Coronavirus

[One Brow]

Your other outrage is over teachers being barred from giving pornographic material to children...

I am a little disturbed that you find the material pornographic.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

As long as private schools refuse to serve the entire public, they don't deserve public funding.

That is quite a radical proposal. So you’d deny Harvard, Stanford and other private institutions from federal / state research grant money? You’d advocate barring students attending those universities from receiving federally subsidized student aid or loans?

I think you are wrong. I think educational institutions should be paid for the service of educating, and the government has a vested interest in having an educated workforce. I’d even go so far as to support mothers who homeschool their kids well enough that those kids can pass state proctored competency tests should be able to pay themselves the tax money the government sets aside for the education of those kids.

 

[Sardines]

That is quite a radical proposal. So you’d deny Harvard, Stanford and other private institutions from federal / state research grant money? You’d advocate barring students attending those universities from receiving federally subsidized student aid or loans?

I think you are wrong. I think educational institutions should be paid for the service of educating, and the government has a vested interest in having an educated workforce. I’d even go so far as to support mothers who homeschool their kids well enough that those kids can pass state proctored competency tests should be able to pay themselves the tax money the government sets aside for the education of those kids.

This guy did not take as big a leap as you did in your post.

 

[One Brow]

That is quite a radical proposal. So you’d deny Harvard, Stanford and other private institutions from federal / state research grant money?

Research grant money is earned through a competitive process.

You’d advocate barring students attending those universities from receiving federally subsidized student aid or loans?

Loans and other tuition relief are available to every person, perhaps based on income only.

I think you are wrong. I think educational institutions should be paid for the service of educating, and the government has a vested interest in having an educated workforce. I’d even go so far as to support mothers who homeschool their kids well enough that those kids can pass state proctored competency tests should be able to pay themselves the tax money the government sets aside for the education of those kids.

I'm sure you are fine with the general public supporting schools for the elite.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Research grant money is earned through a competitive process.

It is still public funding going to private schools which you said shouldn't happen, but it is fun to watch you carve exceptions to your earlier ridiculous blanket statement.

I'm sure you are fine with the general public supporting schools for the elite.

I am absolutely fine it. I think all kids should get the same amount regardless of religion, ethnicity, biological sex, or socioeconomic status. If you own property then you pay property tax regardless of having or not having any school-aged kids, and if you have school-aged kids then you get a fixed-rate school voucher for each school-aged kid.

 

[One Brow]

It is still public funding going to private schools which you said shouldn't happen, but it is fun to watch you carve exceptions to your earlier ridiculous blanket statement.

It's more fun watching you twist the discussion completely out of context in order to score points.

I am absolutely fine it. I think all kids should get the same amount regardless of religion, ethnicity, biological sex, or socioeconomic status.

If you live in elite cities, the public schools are already better funded than the poor neighborhoods. What you're proposing is a transfer of funds from one public school system to another. Feel free to "carve out exceptions".

If you own property then you pay property tax regardless of having or not having any school-aged kids, and if you have school-aged kids then you get a fixed-rate school voucher for each school-aged kid.

Which would then go to any school that accept all students (possibly having a lottery if there is overflow).

 

[Al-O-Meter]

If you live in elite cities, the public schools are already better funded than the poor neighborhoods.

Under the system we have now, that is true in may places, and is one of the biggest reason school vouchers are a more equitable solution. The system we have now is funded by local property taxes and the local school district gets the local money. If that school district is in a neighborhood of McMansions then the school district is flush with cash. If the school district is in a shanty town then it is poor. With the voucher system, the school's funding isn't set by local property values but by enrollment.

With a school voucher system, the empty nest oldsters with the big house on the hill will be paying a ton in property taxes but the modest neighborhood with starter homes will have schools flush with cash because that is where the kids are. It is a system of wealth transfer from the childless to the young breeders which happens to be in the nations best interest as well as a more fair way to do things.

 

[One Brow]

With the voucher system, the school's funding isn't set by local property values but by enrollment.

The private schools that admit the elite will get more direct investments from parents, local businesses, etc. Inequality will be exacerbated. This is human nature.

With a school voucher system, the empty nest oldsters with the big house on the hill will be paying a ton in property taxes but the modest neighborhood with starter homes will have schools flush with cash because that is where the kids are. It is a system of wealth transfer from the childless to the young breeders which happens to be in the nations best interest as well as a more fair way to do things.

Unless you are proposing state control of property taxes, the empty nesters will lower their burden, especially if their taxes wind up in urban areas.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Unless you are proposing state control of property taxes, the empty nesters will lower their burden, especially if their taxes wind up in urban areas.

Property taxes are a percentage of the value of the home. If empty nesters move to cheaper housing then they would pay less, and whomever bought the McMansion would be contributing the large share. The expensive houses pay most to the education fund and the areas with starter homes receive most of the proceeds with school vouchers.

It is the current system, which you are advocating for, that property taxes from rich areas stay in the school districts of the rich areas, and areas with starter home have to make due with less because their houses aren't as valuable.

 

[One Brow]

Property taxes are a percentage of the value of the home. If empty nesters move to cheaper housing then they would pay less, and whomever bought the McMansion would be contributing the large share. The expensive houses pay most to the education fund and the areas with starter homes receive most of the proceeds with school vouchers.

Your area doesn't have city-by-city votes on property taxes?

It is the current system, which you are advocating for, that property taxes from rich areas stay in the school districts of the rich areas, and areas with starter home have to make due with less because their houses aren't as valuable.

There is no solution to inequality that can't be sabotaged. I'm against proposals that increase inequality.

 

[The Thriller]

This guy did not take as big a leap as you did in your post.

LOL!

He’s so predictable.

It’s almost like he’s a lazy troll.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Your area doesn't have city-by-city votes on property taxes?

Nope. California property taxes are constitutionally limited to 1% of assessed value with a maximum yearly increase of 2% and have been that way since 1978. To change it would require a constitutional amendment.

 

[JazzMan4Life]

LOL!

He’s so predictable.

It’s almost like he’s a lazy troll.

I often disagree with @Al-O-Meter , but they are not a lazy troll. They have contributed far more to this forum than yourself recently.
Don't look at the world as team blue VS team red. See everyone as an individual person.
You need that.

 

[JazzMan4Life]

I often disagree with @Al-O-Meter , but they are not a lazy troll. They have contributed far more to this forum than yourself recently.
Don't look at the world as team blue VS team red. See everyone as an individual person.
You need that.

BTW what does any of this have to do with the Coronavirus!?

 

[The Thriller]

I often disagree with @Al-O-Meter , but they are not a lazy troll. They have contributed far more to this forum than yourself recently.
Don't look at the world as team blue VS team red. See everyone as an individual person.
You need that.

Ask the lazy troll. Something happened between post 7,727 and 7,729. Perhaps you could read it and tell the rest of the class?

I definitely see people as individual people. Our lazy troll has proven in countless threads to be dishonest and uninterested in actual debate. It’s not just me, look at what posters in posts 7,743 and 7,746 have said. This being key:

It's more fun watching you twist the discussion completely out of context in order to score points.

Are you seeing a pattern yet?

Certainly you can’t blame me for wanting to avoid wasting time debating such a lazy and dishonest poster. While we’re giving out advice, perhaps you should read through a thread to see who is derailing it with spin and other non-sequiturs? You know, being a troll in other words. It’s pretty obvious.

Thanks

 

[One Brow]

Nope. California property taxes are constitutionally limited to 1% of assessed value with a maximum yearly increase of 2% and have been that way since 1978. To change it would require a constitutional amendment.

Perhaps a redistribution would work under those circumstances, assuming there is a minimum as well.

 

[One Brow]

BTW what does any of this have to do with the Coronavirus!?

It's a tangent that arose from the effects of lockdowns on schooling.

 

[One Brow]

Ask the lazy troll.

The lazy troll deflected, saying someone else should answer the question.

 

[JazzMan4Life]

Ask the lazy troll. Something happened between post 7,727 and 7,729. Perhaps you could read it and tell the rest of the class?

I definitely see people as individual people. Our lazy troll has proven in countless threads to be dishonest and uninterested in actual debate. It’s not just me, look at what posters in posts 7,743 and 7,746 have said. This being key:

Are you seeing a pattern yet?

Certainly you can’t blame me for wanting to avoid wasting time debating such a lazy and dishonest poster. While we’re giving out advice, perhaps you should read through a thread to see who is derailing it with spin and other non-sequiturs? You know, being a troll in other words. It’s pretty obvious.

Thanks

I don't read everything that's posted in GD. Nobody should. You can explain yourself with a quote post button, but I would recommend you take a break.
If you can't make a living off of it, arguing politics on a sports forum is a rough way to live life.
You would do much better campaigning for someone you like or even better, spend your time in a soup kitchen.

 

[LogGrad98]

I don't read everything that's posted in GD. Nobody should. You can explain yourself with a quote post button, but I would recommend you take a break.
If you can't make a living off of it, arguing politics on a sports forum is a rough way to live life.
You would do much better campaigning for someone you like or even better, spend your time in a soup kitchen.

He's posting while he's taking a dump at the soup kitchen. Everybody gotsta dump.