charter school I can find charters that are failures. For every great public school we can find ones that fail. The point is your model is not the path to the promised land. Is there a role for charters ? Absolutely. Is it a model that can replace the public education system - far from it. Although I will make you a deal. You are a free society supported, so let's embrace it in it's pureist sense. Eliminate all Federal taxes and let individuals decide on where to spend the money.
Balance
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 09:50 — Voice_of_Reason_Although a free education is not promised in the US Constitution, it is mandated by law. At the state level it is in the Constitution and that dictates how we should approach it. The federal government mainly adds to the cost of education by dictating all sorts of mandates to the states, Some states cannot afford to fund these unfunded federal mandates and require additional federal funds to keep their systems and that is a problem. The federal government does very little (if anything) to improve education. Heck, they can't even provide us with standardized testing so we can compare how our schools are doing compared to the rest of the country. IMHO schools should be contracted to private companies and have contracts written to ensure standards are met. This would allow collaboration and eliminate the influence of teacher unions and politics for the most part. If a school doesn't perform, they make less profit. Bonuses for exceeding standards could be worked into the contracts. Contracts would not have to be system wide and may be to individual schools. Profit is a big motivator to improve, unlike government bureaucracy, politics, and union greed.
The public still pays, only we get a better outcome for our money.
Misguided
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 12:07 — Solon77For clarification I did not say anything about a free education. I was refering to a free society where deciding what to fund is left up to individual choice.
As far as schools contracting with private companies - just check out the Washington DC school district or Broward county in Florida where charters are run by for profit entities. Cost is up and performance is lagging. A written performance agreement doesn't mean squat.
Profit is a big motivator to improve - when the public is paying it is not. If you need any evidence, just look at the defense industry. If you want an example in the education sector just look at the private technical schools. These entites have the highest level of fraud and non performance and yet they continue to thrive. Look at Washington DC and Florida as I mentioned above examples of waste and abuse. These private education firms are LLCs, out of business at the blink of an eye and open for business the next day under a new name ready to take taxpayer $ again.
I know exactly what you said Solon77
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 17:34 — Voice_of_Reason_I saw your smart-a*s attempt at trying to belittle conservative belief putting out an almost anarchist point of view. For the record, I believe in taxes and public funded education. I just don't believe in wasteful spending and broken programs. I also don't believe in reward of lazyness and bad behaviour.
I saw too many private companies in my life that saved the government money (yes in the Defense Dept.) by doing a better job for less to believe your crap. If they didn't, it was the contract or the stupid regulations the government tacked on that was the problem. A poorly written contract or a lack of contract oversight is a government problem also. I also saw a lot of contracts that shouldn't have been let due to political cronyism and some awarded to companies that should not have been in business due to "fairness & equity" AGAIN GOVERNMENT ! The best system has bonuses for performance and minimum government interference.
I saw to many public
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 21:32 — Solon77For every company you saw save money, I can point to two others that are robbing the taxpayers blind. Do you think moving education over to the private sector is any more immune to the abuses that are seen in other industries. You seem to be blind to that fact.
A small example Salon77, in San Francisco, CA
Sat, 05/26/2012 - 07:24 — Voice_of_Reason_Covenant Aviation Security, a private company under contract with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), provides passenger and baggage screening at SFO.
It costs the government less, is more efficient, better at screening (proven), and the airport and airlines like it better. Also the passengers find the screeners more pleasant. Several other large airports want to do this and have the right under law, but guess what...? Government got in their way, why???.. to protect a few bureaucrats their cushy government jobs.
I bet I can show you why any of your government to private contacts aren't working. It will show about 95% of the problem as government. That would include hiring these companies that shouldn't have been hired. I can also point out that government increases the costs, including salary costs that those companies have to pass along.
Salon77, I have 24+ years in the federal government, including time as an Inspector General Investigator, I seen too much, and lost too much hair over it.
You want to see where
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 22:26 — shearertwYou want to see where socialism and the government welfare state ends up? Just take a look at California....GAME-SET-MATCH!
And your solution
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 13:06 — shearertwAnd your solution is.....drum roll....status quo. You sure do have low standards for what is acceptable.
Solution
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 22:02 — Solon77Yeah leadership and management is hard work. Your solution is to throw it over the fence by providing vouchers as if this is the path to the promised land. I noticed you have not touched the fact that for every successful charter school there is one that is failing students. So how is this any different ?
If its failing students, the
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 22:23 — shearertwIf its failing students, the parents can leave...why don't you get that?
If they don't leave, perhaps they have a different view with regard to whether it's failing their kids or not than you do or what some standardized test says. You don't know why they stay! It may be the best place their kid has ever been! A lot of those studies fail to look at that bc charters often take kids that are having real trouble in school. If the school IS really failing the kid and the parents don't leave, whose fault is that? Keep in mind that most parents who send their kids to charters know what they are doing and you don't.
Parents can leave
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 23:01 — Solon77You are making the assumption that choosing education is going to be like going to the mall to buy socks, where there are twenty stores with all kinds of choices. I don't see education progressing to this level of choice. I certainly do not see a new school opening next to another school with the business model of taking market share from the school next door. Keep in mind people place a high value on proximity and while there are some parents that will endure a long drive to a school (like magnet parents) the majority will not.
Perhaps you are envisioning like what we see with churches. Drive up and down Falls of Neuse, if you don't like the church you are in just go next door.
Choice...
Sat, 05/26/2012 - 09:44 — Bob_SconceI think if you look at what's happening in Charter Schools in North Carolina, you'll see that we are moving toward that level of choice. Charters are, unfortunately, limited by the abominable NC Standard Course of Study, but they're stull mini-laboratories of innovation. Look at Quest Academy, RCHS, The forthcoming Wisdom school, Franklin Academy, etc.... They all have very different ways of teaching.
Education is going to look very different for my kids' kids than it looks today. I just think sheartw is pushing forward on radical changes in hopes of bringing that future closer, but at the cost of hurting countless students in the transition.
Bob, I'm going to have to
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 10:50 — shearertwBob,
I'm going to have to agree to disagree with that a more rapid transition to a voucher-charter model would "hurt countless" of WCPSS students in the process. Its all in the details but your assertion is highly exaggerated chicken little talk that only prevents real change from EVER coming. Most significant changes in history have included some big lurches forward. WCPSS can and should deal with a few years of stagnant to decreased funding while the transition occurs and is phased in over ...say 5-7 years. One recent voucher program in Indiana I believe began by offering it to families making 61K per year or less. I doubt that included a lot of kids currently attending private school. That amount could be adjusted over the years to include more students. Again, its all in the details but dismissing it outright without facts is just fear of change which is the biggest road block to a better system.
Indeed
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 13:05 — Bob_SconceI'm with you on agree to disagree. I'll note that whenever there's a major change, there are always those who are harmed by it. That harm is usually unintentional.
I think we disagree primarily on the degree to which the current public school system is failing students. If you see it as mostly failing students, then removing money from it won't really do much harm. If you see it as moderately successful, then removing money can indeed do a lot of harm. I think I'm more in the second camp, so my goal is to transition to a system that's wildly successful, but to do that in a way that builds on the moderate success instead of decimating it.
Green Hope HS, for example, seems to be doing a great job, on par or better than most private schools in the country. We need to be sure that we don't destroy that school's success in our transition to what comes next.
Yes, I think you're right.
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 08:01 — shearertwYes, I think you're right. I do believe the current public school system is mostly failing students. Green Hope HS may be doing a good job, perhaps great, but I'm guessing that has a lot to do with the parents that are behind those students much like the success of many private schools can be attributed. For every Green Hope HS in WCPSS, however, there are two others that are doing a poor job. I don't consider that successful system. Its seems to me what you're saying is, as long as there are a few shining stars, we can't take dramatic steps to improve the system even when it is failing a majority of students. Most of the kids inWCPSS don't end up going to Green Hope. WCPSS may be a great system for those kids but is simply unfair that the majority don't have such opportunities. I completely agree that making a dramatic transition will disrupt some people's secret little fishing holes....i.e. their "private schools" paid for with tax payer money. I want all WCPSS students to have an opportunity to attend a real private school or charter with tax pary money, not just a select few lucky ones.
You can't see it because you
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 23:15 — shearertwYou can't see it because you don't believe in the power of the individual or choice. While there won't be as many choices as socks, there will be many more choices than we have now. Better yet, we'll be able to see which choices are succeeded and more of those will be created and that is how education will be improved over time. With one model with a captive audience, there is no way to know what works best or any forces to drive change and improvement so we keep just getting more of the same. Government is terrible at innovation, that is why public education has gone largely unchanged for the last 40 years. Can you think of anything else that has not changed in 40 years? Phones? Cars? Computers? Space travel? Oh, guess the last one is unchanged too, wonder who was in charge of that?
VOR, Thanks for having the
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 10:15 — shearertwVOR,
Thanks for having the courage to put forth an idea! I'm sure you can't put all the details the plan on the blog but it sounds interesting. It may not be the "promised land" either but it already sounds better than what we've got so thanks for putting it forward. BEWARE OF INCOMING projectiles from those who haven't got the same fortitude....
Happy Memorial Day as well!
Thanks
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 17:41 — Voice_of_Reason_Make my Memorial Day happy by praying for and remembering the military members that died in the line of duty for our country and for those that suffered lifelong injuries doing the same. This weekend is not about just having fun. But that said, have fun....just remember why you can.
Don't need a Memorial Day
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 22:31 — shearertwDon't need a Memorial Day for that...
Solon77, We need a basic
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 08:27 — shearertwSolon77,
We need a basic federal government to perform the duties specifically outlined in the Constitution. We pay a national sales tax or flat tax to cover those few basic items and I'm 100% with you.
Didn't say charter schools were the “promised land”...just better than current model. I'd think a combination of charter schools, vouchers, and public vocational schools may be closer to “promised land” (if there is a promised land in publically funded education).
Look, I’ve thrown out a lot of ideas (which are far from perfect, especially considering its impossible to outline every particular detail in rapidly written blog postings), but what is your solution? You only seem to want to throw more money at public education. Well, how much is enough? How much of my money do you need to take? 40%, 50%, 60%? Where does it end? Several places spend $10K, $15K or even $17K per student with mediocre results. We tried forced busing for decades with NO improvement. What is your solution? Do you have the courage, like I do, to put any new idea forward to have folks throw bombs at it?
Need a basic
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 13:04 — Solon77Not surprising we are apart on the first statement. I understand your view of the specific duties to be the funding of the military. While I agree with a defense we have gone well beyond what is needed. The military is 2x what it needs to be.
At the time the constitution was written the framers did not envision education, transporation, healthcare, environmental protection but they did allow for the common good. If you think about it the reason for government is because of greed. Everytime a company gets too greedy and does something stupid out comes another law. How would you like WR Grace in your back yard dumping toxins in your watershed because it would be take away from the bottom line to dispose of it properly.
With regards to wcpss education system. The performance is no different than any other large county. Some schools perform outstanding and others not so good. This is not unlike a large corporation. A large corporation rarely clicks on all cylinders at the same from one quarter to the next let alone year after year. As far as throwing money at it, that is not what I am saying, but there needs to be a basic amount. kids should have lab supplies, literature books and teachers should not be having to fund schools. Having a line on the tax return for teachers to deduct personal money spent on school supplies has to tell you something. Which by the way still only gives the teacher 15 cents on the $. If there is to be anything it should be a tax credit and not an income deduction. Your solution is to cut off all funding as a protest and push for charters and privatization. Charters as shown by the data can be good as well as bad. Private schools are going to be selective in their admission. Their demand will be built on reputation and so they will select the brightest students in order to show "success". So where does that leave the kids who struggle ?
So what needs to happen to improve the school system ? As a start, there needs to be a committment by the community whether it be time, money or both to ensure the basics are funded. We are below that threshold now. With regards to the lower performing schools, a business approach would be to identify and evaluate each of the low performing schools and to put a measurable action plan towards improvement. It maybe the principal is the wrong fit and needs to be changed. It maybe there is only 1-2 classes that is dragging the school down. It maybe there are not enough text books. So in other words identify and address the issue. This is not a one size fits all. There also needs to be a recognition that maybe a 60% pass rate is the best that can be done. We also need to make sure the average and high performing kids are taken care of as well. I am not advocating we need to spend to the level of Chapel Hill, but we should be able to match Cumberland County.
The reason for the need for
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 22:42 — shearertwThe reason for the need for government is greed? Perhaps in socialism but not this country. The founders believed the reason for government was to protect everyone's natural born right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Get that...pursuit of happiness, not a guarantee! In fact, they also believed that the protection of personal property was one of the most important reasons for govt. Just the opposite of what you suggest.
The founders were a lot smarter and ensightful than you realize. To suggest they didn't understand healthcare or transportation or education as a reason to force someone else to pay for that is ridiculous. They would have never approved of having the Federeal government involved taking money from people to pay for another's healthcare or education or housing or transportation. You clearly do not understand what they were saying at all. The progressive movement has been distorting the common good clause for the past 100 years but that doesn't make them correct, they couldn't be more wrong.
1- Just a quick glance,
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 12:50 — shearertw1- Just a quick glance, eliminate the suppl pay increase by 1% (5.3M)
2- Retire the debt early and don't give county employees a raise then lower taxes.
That's the level of confidence I have in our public school system model. Every cut will increase the demand for charter schools which is better for education in WC. This, unfortunately, may be the only way to get there....kicking and screaming all the way.
Finally an honest view
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:04 — Solon77Every cut will increase the demand for charter schools which is better for education in WC.
Somewhat suspected but it is good that you just came out and said it. Now you can stop making stuff up to try and support your philosophy.
somewhat suspected?
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:25 — shearertwWould rather just cut WCPSS budget in half and move money over to charter schools but, as Bob said earlier, the state won't allow that. I believe I've been open and consistent with that all along saying the current model is broken and we need a new one. You asked for one and I gave you a school system (New Orleans) with >60% of kids attending charter schools.
Why, then, have you only "somewhat suspected"?
My philosophy is: The current public school system model which WCPSS operates in not working nor will it ever work effectively. WCPSS is one of the worst examples due to its extreme size and ridiculousness (with regard to school assignment). First and foremost, I would break WCPSS into at least 5 "smaller" districts. Second, I'd work towards getting the district I live in to move towards 100% charters schools if at all possible. I don't care what the other 4 districts do, that would be up to the people that live there. However, after they see how well the 100% charter school district does, they'd soon follow suit if they hadn't done so already.
Wow.
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 12:07 — Bob_SconceYou said it better than I did.
see response aboveBut for
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 12:37 — shearertwsee response above
But for you I'll add. Public education is a noble cause. However, we live in a society with limited resources. As much as it may hurt public education, I believe we're at a point where the tax payers are better off keeping that money and seeking alternatives for their children. I can spend my money on my children's education better than WCPSS can. Far better. We've become dependent on a system that is wasting money and failing us. The tax burden it is placing on us is preventing us from seeking alternatives. Pulling back from the current failed education system will be painful in the short-term but will ulitmately lead to a better, more effective system in the future. When the horse and buggy was becoming obsolete, I'm sure somebody said, "If I could just spend more money and by a faster horse, then I wouldn't need to buy that car." At some point, you've squeezed everything out of the current model and you have to make a dramatic change. I believe that's where we are with public education today.
agree to disagree
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:01 — turnerk1Obviously you are as committed to your stance, as I am to mine, so I'm not trying to change your mind. But, in the end, I don't want to advocate for intentionally hurting the quality of education in WCPSS because I might not agree with the priorities set by the system, or the way that it is organized. That seems like cutting off my nose to spite my face.
I appreciate the respectful
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 13:09 — shearertwI appreciate the respectful discussion but I remain unconvinced. It's not that I just disagree with the priorities of the system, I simply don't think a large government run school system can be effective. Spending money on that is preventing us from trying something different. We can't move away from the current system without hurting it in the process. Think of it more like cutting out a tumor. It hurts when you cut it out but once it's gone, you can begin to heal and be better off in the long run.
Charter schools are public schools...
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 14:51 — eztaylorJust want to point out that charter schools ARE public schools. They are funded with tax dollars, just like other public schools in Wake County. Also, private schools, as non-profits are also subsidized by tax dollars (they do not pay taxes on property, sales, income, etc.).
So, in your move to "convert" our current system to a system of charters, what would really change? The only difference I see is that charters do not have to provide transportation, free and reduced lunch, and can fire teachers at will. Would everyone be happy with these tradeoffs? Are these what make charter schools desirable?
And, as a side note, you may think it would be better to keep your tax dollars and take your kid to the zoo, but remember that over 50% of Americans pay no income tax - they work at such low paying jobs it is all they can do to provide food and shelter for their kids - if they were able to "keep" the tax dollars they pay (sales/property) the zoo wouldn't be the first priority on their list - it would likely be shoes that fit or eyeglasses or a trip to the dentist.
Our school system must serve everyone - open your eyes.
Also, while we're correcting
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 15:26 — shearertwAlso, while we're correcting grammar...ever heard of a run-on sentence?
I understand all of what
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 15:24 — shearertwI understand all of what you've stated completely. What you're failing to understand is that you are looking at the situation as if everything would remain as it is now if charter schools were the majority public education method in WC. With more competition due to more money going their way, they'd start providing transportation and other perks people want and desire. I see no logical reason why FRL money cannot also move to charter schools with the child, albeit their may current be legal reasons. That being said, again, schools that offer free lunch to FRL students would be another perk one could provide.
As to your last point, again, you assume all would stay the same as it is now. First, many of the 50% that pay no income tax should. Second, if the tax burdern were lower due to less government welfare, cradle to grave programs, their would be more jobs for people to have, more people paying taxes and more people being responsible for themselves.
Finally, if the money followed the child, the system would better serve everyone....open your mind!
Perhaps...
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 20:29 — eztaylorI apologize for the tone of my post below - perhaps you can help me understand exactly what will be different when there are more public charter schools and fewer basic public schools.
You say things will not stay the same, but what will change and how will those changes be an improvement over our current situation?
I'd like to understand your side, since you seem to have thought about this and think it is the right way to go.
First, people will have real
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 08:06 — shearertwFirst, people will have real choice. Real choice is what drives innovation.
People, especially on the blog, will say I'm just thinking of myself or the "rich" people (which I am not nor do I know). In fact, however, the "rich" people are doing just fine as it is. They can send their kids to private school, move the Chapel Hill or whatever. The rest of us are stuck with what we've got. My only voice on the BOE is now Susan Evans who has not made one constructive proposal or comment as a BOE member yet and might as well just stay home because she is essentially Jim Martin in a dress. Therefore, I have no representation in the school system at all. Charter schools and voucher programs are actually the best for poor and middle class families. That is because they put everyone on equal footing. They allow low income and middle class families to have a shot at sending their kids to private schools. They allow low income and middle class families equal chances at getting kids in to a school of their choice that may be best suited for their kid(s). The rich aren't any better off. They may even be worse off because private school tuition may be increased due to increased demand. You can even institute a progressive voucher program where people over a certain income level get less money. They'd still have the charter school option for free but not get the $7,500 as a voucher, perhaps $2,000 or perhaps only a tax deduction for private school tuition on their state income taxes.
Look, I don't have all the answers nor all the exact right details, but what is your solution? Bob, what is your solution? Just keep putting more money (or even the same money) into the same exact system we have right now? Really? Is that the best you can come up with?
In response
Thu, 05/24/2012 - 19:54 — eztaylor"With more competition due to more money going their way, they'd start providing transportation and other perks people want and desire."
Why do you assume that charters would get more money if there were more of them? They get funding per student (operating funds), and very little, if any capital money (for buildings, etc.).
Why do you assume that competition will increase if charters do get more money? How does more money lead to more competition? Seems like less money would lead to more innovation, which would lead to more competition, not less. Not to mention, why do we want to set up a competition between schools?
I am sure that many of the 50% would be happy to earn a high enough wage such that they could provide a basic standard of living for their families and pay taxes. Problem is, many poor are working poor - they put forth effort but have little to no control over their wage rates.
Last, lowering taxes is in no way associated with increased jobs or economic growth. Lower taxes allow the wealthy to keep more of their wealth - they do not necessarily hire more people with their excess funds.
I like the Henry Ford approach - pay a high enough wage so that every employee can afford the product you are selling - that is the key to a healthy economy.
Economics 101
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 08:19 — shearertwMy apologies in advance if my tone is harsh...I get a little passionate about this sometimes...
Why do you assume that charters would get more money if there were more of them? They get funding per student (operating funds), and very little, if any capital money (for buildings, etc.).
Answered this in other post….
Why do you assume that competition will increase if charters do get more money? How does more money lead to more competition? Seems like less money would lead to more innovation, which would lead to more competition, not less. Not to mention, why do we want to set up a competition between schools?
This is basic economics. More money always leads to more competition. Bob covered this pretty well. Less money only leads to more innovation in government because people actually have to think about how their spending the resources their given. In the private sector, where people have to compete to get a piece of the pie, more money brings in more competition and novel ideas which is where all innovation comes from.
I am sure that many of the 50% would be happy to earn a high enough wage such that they could provide a basic standard of living for their families and pay taxes. Problem is, many poor are working poor - they put forth effort but have little to no control over their wage rates.
It is simply not true that the “working poor…have little to no control over their wage rates”. Does the hardest, most responsible immigrant worker not get put in charge of a team of immigrant works and paid a little more for it? Does the hardest and best minimum wage worker at McD’s not ultimately get chosen to be Asst Manager, perhaps get some company paid training and make their way up the ladder? EVERY DAY this happens. Also, everyone has the chance along the way to better themselves, make themselves more marketable, go to community college, gain a new skill. The construction worker can learn to lay tile, become a brick mason, etc. That’s simply a load of crap that people have no control over their wages. That’s Union propaganda.
Last, lowering taxes is in no way associated with increased jobs or economic growth. Lower taxes allow the wealthy to keep more of their wealth - they do not necessarily hire more people with their excess funds.
Baloney again. Wealthy people NEVER EVER keep their money in mattresses in their homes. They invest it in companies who hire people, the keep it in banks that lend the money to companies who hire people. They also hire people to build new homes, put in a pool, build a boat, etc, etc….This is also basic economics. Your comment, again, is just more propaganda from the class warfare crowd.
I like the Henry Ford approach - pay a high enough wage so that every employee can afford the product you are selling - that is the key to a healthy economy.
Bob already took care of this one…
Mattresses?
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 11:52 — eztaylor"Wealthy people NEVER EVER keep their money in mattresses in their homes. They invest it in companies who hire people, the keep it in banks that lend the money to companies who hire people. They also hire people to build new homes, put in a pool, build a boat, etc, etc….This is also basic economics. Your comment, again, is just more propaganda from the class warfare crowd"
I didn't say that wealthy people keep their money in mattresses (although they may choose to do so...). If they put their money in banks, the banks theoretically will loan the money to businesses - unfortunately, with the high unemployment rate leading to low consumer demand, these loans are too risky and banks have reduced lending, even though they have the money to lend (if you don't believe me, take a look at what interest rate you are earning on your money in the bank).
Businesses that have money ARE NOT spending it - note the incredibly high cash balances at many companies - management is reluctant to hire new employees and to expand because the economy is so weak. Companies are sitting on billions of dollars in cash (not in equipment, factories, R&D labs, or other active income generating investments) - see the article "Companies With 11-Figure Cash Balances" online at smart money. Microsoft has $38 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and short term investments. These do not grow the economy, nor are they available to owners (stockholders) to spend on yachts, etc.
What drives economic growth is many people spending money - a few wealthy people cannot possibly spend as much on yachts and mansions, as can working folks who are purchasing basic necessities.
We can certainly live in a country with extreme income inequality - but it will not generate innovation and growth - from Wikipedia - There is evidence from a broad panel of recent academic studies shows that there is a nonlinear relation between income inequality and the rate of growth and investment. Very high inequality slows growth; moderate inequality encourages growth. Studies differ on the effect of very low inequality.
We are on the way to very high inequality.
Eh....
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 13:44 — Bob_SconceSo, first of all, you're right that banks are not nearly as loose with money as they were in, say, 2006. But, that doesn't really have anything to do with so-called "inequality" -- it's as true with cash marked for the affluent as with cash marked for the middle-class (much of which is in 401(k)s and pension plans), and there is a LOT more of the latter.
As to that inequality, it turns out that the data depends very heavily on assumptions. (See http://www.nber.org/papers/w17164 and http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/04/burkhauser_on_t.html ). In particular, if you stop looking at the income going to tax-units, and instead look at income going to households, and then take into account taxes, transfer payments and the value of benefits, the story of the stagnating middle-class goes away. (See the chart in the second of those two links.)