Proposition 103 - Temporary Tax Increase for Public Education

[Blake's RS]

De-unionize the schools and you could start firing the bad teachers, give hefty raises to the good ones and you'd see education improve and we could still cut how much we spend on education.

Free market capitalism and Adam Smith's invisible hand work everywhere they are tried. So I say give the money to the students not the schools and let THEM pick what privately run school they want to go to and eliminate the entire education bureaucracy completely (huge savings there)

Many years ago my wife was a graphic designer for the Language Arts Department of the Wichita Public Schools (was one of her first jobs out of college) ... most of her short time there was spent putting together an office cook book (at taxpayer expense). Her boss made 6 figures (in the early 1980s) and basically did nothing but manage a meeting of teachers for two weeks in the summer to discuss changes in the Language Arts Curriculum.

MOST of public education is a waste. MOST of government is a waste.

Hell, keep the government (state) out of the brainwashing process we call eduication, and stop teaching the kids to pass a "state" exam. Encourage critical thinking etc. eduication will improve as well.

[Blake's RS]

I just got the pamphlet in the mail. Guess what, in this time of economic difficulty for so many folks the government wants to raise your taxes.

They say it is temporary (5 years) but they are lying, it'll be like the RTD tax which we're still paying after how many years.

This tax isn't for your children, it is the Looper's payoff to the teacher's union that got him elected.

I have a better idea, why doesn't the public school administration spend the money they are already receiving more wisely. The private sector has to spend more wisely, why not the public sector.

I love the assumption that tax revenues will go up each of the 5 years. If this passes (I don't doubt that it will) I think businesses will cut headcount to make up for this loss of gross revenue.

I'll be voting NO.

Its called death by a thousand cuts.

[blacklabel]

Citizens need to realize that we only give incentive to further produce poor results and management when we respond by spending more of our tax dollars to fix it.

The US spends $7,700 per student for secondary education, third in the world, and ranks 14th in the world for overall secondary education. This isn't something that money will fix.

[Tweety Bird]

OneGuy: Nope, my name's NOT Caplis. And I don't listen to him, either.

You can think what you like about renters and taxes. But the property taxes on the rental unit MUST be paid, or the owner will cease to be the owner. If the owner is renting the home or apartment out for less than his monthly costs, he will slowly go bankrupt. The only time this might not be true is with Section 8 or other government-subsidized housing. But the fact remains that someone has to pay the taxes on that property and the goal of the owner/landlord is to recover ALL of his costs, and to still earn a profit. Otherwise, it's not income property any more.

Why would you be against public money going to a private school? The money is already in the government's hands; the question is, what school gets the $$. By not allowing public $$ to go to a private school, you cut off the private school option for all the low-income families who would like to send their kids somewhere else, but can't afford it. Vouchers would offer fabulous opportunities for parents to get their kids out of failing public schools and into an education of THEIR choosing. It would still be publicly-funded education, but would no longer be a monopoly of government-run education.

[Ronin13]

I'll chime in here, mainly because I have a bone to pick with our current educational system.
Schools that have the "NO TOLERANCE" Policy are not schools, they're prisons. Punish both for fighting, so that says if your kid hits mine and mine defends himself (normally justified in regular society) they're both going to be suspended? Where did you learn logic?

Okay, back to schools- I don't think 103 is a good idea, if you can't spend your money wisely then you shouldn't get so much of it! I also disagree with our current education system's workings. To get a college degree you need x hours of general ed, well I hate and suck at math, but in order to get my degree because I scored low on a placement test (since I haven't done math since 2002) I am going to be required to take 4 math classes that don't give any credit (waste of $$$), then two more math classes. By that arithmetic I'll have my degree in 2018... oh nope, can't do that, because the GI Bill only lets me have 4 years of schooling. So can I give Metro State a big middle finger and tell them "Eff your fascist math standards and give me my degree"? No. So now I'm stuck in a conundrum because my father refuses to let me take over the family business until I have a 4-year degree.
Option B: Use the post 9/11 GI Bill to go through flight school and become a helicopter pilot (since that's what I wanted to do in the mil but got railroaded). Ok, posting that problem into the General Discussion...

[losttrail]

If money were the answer, we should have no issues with our childrens education.

The U.S. is #2 in the world in terms of educational spending per capita, behind Switzerland.

So if money is the answer like the left (communists) tell us, then our children and educational system should be ranked within the top 5 at least, in the world.

The Washington D.C. educational system should be producing the finest, most highly educated youth in the nation.

More lies from the left (communists).

[cstone]

Prop 103 was rejected by Colorado voters last November. That's right, this issue was resolved 6 months ago. Was it necessary to reanimate this thread? Please leave the dead alone. Zombies are fun to read but they do not need to walk again.