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: Lane3 who wrote (46622)	11/27/2017 12:50:43 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 358691

>> 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. Yes. But your point is a good one; how do you deal with the allocation of revenue when people don't own real estate or whatever. I could see this turning into a highly undesirable local bureaucracy. Maybe it is a lousy idea. I do think with the expansion of home schooling, there might be value in kicking back some of that money to families who choose to do that, or those who prefer a Catholic school or whatever. There is also the problem of proliferating Autism Spectral Disorders, which public schools are totally the wrong place for in many instances (it is called a "spectrum" for a reason). They do what they can but "cookie cutter" solutions do not work with many of these children. It is probably unreasonable to have portions of the spectrum attending public school, which appears to be a funding anomaly. Many autistic children can learn to perform at amazing levels but just don't receive what they need from public schools. The wealthy ones do okay, but there is no money for proper care of the poor and they fall through the cracks.

To: Lane3 who wrote (46622)	11/27/2017 5:01:09 PM
From: lucky_limey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 358691

Lanr3 How can you even start trying to devise a funding plan when there are 12 million (2012 numbers) illegal k-12 kids in the country? Are you thinking that Dem swing voters in NY and LA should fund these kids,,,,,? I mean, they want to give them sanctuary... Say, $600 month k-12, 20k a year for college.... and free healthcare on top of that? X 12-18 million kids States like California with sanctuary cities should fund these idealist programs... not look to the Feds to pay the bill. Federal Laws says they are illegal and should not be here. If Californians payed the bill for free healthcare, pre school, K-12, & college for their kids - would be a red state overnight.... AND once properly resolved. the rest of us can work with real numbers....