By a large degree, the quality of the schools is dictated by the quality of the surrounding community.
In my Texas school district, we have very fine schools, clean, little to no crime, high national test scores and graduation rates.
In other districts elsewhere, there is high crime, run down facilities (actually, beat down and vandalized), low graduation rates, and most don't even show up for class, let alone standardized tests.
The difference? In some, it is a very large population of non-English speaking illegal immigrants. In others, it is your typical crime ridden, drug dealing, gang overrun communities.
And just to stir the pot more, in the Austin ISD, a very large urban district, there is an inverse correlation between the money spent per student and the academic performance of the school.
For all you California school graduates (including me) that means the more money spent per student, the worse the academic performance. *
*All the normal correlation vs. causation arguments apply.
I calculated the numbers from their tables. Please feel free to check and correct.
The budget increases do come in fits and starts some years barely any, others, giant increases. I leave it to the reader to figure out why.
Also this:
California's state spending has ballooned in the last decade at a rate much higher than the rate of inflation and rate of population growth in the state. According to Tom Campbell, California's finance director in 2004-2005, if the 1999-2000 budget of former California governor Gray Davis had been increased over the next decade by a factor representing the inflation rate and California's population growth in that time, California would now be experiencing a budget surplus, rather than a deficit even with the recent revenue decline due to the state's economic recession.[6] Instead, California has had a 50% spending increase over the past five years.[7]
Some might find this interesting. This is the moderation email I got for the orginal comment. Not a political comment, not calling anyone names. Sure as hell not dissing Linux or Macs or Windows or Obama.
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Troll" (-1). A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Underrated" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Overrated" (-1). A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Flamebait" (-1). A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Troll" (-1). A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1). A user has moderated your comment "Overrated" (-1). A user has moderated your comment "Troll" (-1).
Further moderations that I have not been notified about have reduced the score to 0.
Just as sure as I say I don't really care someone will say I obviously do. But WTF ever.
What is reallying interesting is that some people appear to have some serious emotional investment in the caps lock key.
I remember reading an interview many years ago with Ray Bradbury or one of the other leading authors of the time. In it he described the most irritating things that interviewers do.
First, is to ask where they get their ideas from.
The second, was to call their genre of books "SiFi". It's called "Science Fiction", he said.
The Free Open Source Software community, that builds free, open source software, is complaining that they are not, in one way or another, being another compensated for their free software?
NPR debates usually consists of two liberals with differing viewpoints on how best the government can take care of a problem or how bad some Republican is.
Occasionally they will have a debate between a liberal and a "moderate" who may even claim to be conservative, but "has seen the light".
NPR is part of my commute radio station line up and I have yet to hear them host a debate featuring a real conservative (not some wimp ass Republican from the northeastern states). Of course, I may have missed it while running some hippie and his hybrid off the road with my truck.
Newspapers are not in trouble today because they have advertisers. They are in trouble because of their antiquated delivery mechanism and their less than timely delivery.
What you read on the web today will not be in the papers until tomorrow. It will most likely have been the subject of many talk shows on the radio, T.V round tables, and countless forums such as slashdot.
But let's go with your suggestion that market forces are evil. If you can't market it, then who pays? The government. Then, the government is just another sponser. To think that the news organizations would not then tailor their coverage to please their sponser is naive at best.
NPS is a great watch dog when it comes to covering politicians that don't agree with their political philosophy. But they are mere cheerleaders when the pols running the show are on their own team.
Newspapers go the way of the buffalo just like drive in theaters.
Don't confuse the delivery mechanism with the product. The product is "What is going on?". It is delivered now via Newspapers, T.V., Radio, and the Web.
While a great deal of it is generated by the infrastructure of workers created and maintained by the newspapers, there is plenty that is generated independent of them.
The analogy of Drive Ins is very accurate. It used to be they were one of only two options to watch movies. Even though the Drive In are now virtually extinct, people still watch movies. And their options for watching them have expanded greatly.
People will always want, no, need to know what is going on. Regardless of what happens to the newspaper industry, someone will be there to fill that need and they will be compensated one way or another.
First, moving a company offshore and utilizing legal tax provisions is hardly the moral equivalent of shoving people in ovens or eating them
But I say +1 for Hyperbole!
Second, many of those 16 "top banks" are insolvent only in Barry's mind. The stress tests are an unrealistic exercise and combined with the idiotic mark to market rules, companies that otherwise had positive cash flows were condemned to take TARP funds. And the Feds refuse to let the banks that do pass the "stress test" pay back the TARP funds (can't relinquish control can we?)
Third, if Congress makes the law and the Supremes don't shoot it down, then it's the law. People may not like it, but that's they way it has been for decades and decades, most of which the Dems ran the show. Hell I remember whining about companies paying no taxes when I was a kid and that was a loong time ago.
If they want change, then pass the laws and change it. But to use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to demonize and scorn exposes Barry for the self absorbed amateur he is.
Slashdot Mirror
By a large degree, the quality of the schools is dictated by the quality of the surrounding community.
In my Texas school district, we have very fine schools, clean, little to no crime, high national test scores and graduation rates.
In other districts elsewhere, there is high crime, run down facilities (actually, beat down and vandalized), low graduation rates, and most don't even show up for class, let alone standardized tests.
The difference? In some, it is a very large population of non-English speaking illegal immigrants. In others, it is your typical crime ridden, drug dealing, gang overrun communities.
And just to stir the pot more, in the Austin ISD, a very large urban district, there is an inverse correlation between the money spent per student and the academic performance of the school.
For all you California school graduates (including me) that means the more money spent per student, the worse the academic performance. *
*All the normal correlation vs. causation arguments apply.
But does not CA have a balanced budget requirement?
Therefore, Budget = Revenues. Otherwise Budget > Revenues = Deficit = illegal in CA.
The average CA budget increase since 1978 is 7.7 percent: http://www.sen.ca.gov/budget/budgethistory.pdf
The average rate of inflation since 1978 is 4.22 percent:
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx?dsInflation_currentPage=0
I calculated the numbers from their tables. Please feel free to check and correct.
The budget increases do come in fits and starts some years barely any, others, giant increases. I leave it to the reader to figure out why.
Also this:
California's state spending has ballooned in the last decade at a rate much higher than the rate of inflation and rate of population growth in the state. According to Tom Campbell, California's finance director in 2004-2005, if the 1999-2000 budget of former California governor Gray Davis had been increased over the next decade by a factor representing the inflation rate and California's population growth in that time, California would now be experiencing a budget surplus, rather than a deficit even with the recent revenue decline due to the state's economic recession.[6] Instead, California has had a 50% spending increase over the past five years.[7]
http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/California_state_budget
Footnotes are specific to the above link.
So...
*CA budget levels have not remained at 1978 levels.
*CA budgets have exceeded the rate of inflation and population growth.
*CA Spends too much
Prop 13 went into effect nearly 30 years ago. It can hardly be blamed for their current financial problems.
The revenue stream has not been eliminated. Their spending, though, is out of control.
Tax set to 1% of assessed value.
Assessed Value may only increase 2% per year.
When ownership changes, then the assessed value is reset to the market value.
Goto step 1.
This is a sensible and fair system that keeps people from being taxed out of their homes.
CA's problem is not lack of revenue, it is spending too much.
...Unless you have an ejection seat for when things go into the toilet.
How long before M.S. sends out an update that automatically redirects URL typos to Bing?
Some might find this interesting. This is the moderation email I got for the orginal comment. Not a political comment, not calling anyone names. Sure as hell not dissing Linux or Macs or Windows or Obama.
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Troll" (-1).
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Underrated" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Overrated" (-1).
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Flamebait" (-1).
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Troll" (-1).
A user has moderated your comment "Insightful" (+1).
A user has moderated your comment "Overrated" (-1).
A user has moderated your comment "Troll" (-1).
Further moderations that I have not been notified about have reduced the score to 0.
Just as sure as I say I don't really care someone will say I obviously do. But WTF ever.
What is reallying interesting is that some people appear to have some serious emotional investment in the caps lock key.
I think that particular case calls for electrifying the caps lock key.
I remember reading an interview many years ago with Ray Bradbury or one of the other leading authors of the time. In it he described the most irritating things that interviewers do.
First, is to ask where they get their ideas from.
The second, was to call their genre of books "SiFi". It's called "Science Fiction", he said.
Is to get rid of the damned, usless, pain in the ass keycaps key.
As for the keyboard itself, seems I've seen that in some si-fi movie.
Now that's compensation I can get behind.
The Free Open Source Software community, that builds free, open source software, is complaining that they are not, in one way or another, being another compensated for their free software?
And that half happens to be the 51% that are being paid for by the 49%.
When is Bill Clinton getting out of jail again for lying in a federal investigation?
NPR debates usually consists of two liberals with differing viewpoints on how best the government can take care of a problem or how bad some Republican is.
Occasionally they will have a debate between a liberal and a "moderate" who may even claim to be conservative, but "has seen the light".
NPR is part of my commute radio station line up and I have yet to hear them host a debate featuring a real conservative (not some wimp ass Republican from the northeastern states). Of course, I may have missed it while running some hippie and his hybrid off the road with my truck.
Newspapers are not in trouble today because they have advertisers. They are in trouble because of their antiquated delivery mechanism and their less than timely delivery.
What you read on the web today will not be in the papers until tomorrow. It will most likely have been the subject of many talk shows on the radio, T.V round tables, and countless forums such as slashdot.
But let's go with your suggestion that market forces are evil. If you can't market it, then who pays? The government. Then, the government is just another sponser. To think that the news organizations would not then tailor their coverage to please their sponser is naive at best.
NPS is a great watch dog when it comes to covering politicians that don't agree with their political philosophy. But they are mere cheerleaders when the pols running the show are on their own team.
Newspapers go the way of the buffalo just like drive in theaters.
Don't confuse the delivery mechanism with the product. The product is "What is going on?". It is delivered now via Newspapers, T.V., Radio, and the Web.
While a great deal of it is generated by the infrastructure of workers created and maintained by the newspapers, there is plenty that is generated independent of them.
The analogy of Drive Ins is very accurate. It used to be they were one of only two options to watch movies. Even though the Drive In are now virtually extinct, people still watch movies. And their options for watching them have expanded greatly.
People will always want, no, need to know what is going on. Regardless of what happens to the newspaper industry, someone will be there to fill that need and they will be compensated one way or another.
Barry's hand picked staff screwed up and it's not Barry's fault. Is that what you are saying?
Maybe they are all a bunch of "Yes Men".
"Negative - ...is indeed comparable" - to shoving people in ovens or eating them.
Huh? Seriously?
Hey, you're not one of those 911 Truthers are you?
Perhaps there should be a law:
All law makers and tax agency managers, State and Federal are required to complete their own returns, by hand, with a #2 pencil and a calculator.
First, moving a company offshore and utilizing legal tax provisions is hardly the moral equivalent of shoving people in ovens or eating them
But I say +1 for Hyperbole!
Second, many of those 16 "top banks" are insolvent only in Barry's mind. The stress tests are an unrealistic exercise and combined with the idiotic mark to market rules, companies that otherwise had positive cash flows were condemned to take TARP funds. And the Feds refuse to let the banks that do pass the "stress test" pay back the TARP funds (can't relinquish control can we?)
Third, if Congress makes the law and the Supremes don't shoot it down, then it's the law. People may not like it, but that's they way it has been for decades and decades, most of which the Dems ran the show. Hell I remember whining about companies paying no taxes when I was a kid and that was a loong time ago.
If they want change, then pass the laws and change it. But to use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to demonize and scorn exposes Barry for the self absorbed amateur he is.
They did actually and they did find a mistake. I am now $1k richer for it.
Right, because he has a very large staff who's job is to carefully investigate the finances of everyone he nominated.
It's called the Vetting Process.
-----
"Fairness" is Marxism dressed in drag.
And actually, the evil businesses he is targeting are not cheats. They followed the law to the letter. Blame congress for leaving the loop holes.
Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer, and Hilda Solis are tax cheats. The law was clear, but they were too important to follow it.