1. Interesting hypothesis...but if correct, how did the country function so well before public schools?

2. How exactly do we benefit more from paying for other folk's kids education than if they paid for it themselves?

3. Why would you assume that the government is capable of providing a good education...much less an efficient one since they have failed miserably in the recent past?

[QUOTE=Wickd89;3830449] 2000-2001 was a long time ago. It is over $10K now.

I find it funny that whenever they need to cut money the first thing the public and the teachers say is "cut the bureaucrats" out of the schools.

There are many many many problems with our schools.

These are how I see it listed in no particular order:

1) Large schools districts that require a huge build up of infrastructure to run. You can run a chain of 1000 schools without the infrastructure to do so. La County and LAUSD have a huge network infrastructure built and paid for by the tax payers of this county and the Federal Government. This infrastructure is built to manage their resources efficiently - as good as it is it simply doesn't do that because the bureaucracy isn't efficient. The locals administrators and teachers at the schools view the central district as adversaries and not partners. This causes huge fights and tantrums over things that are generally stupid. Of course, the central district gets things wrong more often than not - just look at LAUSD's recent payroll system implementation. For the last year teachers have been lucky to get paid at all and those that have have been over paid mucking up their taxes for them. It's awesome.

Smaller districts run better because it keeps the management within the neighborhood that is served. It keeps it personal.

2) It cannot be denied that illegal immigration has had a major impact on the quality of our schools. We simply have not been able to adjust to the number of kids that have come along with the immigration, be they natural born or illegal themselves.

3) uninvolved parents - it costs less to teach a kid with parents who are involved than it does to teach a kid whose parents just want the kid babysat.

4) pure stupidity. Seriously.

I've been one of those bureaucrats; I've worked a few years for LAUSD and seen how just plain stupid both sides are. School districts should be run by the neighborhoods they serve. If that were the case across the board I think that education as a whole would be better for all involved - especially the kids.

I agree with Mikester about the scope of the schools.

When I was a kid, our grade school (public in NJ) had 1 Principal and 1 Secretary. By the time I was in 6th grade they had added one counselor.

That same school, with the same number of students, has a principal, three vice -principals, 3 counselors, and a slew of additional people that are there to "help".

SmileWavy Hiya Mikey

Oh, I forgot....

Here's one to ponder.

If global warming is a serious threat, why are we still busing kids (sometimes more that 40 minutes one-way in Los Angeles)?

Not that I am in favor of even higher property taxes by any stretch, but Prop 13 undeniably has had a lasting negative impact on education funding. The money has to come from someplace...income and sales/consumption taxes are more volatile and also have every politician grubbing for dollars to feed their favorite pet projects and entitlements.

The excellent school district here was one of the main reasons we moved to this area. Our son is currently in public kindergarten and has a fantastic teacher. The thought of having to put him through private school from here on out is scary...potentially to the tune of $15-20K/year...but we'll do it if necessary.

[QUOTE=fintstone;3830461] Don't know if your right or not, if so, add about 30% to my cost calculations.

Public schools predate our country.

If you depended on everyone paying for their own education you would have only those who could afford private schools to be educated. You think the US has a problem competing with China now, what would happen if only those who could afford high school went.

There is a public and a private benefit to education. The person who is educated gets a private benefit. but the public benefits because that person contributes more to society because of the education he received. Better educated people earn more money which means they pay more taxes which creates a broader tax base - reducing your taxes. The greatest expansion in education and wealth to the middle class came from the GI Bill after WWII when people who otherwise wouldn't have been able to afford college or trade school were paid to go to school, largely creating the middle class we enjoy today.

The government is a function of its citizens. Voters get the government they deserve. School districts where voters hold the schools accountable have excellence in their schools. Districts where voters don't do not. That's the beauty of democracy.

My kids go to public schools where the test scores rival any private California school's. Of course, we don't live in California.

While it is true that some public schools existed before our nation was founded, they were not necessarily free (supported by taxes) as one would envision based on the current model. Free elementary public education was not available for all American children until the end of the 19th century.

You can trace our country's economic development and expansion of personal freedom by following the expansion of fully free public education. Some things, like national defense or roads are only possible with government backing. Public schools require public funding the way public roads do. Or our armed forces. The goofballs who try to opt out of the portion of their taxes that oes to the defense budget have pretty much the same idea as people who say they don't use the public schools so they shouldn't pay for them. It doesn't matter if you vlaue or think you use the armed forces - you are better off as a citizen of this country for having them, and as a citizen it is your obligation to pay for them, just as it is your obligation as a voter to hold your government accountable for being efficient and effective - in national defense as much as public schooling.

I understand why the military requires public operation...but fail to understand why there is an inherent advantage to public education. Private schools seem to do quite well. I imagine that most of the liberal politicians that are so eager to raise taxes to increase put their children in private schools.

MRM - I don't think that many will dispute the value of public education.

However, I think many believe that it is being run poorly at best, and is doing a disservice to our country at worst.

You can list any number of things that fall into this category from bilingual education, to automatic promotion to self-esteem building. There are tons more. Add to this, the allegiance of teachers unions to the Democrat party and you have a system where the workers, by virtue of their support and voting, can elect their own boss. This boss can give them raises and perks. Government Unions are unique in this area, and I think it leads to corruptive influences and a general distrust.

BTW: I pay for my kids to go to private school because LAUSD is so horrible.

CA spending per K-12 student is appx $7K. $44BN divided by 6.2MM students. Those are current numbers.

[QUOTE=fintstone;3830461]

[QUOTE=Hugh R;3830527][QUOTE=fintstone;3830461]

Don't know if your right or not, if so, add about 30% to my cost calculations.[/QUOTE}

Hi Hugh,
Not my quote. Someone else was actually rebutting my web search that showed the $6.9K cost. I agree it might have gone up in the last 6 years..

Nicely said.
Completely Agreed. To believe that anyone can opt-out is not really an option.
I appreciate that in my area we have Police and Sheriff to protect us, even though I do not expect to ever call them (well at least I hope not too)..

Few public schools are worth attending, at least in CA.

I presently live in Orange County, and it really looks like the school system is pretty good.

Other places that seem to have good public schools include:
-- New Jersey (Bergen County and Parsippany area)
-- Many parts of Texas

I have seen a few people attend LAUSD public and go on to obtaining a college degree, but it is really a tiny percentage. My family who still live in LA, have all their kids in private schools; it is not even an option.

Hope your private schools are meeting your needs...:)

Agree. So really stupid. For example, newer areas in South Orange County will loose more teachers, just cause the schools are newer! Does that make sense to anyone?!
When I look at the top elementary schools in the area: all distinguished schools, all high parent participation, high scores in almost everything, and budget minded (good average cost per student).. (for those that are looking for a race angle - they are 82-90% white, if we were in Irvine, it would have a higher Asian population and even higher academic scores)..

I think this might be the same reason that the Inland Empire will take a greater hit than any other area in CA.

Sadly, I actually expected Arnold to come up with a better solution. Not entirely his fault, but it is on his watch and thats the way it goes....
If he fixed it, he would get all the credit...(Kind of like Bush)..:p

The problem I have that in the time that they take to fix the education system, we loose entire generations of kids. :(

Sheesh!

From the CA Secretary of Education website:

Per-Pupil Spending
Total per-pupil expenditures from all sources are projected to be $11,935 in 2007-08 and $11,626 in 2008-09, including funds provided for prior year settle-up obligations.

VOTE with your G**-D*** feet! There are jobs, good jobs, better jobs, that pay the same in lower cost areas with better services.

Wayne, in all deference to you, I do not understand your decision to keep Pelican in California.

PAY ATTENTION:
my kids (2) are in private school in Orange. I pay about $12,000 a year for that, on top of the taxes I pay to support other people's kids in public school. That was in my post. (Comprehension and spell check).

Blaming this on the governor was juvenile and way off base. You were trying to stir up emotion to further your cause which if successful would result in increased government spending on your behalf (at the cost of others). I saw through it and called you out on it. Did I get a little fired up? Sure, but this is something I feel strongly about. When you tried to blame the terrible incompetence of the school system on the governor because he isn't throwing money it it fast enough, I got a little annoyed.

You wanna stop the graffiti and fix improve the school system? deport the illegals and their anchor baby kids with spray cans. Spending a few extra $billion isn't going to do anything about that. Spending incredible amounts of money isn't going to solve that.
Kicking them out of the country and preventing them and others like them from coming in will stop at least part of it.
There is a reason I don't live in Santa Ana. I'm allergic to hispanic gangs.

Wanna fix the schools? Take the "English learners" (50% of the kids in LA unified school district) out of the mainstream classes where the drag the other kids down and then fire each and ever single school administrator. Then fire every single teacher who is active in the union. Replace them with people who have proven success in the private sector.
Then make them perform for their money.