This bill made me curious

[One Brow]

Perhaps more people may be able to read, but it sure as hell seems as more and more people cannot comprehend what they are reading. Personally, I think that's a major problem.

That's the notalgia effect.

 

[♪alt13]

Yes to all of this. We don't send our kids to public schools to learn. They suck at that. We send our kids to public schools for the social aspect, so they can hang out with friends. When they come home, we do homework, teaching, etc with them. Their attendance sucks at school, well, because the schools suck at teaching them.

I'd love an internet schooling curriculum. The problem is, where do parents get all this "free" babysitting from?

So what's the solution? Abandon/poorly fund public education?

 

[babe]

So what's the solution? Abandon/poorly fund public education?

I don't know Green well enough to be sure how much fun he's having with me, or how much he's in to the "free babysitting" aspect of public schools. I actually realize this is a major aspect of the role public schools play in our lives. For parents like him, or for those who value the social aspects of schools, we just need to recognize this value and put a dollar price on it. . . .

Then move to the policy of taxing parents in proportion to their use of it, directly, like Green started out saying. . . . it's just not fair for some parents to exploit the system. No doubt we'd still have to subsidize poor parents on a mean's-testing formula I suppose. Throw in some kind of voucher system to pay private schools, homeschoolers, or daycare centers for their service. Going "online" with coursework and lectures/presentations still looks to me like a hugely efficient way to educate. And, maybe, put a tax on the NEA/state unions somehow for their opposition to progress in achieving more efficiency in education.

But I bet "private sector" programs and/or schools could do the job for much less cost.

PBS. . .. chiefly Sesame Street. . . . does a lot of "socialization"/babysitting, too. Put a kid in front of the Boobtube, with a radio-based cuff on their leg and home security system. Mesmerization is under-rated as a control method. Hitler used it with fantastic results.. .. .

Now I don't know if I am just kidding any more than I know if Green is. . . . .

 

[cowhide]

A proposed bill would eliminate the child tax exemption in Utah and raise $400 million for education. The argument is basically about fairness. Large families benefit from the tax exemption while at the same time their children are dependent on the state for their education. The question was raised "Is there another way to raise the money?"

https://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=750&sid=26954018&title=sunday-edition-eliminating-the-family-child-tax-exemption

I've never bothered to itemize charitable deductions and to be honest I am not even certain what qualifies. I am always puzzled at first when the DI asks if I want a receipt for my old couch, last years kids clothes, or a box of dust covered electronics. As I chuckle and say no I think to myself "what cheap ******* would bother to write this junk off".

What percentage of tithing and other charitable donations can be deducted from Utah state taxes? Is it dollar for dollar, 50%, 10%? If the Utah state tax rate is 5% and 50% of tithing can be written off, then a Mormon that pays their full tithe would pay nothing in state taxes, right?

This bill is long over due especially in Utah. I would be shocked if it passes.

 

[cowhide]

If your Federal marginal tax rate in your tax bracket is 39%, and you're clearly above the alternative standard deduction, a tithe-payer will get a Federal benefit of 39 cents less Federal taxes for each dollar of "tithe" that you pay, plus a fractional State benefit which would amount to another ten to twenty cents. You never make money paying tithing.

The state bill you are referring to is the child-hater tax. People who think there are too many kids anyway, and that they are all useless. It's really a self-hating bunch, mostly anti-Mormons, who don't realize that their future social security benefits are going to be paid by these kids, if they go to school and then get good jobs. . . . .

Wow the Mormon victim card. How many kids do you have? Yea I am sure that social security will repay the difference between educating 12 kids vs 1.

 

[cowhide]

The problem with liberals is they want the government to collect more taxes for everything, in every imaginable way. There will never be enough money for liberals to take care of everybody.

The problem with socialism in public schools is that public schools don't educate. They condition kids, train kids to obey implicitly, misinform them on the basic realities of life, and turn them into morons who are ostensibly trained to do some little task the same way everybody does it. Common core, the latest fascist/socialist dream, displaces all true education with "information-based" rote drills, removing every last vestige of classical education and producing "worker bees" for corporate service and clueless government honchos.

Education of the classical sort apprises the pupil of a complex world and brings out creative, intelligent cognition and the capacity to solve problems, and a way of living that is not merely "dependent" on government or corporate welfare. An educated human being would be so bored with filling some government post, and would feel so poorly-paid, he'd bust out and start a business of his own. Like me. After years in college getting thoroughly drilled in multiple disciplines, none of which was ever relevant to getting a better job, and years working and living in poverty funded by government grants, I escaped and began to earn a living.

Today I educate my own kids, and pay enough property taxes to pay for several families of ten kids warehoused in the public schools, and consider every cent of that wasted.

We don't need public schools anymore. At least in the K-12 level. We need to spend our educational dollars on internet programs accessible by everyone. School teachers should produce their own online classes instead of driving to a schoolhouse every day, and the state should reimburse them on a per-pupil/user toll, paid directly by parents. Colleges should administer their own entrance exams, and set their bars high. . . . and use more internet and less bricks. Tenure should be abolished. Training for job-specific skills should all be done privately or at least in community-based colleges, which should be financed in part by trade unions and businesses that hire "graduates" from such training coursework.

Charter schools do a better job for the dollar they get. Private schools are a good idea, not just for the elites. We should subsidize them per-pupil on a voucher system, at 60% of the per-pupil rate we've got in "public schools". At that rate, they still get better results.

The problem with conservatives is they love denying that they like to spend money too. This bill is needed to address the socialism that you so hate. It is unfair to spread the wealth to families who decide not to reproduce like rabbits. So how about taking some person responsibility and stop blaming all the ills of your life and society on public education. While I agree that the public school system needs to adapt with time and do a better job educating our children, the ultimate responsibility still lies with the child and the parents. THere are several reasons why parents and children love to blame the school system. Some are valid while others are simply a way for people to not take responsibility. A poor school system doesn't prevent one from learning, yes it makes it harder but if you want to learn then study. The fact that you give no credit for your public education is your choice but many people have used their public education to better their lives and without it would be stuck in poverty.

Your experience is not the same as others. However instead of seeing the benefits of public education, you tear it down so you can promote the idea of vouchers and online education. Vouchers are for rich people and not all charter or private schools out perform public schools. There are bad private and public schools. That is the reality. The real problem of being be boxed in and not taught to think goes way beyond education and more to do with how we process all the available (mis)information that is available today.

 

[cowhide]

I don't know Green well enough to be sure how much fun he's having with me, or how much he's in to the "free babysitting" aspect of public schools. I actually realize this is a major aspect of the role public schools play in our lives. For parents like him, or for those who value the social aspects of schools, we just need to recognize this value and put a dollar price on it. . . .

Then move to the policy of taxing parents in proportion to their use of it, directly, like Green started out saying. . . . it's just not fair for some parents to exploit the system. No doubt we'd still have to subsidize poor parents on a mean's-testing formula I suppose. Throw in some kind of voucher system to pay private schools, homeschoolers, or daycare centers for their service. Going "online" with coursework and lectures/presentations still looks to me like a hugely efficient way to educate. And, maybe, put a tax on the NEA/state unions somehow for their opposition to progress in achieving more efficiency in education.

But I bet "private sector" programs and/or schools could do the job for much less cost.

PBS. . .. chiefly Sesame Street. . . . does a lot of "socialization"/babysitting, too. Put a kid in front of the Boobtube, with a radio-based cuff on their leg and home security system. Mesmerization is under-rated as a control method. Hitler used it with fantastic results.. .. .

Now I don't know if I am just kidding any more than I know if Green is. . . . .

The problem with the private sector is that they want to make money at it. Then you introduce greed which leads to the haves and the have nots. As far as saying schools are brainwashing people, I could say the same thing about churches and no one wants to close them down. There is plenty of money to go around. Close all the military bases in foreign lands and stop bribing countries with foreign aide. That would be a start. Get rid of tenure - see we liberals and conservatives can agree. Hold the schools accountable but also hold the parents and children. THere are a lot of hard working dedicated teachers who shouldn't have a snotty-nose teenager be responsible for him/her not doing her homework. However, we should also have term limits on politicians why we are at fixing the the ills of society. I know GOPers love the private sector but even they need and ask the gov't for help.

 

[babe]

This bill is long over due especially in Utah. I would be shocked if it passes.

Cowhide, you are a perfect example of "liberal" hypocrisy. If the argument were directed at, say, Hispanics, who are poor and have a lot of children, or illegal immigrants whose children get educated on the public dollar while the parents are often employed and paid "beneath the radar", with no taxes deducted, you would be arguing against a "head tax" on children.

The bill introduced by Utah's most "liberal" folks is a regressive tax on the poor, and would drive more people into other forms of government dependency. It would not "raise revenue", it would decrease revenue while shifting expenses for supporting poor families to the welfare programs.

It's a bad idea.

Public education is also a bad idea, actually, when there are adequate private capacities to meet the educational needs at every level of education. . . . Even our state-run universities can't compete with private education anymore, and we should just let private organizations grow instead of inefficiently taxing the poor to support bigoted liberal brainwashing organizations that depend upon tax support for their existence.

 

[babe]

Wow the Mormon victim card. How many kids do you have? Yea I am sure that social security will repay the difference between educating 12 kids vs 1.

You really need to raise your level of discourse a bit. Well, maybe I do, too.

In Utah, the "liberal" minority has been playing their victim card as long as I can remember. You are disingenuous in your rhetoric. My kids are not in the public schools, but I still pay for other peoples' kids in those schools. What a complete *** you are making of yourself here. What an idiotic retort about "social security" paying anything. It's other people's kids that will be paying social security taxes and trying to keep that "tax" paying welfare for the older people. The Supreme Court defined "social security" as a tax, and therefore benefits paid out are merely "welfare". I would favor abolishing the social security tax entirely. But if you are going to track with the welfare state system, you at least need to recognize that the benefits, historically, have exceeded the revenues collected for "social security", and the program has been used as another form of deficit-spending Keynesian "shot in the arm" for the economy. The problem with "shots in the arm" is that financially they are much like the Heroin addiction form of "shots in the arm", in that they are unsustainable.

 

[babe]

The problem with conservatives is they love denying that they like to spend money too. This bill is needed to address the socialism that you so hate. It is unfair to spread the wealth to families who decide not to reproduce like rabbits. So how about taking some person responsibility and stop blaming all the ills of your life and society on public education. While I agree that the public school system needs to adapt with time and do a better job educating our children, the ultimate responsibility still lies with the child and the parents. THere are several reasons why parents and children love to blame the school system. Some are valid while others are simply a way for people to not take responsibility. A poor school system doesn't prevent one from learning, yes it makes it harder but if you want to learn then study. The fact that you give no credit for your public education is your choice but many people have used their public education to better their lives and without it would be stuck in poverty.

Your experience is not the same as others. However instead of seeing the benefits of public education, you tear it down so you can promote the idea of vouchers and online education. Vouchers are for rich people and not all charter or private schools out perform public schools. There are bad private and public schools. That is the reality. The real problem of being be boxed in and not taught to think goes way beyond education and more to do with how we process all the available (mis)information that is available today.

Some conservatives call me a socialist. I do think there are some things we can do efficiently through state or federal government. The issue here is the poor results we are getting with public schools. More taxes will not fix that. We need to do something else.

So at first blush, seeing your "passion" on this issue, I suppose you might be a school teacher. I came from a whole tribe of schoolteachers. If the public trough were shut down on education, school teachers could still meet the need, and earn a better living at it, educating people in private-run schools and doing it more efficiently.

Don't be afraid of change.

 

[babe]

The place of "welfare" or "charity"

If we just shut down all our public schools, auctioning them off as institutions or brick and mortar assets to private organizations, and did so in a way that did not encourage "cartelism" or monopoly so there could be actual marketplace competition in the educational industry, we might get better education at a lower cost. . ..

But what about all those large, poor families who can't afford even that?

Public assistance to education is, properly, speaking, welfare. With some tax exemptions available, charitable organizations like churches or even secular counterparts can raise funds from contributions, tax-incentivised, to help with some of that need, but I would expect there would remain some need for public assistance.

Giving poor families a "voucher" for education and letting them take it to the private school of their choice would keep competition in place, and achieve overall cost reductions in how much the taxpayers must support "other peoples' kids".

Even with that, I think the correct "liberal" or compassionate and wise position for politicians to take, is to stop trying to exploit class warfare. It is a benefit to the entire community if poor kids get education, without the state-dictated brainwashing and social agenda propaganda.

I am amazed at the gall of "liberals" who complain that big poor families are NOT paying enough taxes. . . . pointing a say a minority like the LDS. . . .

It is a real hoot. LDS folks are above the median in income, and probably do not generate, as a class, a disproportionate burden on folks with smaller families. Most LDS folks today have perhaps three to five kids when their families are "complete".

Quite a dissimilar statistic will be found if other "minorities" are compared to that, but of course it would be "racist" to discuss those. . . . lol

And I think the Mormons are a socialist, statist, authoritarian outfit, and I wish I could move their social system towards something that would not favor statism so much. Am I a hoot, or what???

I know, let's go back to 1896 and undo the agreement the Federal government extracted from the Mormons, and let the Mormons educate their own kids. Used to be every ward had a school for their kids on weekdays, teaching reading, writing and arithmetic. . . . and Mormon culture.

I'd be all for that. Every religion required to educate their own people. Good idea.

 

[mellow]

The illiteracy rate in 1870 was 20%. By 1979, it was 0.5%. That was the result of public education.

https://nces.ed.gov/naal/lit_history.asp

Flagged for logical fallacy.

It could also be said that in 1870 the death rate was higher than in 1979, there were also more automobiles in 1979 than in 1870. More Americans had indoor plumbing in 1979, than in 1870, and there were more murders, assaults and rapes in 1979 than in 1870. More drug abuse in 1979, more suicides, and more abortions. The percentage of the population in prison was higher in 1979 than in 1870. Should we also attribute all these to public funded education?