Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (46620)	11/27/2017 12:18:21 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 358606

The variable cost portion would be based on the number of kids in k-12 As a practical matter, it would be simpler to not screw with people's tax assessments but rather divide the variable costs among the number of public school students and charge tuition. That's effectively what you've done. Of course, there's the problem of the source of the tax money. I'm out of my element here in that I never had kids in the school system but I think most school money comes from real estate taxes. Lots of parents don't pay real estate taxes so the full burden of the "tuition" for kids in public schools would fall to those parents with real estate. Which would probably be so great that it would be a better deal for them to send their kids to private school. So public school would become a welfare system. The cost of which would have to be paid by everyone, like we do now.