Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktVital Statistics:
| Last | Change | Percent | |
| S&P Futures | 1546.7 | -0.1 | -0.01% |
| Eurostoxx Index | 2696.2 | -15.7 | -0.58% |
| Oil (WTI) | 92.97 | 0.4 | 0.46% |
| LIBOR | 0.28 | -0.001 | -0.36% |
| US Dollar Index (DXY) | 82.61 | 0.029 | 0.04% |
| 10 Year Govt Bond Yield | 2.03% | 0.01% | |
| RPX Composite Real Estate Index | 193.5 | -0.6 |
Stock index futures are flattish after a good retail sales report. Retail sales increased 1.1%, higher than the .5% estimate. January was revised upward. While retail sales is a notoriously volatile number, it does provide another data point that the economy seems to be picking up speed, not slowing down. Mortgage applications fell. Bonds and MBS are down.
HARP refis are accounting for the lion’s share of refinancings in the hardest hit states.In Nevada, they account for 68%. In Florida, it is 58%. This has had the effect of taking inventory off the market, which is driving price increases and helping create a virtuous circle of price appreciation and easier credit. The MBA is projecting that lending will fall 21% this year as higher interest rates cool the refi market according to Fannie Mae. Refis will still account for 58% of all origination.
The battle over the Consumer Financial Protection Board continues. Republicans are threatening to block Richard Cordray’s nomination to head the agency unless changes are made in its charter to make it more accountable to Congress. Republicans are pushing for the Chairman of the CFPB to be replaced with a bipartisan board and for the agency to be subject to the normal Congressional appropriations process.
Ally has sold a large MSR portfolio to Ocwen for $585 million, covering $85B of unpaid principal balance. No word on what percent were performing, etc.
Filed under: Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
Update for Nova and jnc to my husband’s supplemental (medigap) medicare insurance cost. I found out yesterday from Blue Shield that his premium would have risen to a little over $1200/mo when he turns 65 next month and so their $656/mo quote for supplemental or secondary insurance is close to a 50% discount. Hahahaha, that’s like marking up an item pre-sale 50% then give a 40% discount on sale day.
I applied for an individual Health Net HMO/50 yesterday that I was told I have about a 50/50 chance of being approved for. If I am, then my new premium for similar insurance to what I have now will go from $883/mo to $600/mo and I can get Walter his medigap insurance, the best plan available for about $220/mo. I’ll save about $700/mo. Wish me luck. I have to have it all done before April 1st……………….a little doubtful but “nothing ventured, nothing gained”.
LikeLike
is he eligible for a Medicare Advantage plan?
LikeLike
Oh and we’ve been waiting to buy that new car until he reached Medicare age because we thought we’d be getting about a $400 lower monthly premium outflow. If this doesn’t work we’ll be driving our 2003 toyota for another year or two at least………………….oh yeah.
LikeLike
He’s not eligible for any normal medicare plan, except straight medicare A & B, while we maintain small group employer based insurance. That’s why I need to drop our policy and find my own insurance and then he can get any plan he wants. If I don’t get this new one, we either need to stay with the small group or I need to give up my insurance altogether. He obviously doesn’t want me to do that although I’m willing to take the chance………………….if I get too sick………………………..too damn bad for me…..hahahaha. I know better though, he’d spend every penny he has to save me, so sweet but impractical.
LikeLike
ugh. your situation is just beyond my area of expertise. sorry i can’t be of more help.
I’m trying to think of where you can go for help.
LikeLike
No worries Nova. I’ve been on the phone for two days now and will be again today but I don’t think there’s much to be done, truly. We’ll probably just end up sticking with what we’ve got and paying the the high premiums. Maybe when Obamacare kicks in next year I can get an individual policy if I can’t get one now. Right now everything hinges on Health Net, a very odd position for me to be in.
Just thought this might be useful information here. Either work for a large employer or state or federal government (entrepreneurship stinks), don’t ever get even a little sick, or marry someone the same age as you. If I were turning 65 with him, we’d be fine.
LikeLike
“He’s not eligible for any normal medicare plan, except straight medicare A & B, while we maintain small group employer based insurance. ”
OK, so it’s the age difference between you two and the employer based coverage that’s the issue.
LikeLike
This is funny:
“In honor of the season, Americans everywhere will wear traditional budget-season hats and eat the customary budget-season meals, which include, of course, a rich dessert that we assume will be offset by future weight loss.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/13/our-deficits-arent-as-bad-as-washington-thinks/
LikeLike
That’s right jnc, a different kind of donut hole I guess. By Nov. 1 we’ll be paying more than we started with this year with one of us on medicare.
LikeLike
Kaus is a huge fan of Government providedUniversal Health Care and that’s what this article is about, in terms of saving Obamacare. I’m interested in his seeming obsession with class distinction. Who else sees the country being fractured along class lines? I’ve heard this rhetoric since I was young (hearing about the “People’s History” (remember, I’m a product of public schools) but cannot reconcile class distinctions with what my actual experiences are.
Anybody here encounter unpalatable class distinctions regularly? If so, what are they?
http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/13/saving-obamacare-maybe-beebe/
LikeLike
McWing:
Not a personal encounter, but this addresses your question to some extent:
h/t Lulu on PL
LikeLike
On Key Budget Questions, the Wealthy Have Distinctive Priorities
This is not that surprising, given that the budget imposes distinctive responsibilities on the wealthy. I suspect that if both the tax code and government expenditures treated all people equally regardless of income, then the budgeting priorities of various wealth demographics would fall more closely in line. As it is, the disparate treatment different wealth groups receive from the government ends up fostering class tension, at least with regard to both government financing and expenditures.
LikeLike
There’s a guy in my hockey league who is the CEO of one of the big bank/credit card co. he’s worth about a zillion dollars. you’d never know, outside of the $200,000 Mercedes that’s parked out front. but it’s just so weird sometimes to line up for a face-off against him. there are also guys working MW jobs in the league.
fairfax county: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/demogrph/gendemo.htm#inc
So median income is about $120k — so half of the households make more than that. at the same time our local elementary school is 40% free or reduced fee lunch.
there’s a gap, but it’s not readily apparent.
LikeLike
From that same article:
I doubt that they consciously think about it this way, but they’re opposing policies that would minimize class distinctions.
LikeLike
Thanks Michi, for the survey article. I’m assuming that the wealthy have a different perspective than the non-wealthy and I tend to agree with Scott that it involves responsibility over who is financing largesse that often influences one’s perspective on what government should or shouldn’t do. That being said, I’m curious if those class differences are increasing, as well as if those differences are innately bad as Kaus and those that agree with him seem to think.
One fascinating thing Kaus does not discuss re medicine is that many doctors don’t like to deal with Medicaid patients. Yes, there is a financial component (though I know many, many Medicaid MD’s who work within its framework and make a fortune), but more to the point that Medicaid patients are often exceedingly non-compliant as well as often “chip on their shouldery” in a “you owe me” and/or “you treat me different because of race” kind of way. I do not see that changing even in the most egalitarian system Kaus could envision.
Also, who here feels that class tension is increasing. Frankly, the only sense I have of class distinction is when I read articles railing against it. In my everyday experience I just don’t encounter it.
LikeLike
One has to ask the question, why would the wealthiest of Americans not want to support quality education of ALL our children and not even consider that wages and the massive unemployment we currently have to be at the top of our nations problems.
Perhaps it’s because they have come so far to becoming the “owners” of America and have no desire to continue until they are the “sole owners”.
In 2010, the top 1% owned 35% of our nations wealth.
The next 19% owned 54%. Making the top 20% owning 89% of our nations wealth.
Leaving a mere 11% for the bottom 80% of Americans.
Now, taking the economic collapse of 2008 and the roaring back of the stock market, they now own even more. Since 80% of all stocks are owned by the top 10% of Americans, it doesn’t take rocket science to know the only reason the stock market is doing so well while 80% of Americans are not, is because the wealthiest still had stockpiles of money to “hang in there” and continue to invest, increasing their “ownership share” of the market. While middle class and seniors (LOTS OF seniors) lost so much of their savings and investments, they simply could not afford to “hang in” the stock market and reap what the wealthiest have been able to.
While current numbers are not available, I am willing to take a swag (scientific wild ass guess) that the “new” numbers of wealth distribution would be:
The top 20% now own 95% of all American wealth and the bottom 80% now own a mere 5%.
Why would the wealthy even care about jobs, education or healthcare for the multitudes? If we were to provide quality education for all our children, take steps to create jobs for Americans, at decent wages, and ensure everyone has the same rights to healthcare, then it would only make sense part of the wealth of America just might shift in the other direction and decrease the ownership of the wealthy.
Many want to say that would be “wealth redistribution” from those who have earned it.
I believe we’ve been doing wealth redistribution, for many years now, and so far, it’s only been to the advantage of the wealthy, not the masses.
LikeLike
P.S. Recessions are the best friend of the wealthiest. With each and every recession we encounter, the wealth shifts, and always in the same direction.
LikeLike
Geanie, I profoundly disagree with many of your conclusions. However, I’ll focus on one, public education. Why do you think the wealthy do not care about education? Is there only one way to demonstrate support for public education, through the (seemingly perpetual) increase in property taxes to fund the current structure of public primary education?
I am deey ambivant about a Federal or even state roll in education, however, most “rich” people I have encountered send their kids to public schools. I am a believer that vouchers and choice is a much better mechanism and would result in much better outcomes than the current structure. If someone believes as I do, at least about vouchers/choice, do they, in your opinion, not care about education?
LikeLike
Troll… In my state, Oklahoma, the wealthy do not send their children to public schools. Heck, even most upper middle class send their children to private schools. And I have no problem with that, if you can afford to send your children to private schools, YAY for you and your children.
However, I do have issues with the inequality of the distribution of education funds in my area. I was born here, I am 57 years old. And still today it’s obvious that the majority of school funding is going to the “wealthier” area schools while the schools in the poor areas just continue to be ignored.
I see new schools being built on the “good” side of town, so they can have the “
LikeLike
If someone believes as I do, at least about vouchers/choice, do they, in your opinion, not care about education?
In true Libertarian fashion, they care about the education of their children, rather than the community’s children.
LikeLike
Mich:
In true Libertarian fashion, they care about the education of their children, rather than the community’s children.
The community doesn’t have children. Other people do. And yes, I care about my children more…a lot more…than I do about other people’s children. Any parent who says otherwise is most likely trying to pull one over on someone.
LikeLike
Michi, how so? If I think a parent of a child should be able to use a voucher at any school of their choosing, how is that a lack of concern for the communities children? In my mind it demonstrates a profound respect and concern for the communities children in that I want them to be able to send their children to any school they want, just as I want(ed) to do.
Again, is supporting the current structure of public primary education the only way to properly support public education?
LikeLike
the only way to properly support public education?
I would doubt that it’s the only way, but it’s the only way which has been demonstrated to work in this country. . . but then I have no idea how countries like Canada and the UK do it and they may have a superior method.
Not everyone has the resources you do, McWing, and vouchers will never replace a free public school system. You want(ed) to take your children out of a system you consider(ed) failed rather than try to fix it as part of a community effort. To that end, I agree with you that there are too many federal and state requirements that ignore community needs–where we run into problems is that we do need to have some sort of across-the-board standards so that children can move between schools and not have to start from scratch when they do so.
LikeLike
white smoke!
LikeLike
NoVA:
Hey–I’ll have to check out the news!
But what I wanted to ask you is, I thought this comment you made on PL (although I couldn’t see what you were replying to) was intriguing. What do you think we should tax?
because we tax labor. which is stupid.
LikeLike
Scott:
And so you should. But why would that preclude you from caring–to some extent–about their friends? Or even just other kids in your town whom you’ll never meet, but hope that they grow up to be responsible citizens rather than deadbeats?
LikeLike
I strongly favor public education and am happy with it as a state or local function, not a federal one, with the limited exceptions for federally impacted areas like military base towns, and the public health service access for disease control, and the USDA school lunch program. I am also sympathetic to vouchers, especially public-to-public vouchers, so that parents can have an escape hatch for kids in failing schools. We have some good [and some bad] charter schools in TX and I think the voucher system should include them. I still don’t like vouchers to go to a religious school.
I think the success of the community is based in large part on the education and training of its people, so every community has a stake in education and training. Thus I am a strong supporter of community colleges, which provide training and retraining as well as academic basics for moving on in college.
I have been singled out by “class” for having been wanting, I have been poor, I have been very well off, and I am comfortable. Living in a comfortable suburban environment full of engineers of every race and color and national origin I can easily now be blind to class.
There is no such thing as a classless society, and an attempt to make one would result in a dictatorship and a rigid class society. In a free country there can be an open class society, in which mobility is an option for most persons. Education or training is the key to that mobility.
That is all stuff I think or believe, or found to be probably true in my lifetime.
LikeLike
Mark:
I still don’t like vouchers to go to a religious school.
Why?
LikeLike
Aversion to tax supporting of churches, synagogues, and mosques. I don’t think giving the voucher to the family to give to the mosque saves the scheme. However, I am not completely hard headed about that. If the mosque school met the local or state standards and there was no decent public or charter choice, if I were on the local school board I would allow the vouchers to be spent at the Elijah Muhammed School of the Defender, if they didn’t discriminate against us [heathens], and if their discipline didn’t include the removal of thumbs.
LikeLike
Mich:
But why would that preclude you from caring–to some extent–about their friends? Or even just other kids in your town whom you’ll never meet, but hope that they grow up to be responsible citizens rather than deadbeats?
I do care about their friends, and even other kids in my town that I’ll never meet. As I detailed some time ago, the degree of my caring about others decreases as their distance from me in both relation and space increases. The bigger the “community”, the less meaningful it becomes.
This is why favor local government solutions to perceived problems rather than top-down, all encompassing, federal solutions.
LikeLike
“You want(ed) to take your children out of a system you consider(ed) failed rather than try to fix it as part of a community effort.”
The real wealthy already do this, i.e. President Obama and Sidwell friends. Vouchers are more about giving the middle class and lower class better options.
Rest assured that President Obama and the political class would not tolerate the state of the DC public school system and the teacher’s union’s role in it if they had to send their own kids there.
LikeLike
Michi, I don’t understand what my resources have to do with a voucher/choice system. I’m arguing that if we have to have a public school system, then giving parents the money (voucher) to send their kids wherever they want versus forcing them to attend a government designated school is a better way to do it.
I’d also take issue with the idea that the current system works. I think public primary education outcomes are worse now than, say, 50 years ago. It was the New York school system where it was found, according to the headlines, that 80% of HS grads required remedial help.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/officials-most-nyc-high-school-grads-need-remedial-help-before-entering-cuny-community-colleges/
LikeLike
“Geanie, on March 13, 2013 at 10:38 am said:
One has to ask the question, why would the wealthiest of Americans not want to support quality education of ALL our children and not even consider that wages and the massive unemployment we currently have to be at the top of our nations problems.”
The answer to this question is that they don’t think that they should be the only ones who have to pay more in taxes to help address the problems.
LikeLike
McWing: because you’re never going to give everyone vouchers for free education, and that’s what a public school system does. And I knew you were going to say the the current system doesn’t work, and you’re right in some cases. That doesn’t mean that abandoning it wholesale in favor of some children getting an education while others don’t get squat is the answer.
LikeLike
“rather than try to fix it as part of a community effort”
can’t be done. the goal of the public school system is not educating the next generation.
regarding taxing – if not a flat tax, than a broad based consumption tax. but first we have to decide what we want to buy and the cost.
LikeLike
The larger issue is that voucher advocates have concluded that the current public school system and the teachers unions have organized things in such a way that the primary goal is to benefit the adults who are being paid by the system, not further the education of the kids themselves. Given how politically entrenched these interests are, the only feasible way to disrupt things and bring change is with the threat of parents being able to send their kids elsewhere.
LikeLike
Michi, I’m sincerely confused. Why wouldn’t a voucher/school choice plan give every child a public education?
LikeLike
first we have to decide what we want to buy and the cost.
But, but, but. . . that would require a budget!
/snark
LikeLike
Education or training is the key to that mobility.
Precisely–and that’s why this paragraph out of that article is so damning:
I don’t by any means think that the wealthy surveyed want to increase class distinction, but effectively they will if they get their way.
LikeLike
Education or training is the key to that mobility.
no argument with that. it’s just that I have zero faith in the government to provide it.
LikeLike
Where is your school board, NoVA? Are your suburban schools bad? Are you extrapolatingfrom the DC experience? Which gummint is the one in which you have zero faith?
Dave! lives near you an he thought of running for school board when he got pissed.
LikeLike
The larger issue is that voucher advocates have concluded that the current public school system and the teachers unions have organized things in such a way that the primary goal is to benefit the adults who are being paid by the system, not further the education of the kids themselves.
That is a very cynical attitude towards teachers who could easily be doing some other job if they did not care about educating kids. I’m not sure how vouchers would improve this situation as most charter schools pay less than public schools. Is there some sort of inverse ratio between salary and caring for kids?
LikeLike
vouchers will never replace a free public school system.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that they should. The hope is that healthy competition will make everyone better.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Bergoglio
LikeLike
Michi, I might argue that “spending whatever it takes” means different things to different people. First, I do not believe in this principle. I am not willing to bankrupt myself or my neighbors, strangers or even my country so that all children can attend a good public school. That’s hyperbole, I also wouldn’t allow myself or anyone I cared for to starve to death so that I could send the last of my money to a school district to provide a good public education, nor would you.
However, I do think there is a difference among those bearing the direct cost of public schools (property owners) and those that do not (renters). I might want more of OPM spent than I’d be willing to spend, even as a percentage of my income, and I think most people would agree with that.
LikeLike
“That is a very cynical attitude towards teachers who could easily be doing some other job if they did not care about educating kids.”
Correct. It’s based on the unions defense of the rubber room and their success at torpedoing Michelle Rhee’s & others attempts at reform.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_brill
Ezra put it best:
and
LikeLike
Francis I.
LikeLike
McWing:
However, I do think there is a difference among those bearing the direct cost of public schools (property owners) and those that do not (renters).
My rent covers my landlord’s property taxes. What makes you think renters don’t pay property taxes?
LikeLike
FWIW, the rent I collect doesn’t cover my expenses on a month-to-month.
LikeLike
FWIW, the rent I collect doesn’t cover my expenses on a month-to-month.
By design?
Of course, if you did not collect rent at all you would be in a deeper hole… .
LikeLike
The primary gripe against teachers’ unions seems to be that they protect bad teachers and that people want the ability to fire them easier. There doesn’t seem to an equally strong impetus to raise teacher salaries in order to attract better teachers. It’s all stick, no carrot. This is part of the broader national mood that somehow public sector work is less worthy of remuneration than private sector work. Or it could be reflexive of envy that teachers are one of the last remaining bastions of defined benefit pensions and other legacies of post-WWII benefit packages.
Teachers are very distrustful of merit pay as they see it as a backdoor way to depress wages. That is, the pool for merit increases is likely to be smaller than the equivalent aggregate negotiated step increases.
LikeLike
yello:
This is part of the broader national mood that somehow public sector work is less worthy of renumeration than private sector work.
Renumeration in the private sector is mostly unrelated to “the broader national mood” about what is and isn’t worthy of renumeration. One of the problems with public sector work is that it can’t pay based on any
objective*proper determination of value or worth.*I used the wrong word there.
LikeLike
“There doesn’t seem to an equally strong impetus to raise teacher salaries in order to attract better teachers. ”
Sure there is. See Rhee’s proposals to provide merit based pay.
The crux of the issue is tenure vs merit.
LikeLike
“Or it could be reflexive of envy that teachers are one of the last remaining bastions of defined benefit pensions and other legacies of post-WWII benefit packages.”
Or that the only answer provided by teachers unions to declining educational results is to pay the same people who presided over the decline even more. I.e. rewarding failure.
LikeLike
It’s not just Republicans either. See Rahm Emanuel’s fight with the Chicago teacher’s union over lengthening the school day.
Every proposal for reform is reflexively opposed by the teachers unions.
LikeLike
Michi, I should have said direct cost, as in literally writing a check to pay property taxes. Also, some live in subsidized housing and have even a lesser indirect cost. (As a side note I would actually support a higher level of taxation if all withholding was disallowed and all taxpayers had to write a check, once a year, to the Fed, county and municipal governments)
Yello, if public school teachers are generally paid more than private school teachers, then what is the complaint?
LikeLike
nope, i can only charge so much. i’m more of an accidental landlord.
but i’ve got a tenant paying down the mortgage. i’m basically paying the condo fee.
LikeLike
“Teachers are very distrustful of merit pay as they see it as a backdoor way to depress wages. ”
I have at-will employment. I see no reason why teachers shouldn’t either.
LikeLike
Yello, if public school teachers are generally paid more than private school teachers, then what is the complaint?
Teachers are willing to take lower pay in the private sector in exchange for greater autonomy and/or less bureaucratic hassle. As for the latter, the various NCLB/RTTP mandates have been increasing administrative load on teachers with no compensation in either hours or pay. As a result either classroom time or post-hours paper grading and planning suffers in some way. More is being demanded of teachers with less reward. Something has to give.
LikeLike
One of the problems with public sector work is that it can’t pay based on any proper determination of value or worth.
Then how should the pay of any public sector employee (cop, firefighter, teacher, DMV clerk) be determined?
LikeLike
yello:
Then how should the pay of any public sector employee (cop, firefighter, teacher, DMV clerk) be determined?
It can only ever be determined via negotiation between the employee and a 3rd party (ie politicians) ostensibly acting on behalf of those who are actually using the services of the employee, ie taxpayers. And ultimately this is the problem…one of the parties negotiating over pay (politicians) must substitute his own sense of value for those who actually receive the value. Hence the value is almost inevitably mis-priced.
There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Value is inevitably subjective and relative to the one doing the valuing. (That is why I edited my original to cross out the reference to “objective”). When the one negotiating over pay is not the one doing the valuing, there is inevitably a disconnect between cost and value.
LikeLike
yello:
BTW, this problem of proper valuation is inevitable with regard to public goods like police and military protection. The difficulty in properly pricing a public good is one of the things that distinguishes public goods from individual goods. But with regard to individual goods like education or health care, the introduction of a third party payer totally distorts the proper pricing process.
LikeLike
I have at-will employment. I see no reason why teachers shouldn’t either.
The unions serve two functions, collective bargaining and workplace rule enforcement. Since most school systems are near monopolies, they serve as a counterweight to capricious employment abuses which are not unheard of.
LikeLike
“Since most school systems are near monopolies”
Which is part of the problem that vouchers are trying to address.
LikeLike
jnc:
Which is part of the problem that vouchers are trying to address
I actually think the voucher isssue is one that Republicans should be leveraging to the hilt in order to break the Democratic monopoly over black votes. Poor inner city minorities suffer the most under the current monopoly, and it seems to me an issue that parents of kids in atrocious public schools will have a strong and natural affinity for Republican policy, and can most easily see the deleterious effects of D policy. I would make this the core issue for driving a wedge between black voters and Dems.
BTW, did you see the movie Waiting for Superman? Fantastic, but heartbreaking at the same time.
LikeLike
No I didn’t see the movie, but I’m familiar with it. With regards to GOP minority outreach don’t see another Jack Kemp anytime soon. Chris Christie is probably the closest when it comes to connecting with middle & working class voters.
LikeLike
jnc:
I wasn’t even thinking about a national figure. I think the GOP needs a locally focused effort to go into black communities and start talking about empowering parents to make choices for their kids instead of leaving their future in the hands of government bureaucrats and corrupt unions. These people know how bad their schools are and often feel powerless to do anything about it. There is every reason to think a positive message of giving parents control will resonate with the people who are trapped by current policies.
LikeLike
“I think the GOP needs a locally focused effort to go into black communities and start talking about empowering parents to make choices for their kids instead of leaving their future in the hands of government bureaucrats and corrupt unions.”
There was an opportunity for Romney to do that during the election as I believe was noted at the time (I don’t seem to be able to search comments, but just top posts on the site search tool), but the current GOP leadership doesn’t appear to be that creative or sophisticated.
“There is every reason to think a positive message of giving parents control will resonate with the people who are trapped by current policies.”
Provided that the person making it is sincere and cares about these issues even during non-election years. That’s part of what gave Kemp credibility.
LikeLike
jnc:
the current GOP leadership doesn’t appear to be that creative or sophisticated.
Agreed.
BTW, if you want to search the comments rather than the posts, you need to do it from the comments section on the dashboard.
LikeLike
oops… posted before done
I see new schools being built on the “good” side of town, so they can have the latest and greatest,even though their “old” schools are 10 times better than the schools on the “bad” side of town. I see great inequalities in how the funds are distributed.
I don’t know how to fix our education system for our children. I only know that what is happening here is just wrong.
Like I said, I came from the poor side of town. I was the first one to graduate high school and to go to college. I went on scholarships.
But as the years have passed, I see that, at least here, if you’re poor and live on the wrong side of town, you aren’t going to be provided with the same facilities, supplies, teachers, etc. that our public school system provides to those on the “good” side of town.
I only want to see all our children get an equal chance to learn and grow to be production citizens, not just those who are on the right side of town. For if you don’t include those poor students, you will never drive down the poverty count.
LikeLike
Geanie:
And still today it’s obvious that the majority of school funding is going to the “wealthier” area schools while the schools in the poor areas just continue to be ignored.
Where is the majority of school funding coming from, the wealthier or the poor areas?
LikeLike
Scott, since our school funding comes from property taxes and sales tax bonds for a GIVEN COUNTY… I expect the funds to be parsed out equally for all schools in that county, not just to those with the most expensive houses. I too own my own home (on the good side of town) and pay property taxes. I prefer to see them be equally spread so even a smart poor kid can get the same benefits as a not so smart rich kid.
We evidently disagree on providing education for all our children equally. We’ll leave it at that.
LikeLike
Geanie:
We evidently disagree on providing education for all our children equally.
Well, my primary concern is providing the best education I possibly can for my children. And I am not willing to sacrifice the quality of my children’s education in pursuit of what is surely the unrealistic notion of an education of equal quality for all children.
But as a matter of policy within the context of public education, I think that generally speaking parents, not government bureaucrats, are the best guardians of their own children’s welfare, and so I think a voucher system which opens up more educational options for parents will do much to help equalize educational opportunities across various wealth demographics.
LikeLike
Yes, I agree to disagree.
My primary concern was also for my own children. But I in no way believe that any child, when it comes to a quality education, is any more deserving than another. And I see a voucher system as furthering the disparity of a good education by all.
Why is simply providing the same care; facilities, teachers, etc. to all children such a difficult thing to do? I see no reason why one school has a million dollar auditorium while another doesn’t even have enough books to go around, especially when all is paid for from funds gathered from all in the county.
And with that, I am signing off for the night. Sleep well all.
LikeLike
Geanie:
But I in no way believe that any child, when it comes to a quality education, is any more deserving than another.
No one “deserves” a public education. It is a benefit granted by the goodwill and kindness of others.
And I see a voucher system as furthering the disparity of a good education by all.
I think making a fetish of equality just for the sake of equality is dangerous and does great damage. I think It is much better to have many schools of disparate quality and provide parents with the means to choose from among them the one they value the most than it is to insist that the parents send their kids to a single designated school while pursuing the utopian chimera of equalizing the quality of all schools.
LikeLike
“Why is simply providing the same care; facilities, teachers, etc. to all children such a difficult thing to do? I see no reason why one school has a million dollar auditorium while another doesn’t even have enough books to go around, especially when all is paid for from funds gathered from all in the county.”
This is literally an impossibility for a number of reasons. First, as soon as a new facility is built, the one that just was built previously is inferior due to, at a minimum, it being older. Second, there are only so many good teachers, mediocre teachers and bad teachers. You cannot get rid of bad teachers due to union rules, and it’s often hard to lure good teachers to an underperforming school because of union rules on merit pay versus seniority. Also, from a teacher standpoint, if your an exceptional teacher and the only real advantage you can achieve due to union rules is being able to pick the school you wish to work at, a lot of people will want to work closer to home, human nature. As a result, the younger, less experienced teachers end up in the older facilities. Also, think about how neighborhoods change, they age and the school age population decreases, while it increases in a newer and different part of town, bussing kids far away pisses parents off and there just is only so much money any property owner is going to be willing to vote for before voting with their feet, so districts tend to build new facilities where the population is growing. Finally, look at who votes. I guarantee that school spending correlates closest to districts that vote in the highest percentage. Look at turnouts as a percentage of population and I bet the best schools in OKC are also the ones where voting as a percentage of the population is highest.
Here is my second “finally,” there is no competition in poor districts. What happens with monopolies? Sclerosis and corruption. Why should a poor school district worry about the kids leaving when the parents can’t afford to send their kids to private schools. Districts in upper middle class and rich areas actually have to worry about competition as the parents can afford to send their kids to private school. A solution to your concerns is a voucher given to parents so they can send their kids anywhere they want. I suspect that quality schools will open up next to shitty public schools virtually overnight and the shitty public schools will improve or die. Imagine if Wal-Mart saw an financial opportunity is owning schools? Or Fed-ex? Or Apple?
LikeLike
I have to admit that I find it totally and entirely inexplicable that anyone who really cares about the kids as individuals could possibly object to a voucher system. When I hear people make arguments against vouchers, I can only conclude that what really matters to them is the public school system as a concept. The actual education of kids as individuals is secondary to maintaining government produced education.
LikeLike
Scott:
I think It is much better to have many schools of disparate quality and provide parents with the means to choose from among them the one they value the most
This is precisely the public school system now. If a parent values a school in a different district more than the one where they live, all they have to do is move.
LikeLike
Mich:
This is precisely the public school system now.
No it isn’t. The public school system designates a single school, determined by one’s address, that parents are allowed to send their kids to. If they want to send their kids to a different school, they either need to to send them to a private school or move to a new address, and the public school system doesn’t provide them with the means to do either.
As I said earlier, unless one’s primary goal is to preserve the current system of government produced education rather than to provide educational opportunities of value to as many kids as possible, then I find opposition to vouchers to be wholly inexplicable.
LikeLike
Scott: OT. If you’re still shopping for a TV, take a look at Costco’s website this morning. they’re offering some really good deals and free (i think) shipping.
LikeLike
nova…thanks. I already bought the 51 inch Samsung plasma, but one can never have too many TVs….
LikeLike
Scott:
It depends on what state you’re in, I guess. In Utah parents can choose any one of a number of public schools within a district (I don’t know how districts are designated, but SLC has at least two different ones that sometimes overlap). Or they can move to a different district. I don’t see the issue.
LikeLike
Mich:
I don’t see the issue.
The issue is the ability to go to a school that you as a parent value as opposed to only being able to go to those that your government offers, many of which are simply dreadful. Again, I find it totally baffling that anyone would think it is good public policy to make primary education universally accessible, but then oppose expanding the educational choices available.
LikeLike
Michi,
Most districts do not give parents that option.
LikeLike
Mark — you asked about the local situation. It’s Fairfax County, which is consistently ranked among the best in the nation. That said, it think it suffers from what any large public school system does. It has great resources for the AP kids as well as (my understanding anyway) for special needs. It’s the great bunch in the middle where it’s more assembly line. And there’s no reason for that to change. It doesn’t have to. It gets paid either way ($2.5 billion annually, IIRC). That, and the system is so huge, my concern is that it’s disciplinary procedures are not designed to teach, but to move past the problem in the most convenient way possible. There’s been a few high profile cases that have made the Post and the administrative response is like what had Dave! worked up.
LikeLike
Scott, no matter how you paint it, I still cannot see why when a given county raises, say $1 million, with for example sake only, has 10 schools in the county.. why is the $1 million not divided equally between the 10 schools. I understand since there has been NO equality in the maintenance of our public schools for some time that even if we were to do that starting today, there would still forever be a disparity of quality of education solely due to it already having existed for so long.
As far as a voucher system. As I stated a couple days ago, I mostly stay tuned to ATiM for learning. I in no way ever believe I am “all knowing” or have all the answers, so I am asking to better understand your proposal. You never know, you might change my mind, and then you may not. So please explain to me how this voucher system would work.
Does every parent (set of parents) get a voucher (check) for a certain amount and they use that to do what? send their child to a better public school? send their child to a private school? And then how do the parents get their child to this better school since most likely it will not be close to home particularly for the poor? Will the voucher cover the entire cost of allowing the child to attend this better school? Or will the parents have to also come up with their own funds to be able to do this?
Inquiring minds want to know. And I probably have similar questions about health care vouchers.
LikeLike
Geanie:
Scott, no matter how you paint it, I still cannot see why when a given county raises, say $1 million, with for example sake only, has 10 schools in the county.. why is the $1 million not divided equally between the 10 schools.
My guess would be because the collection of the $1 million came disproportionately from those families that attend certain schools, and it is spent to some degree in rough proportion to the way it was collected.
So please explain to me how this voucher system would work.
The details vary across many different systems, but essentially parents would be given a “voucher” for a certain amount of money, paid by the government, to be used towards tuition at the school of their choice. The school could be public or private.
And then how do the parents get their child to this better school since most likely it will not be close to home particularly for the poor?
That is a logistical problem for the parents to work out themselves. Obviously they would not choose to send their kid to a school which the kid can’t actually get to.
Will the voucher cover the entire cost of allowing the child to attend this better school?
Again, the details of the system can vary, but generally speaking the voucher would be for a given amount of money, presumably something roughly equal to the marginal cost of educating a single pupil in the existing pubic school. If it did not cover the full cost of tuition at their school of choice, then the parents would presumably have to come up with the difference in some other way. Or continue to send their kid to the same public school he goes to now.
All a voucher does is increase the availability of choice. The existing choice of the crappy public school would remain, so in the worst case they can always continue to send their kid there. The point is to simply to make other alternatives available.
LikeLike
Scott,
As far as how funds are distributed currently to our public schools. While it is evident that the funds are not equally split across all schools in a given county, it is something I just don’t agree with. Just as an act of nature, I am “assuming” we have just as many intelligent poor kids as we do intelligent rich kids. And with the funding being parsed out as it currently is, I do believe we allow many intelligent kids to not even come close to accomplishing what they could otherwise. But it is what it is.
And then basically a voucher system would still favor most except the poor, again.
So now they have a voucher that will allow them to send their child to whatever school they want. But unless someone invests in those areas to provide a quality school (and if anyone does start investing, those areas will be the last to see it), the “closest” quality school would not be near to them at all. Here in Tulsa, the nearest private school for our poor side of town is at least 8 miles away with most being at least 12 miles away. So now the parents have to figure out how to get their child to that school, which for many would not be a deal breaker and the child stays in the same low “educational” school they’re already in.
And for those who can arrange the transportation:
Here in Oklahoma, the per student dollars spent (2012) was between $7,480 and $8,440 (OK cut education by 20% since 2008). You can’t even touch a private school here for that. You better have at least $15,000 for a year of private schooling here, with $12,000 for tuition and then the costs of the required uniforms and the additional “activities” fees. And the child would still have to be “accepted” (approved).
So if the voucher would be the equivalent of the cost of our public spending now, again, the poor just wouldn’t be able to do so.
So what additional opportunities or choices are we really giving and to whom?
LikeLike
Geanie,
You hit on a lot of problems with voucher/choice systems as currently implemented. In most places they serve as back door tax rebates to wealthy families who send their kids to private schools.
LikeLike
yello:
In most places they serve as back door tax rebates to wealthy families who send their kids to private schools.
You mean places like The Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden? Seems rather unlikely to me.
LikeLike
Scott,
I read the article and based on how they did the voucher is what has made it so successful, IMHO.
“Schools that receive vouchers must except students regardless of ability or background, and must not charge tuition beyond the value of the voucher.”
Oh yea, I can just see Holland Hall and several others (here in Tulsa) accepting a voucher for $11,000 (OK per student cost) when it already costs close to $20,000 a year to attend those schools.
Please let me know if I’m missing something here.
LikeLike
“Schools that receive vouchers must except students regardless of ability or background, and must not charge tuition beyond the value of the voucher.”
I would blame the American public school system for that but the think-tank that promulgated it seems to be from Canada.
LikeLike
Geanie:
Oh yea, I can just see Holland Hall and several others (here in Tulsa) accepting a voucher for $11,000 (OK per student cost) when it already costs close to $20,000 a year to attend those schools.
Why does it matter if 1 or 2 or 10 schools do not conform to whatever restrictions you wanted to place on the use of the vouchers? If vouchers make even 1 more option available to parents to choose from, why wouldn’t that be welcomed?
LikeLike
Geanie:
I will address this more in depth later.
LikeLike
“Does every parent (set of parents) get a voucher (check) for a certain amount and they use that to do what?”
that’s what I would do. but i also think the model of school campuses is a bit outdated.
I’ve posted this one before, but it’s a favorite
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/end-them-don%E2%80%99t-mend-them
“Close them anyway. I’ve got 11,749 reasons. Or, given the Cato report, call it 15,000. Abandon the schools. Gather the kids together in groups of 15.4. Sit them down at your house, or the Moose Lodge, or the VFW Hall or—gasp—a church. Multiply 15.4 by $15,000. That’s $231,000. Subtract a few grand for snacks and cleaning your carpet. What remains is a pay and benefit package of a quarter of a million dollars. Average 2008 public school classroom teacher salary: $51,391. For a quarter of a million dollars you could hire Aristotle. The kids wouldn’t have band practice, but they’d have Aristotle. (Incidentally this worked for Philip of Macedon. His son did very well.)”
LikeLike
Surfing the leftycartoons site NoVa linked to on the newest thread, I ran across this cartoon:
http://leftycartoons.com/a-brief-guide-to-what-society-values/
It seems the market has decided on the fair value of teachers.
LikeLike
“BTW, if you want to search the comments rather than the posts, you need to do it from the comments section on the dashboard.”
Thanks. This is the post I was thinking of:
along with this article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/old-obama-acquaintance/2012/08/16/215b484e-dbd3-11e1-8e43-4a3c4375504a_story.html
As an added bonus, it also had the great gin discussion.
LikeLike
here’s another one: http://leftycartoons.com/top-ten-ways-teachers-unions-caused-the-economic-crisis/
“first grader need more skin in the game.” love it.
LikeLike
Correction: Last sentence, paragraph 3:
So now the parents have to figure out how to get their child to that school, which for many would BE a deal breaker and the child stays in the same low “educational” school they’re already in.
LikeLike
BTW, can anyone tell me how to change my avatar? I clicked on my name in the black bar at top, but I do not have anything available to edit my profile.
LikeLike
I can also just see most of these open their doors to students regardless of ability or BACKGROUND. I’m sure their “benefactors” wouldn’t be very happy at all,
Believe it or not (sarcasm), racism still flourishes here 😦
LikeLike
will check back in later. Time to get stuff done.
LikeLike
yep, a typo in an article about education… gotta love it!
LikeLike
Believe it or not (sarcasm), racism still flourishes here
Most of the private schools south of the Mason Dixon line were established solely to avoid school segregation. They all have proud traditions of learning dating back to 1956 or so. The Stanley Plan in Virgina was to use education vouchers as an end run around court-ordered integration.
LikeLike
Yello: If you know Tulsa’s “racial” history, nothing less than another race riot like that of 1921 will budge the deep southern racial roots here.
If it weren’t for my entire family living here, I’d wouldn’t be living here. But I do love my grandbabies so very much 🙂
LikeLike
Geanie, your assumption is that a child in Tulsa cannot get a decent education for $7400-$8000. I happen to disagree and think that there will be a lot of schools that will open and do just that with room for a profit. Finally, expensive private schools will always exist, do you have an objection to them?
LikeLike
Semi-corked. 🙂
LikeLike
Scott: There lies why the voucher system, as you see it, won’t work. You want to use Sweden, Holland and Denmark as examples of it working. But there is a BIG difference in the way you are presenting it to be and what is actually working there.
“Schools that receive vouchers must except students regardless of ability or background, and must not charge tuition beyond the value of the voucher.”
IF we were to do the same, MUST NOT CHARGE TUITION BEYOND THE VALUE OF THE VOUCHER, than it would be successful.
IF we cannot, then again, since, here where I live, then it won’t work except for those who really don’t need assistance getting their child out of public schools and into private ones.
Again, it would be an opportunity for only a very small portion of the populace. I’d like to find a way to educate ALL our children, not just the lucky few. For it is ALL our children how are our Country’s future.
LikeLike
Troll: Currently that $7400-8000 isn’t buying a lot of education, at least not on all sides of town. Remember that’s an average amount. I’m quite sure the good side of town gets more while the poor side gets less.
I have no problem with there being private schools that are primarily for the rich. What I do have a problem with is attempting to do a voucher program, with the false belief it will be better for all, when in fact, it will only help the top 20% and do nothing for the bottom 80%. (maaaaybe 30/70). Unless the program does state the schools cannot charge a student more than the value of the voucher, which brings on another issue of it’s own.
And I cast those percentages based on these assumptions:
The top 10% can afford any school they want, doesn’t matter where or how much or if they have a voucher or not.
The next top 10%, which I believe includes the upper middle class, can use the voucher to subsidize their taking their child out of public schools and place them into private schools.
The bottom 80% will still continue to use the nearest public school they possibly can due to transportation or add’l costs issues.
I’d really like to find something that doesn’t just help the top “whatever”%.
LikeLike
Geanie,I just differ philosophically. I think there would be a number of schools opening up able to educate kids for whatever the school district per student rate will be, and even be able to provide transportation and turn a profit. I have that much faith in the market. Yup, there’ll be schools charging more, and some charging less, if parents are allowed to get a rebate. Again,
I suspect that entities that are successfully running charter schools in some inner cities will expand
And take advantage of the money. Again, imagine how efficient a district run by Wal-Mart, Apple
And Fed-Ex would be.
I am a product of public education, as should be obvious to anyone here who can read. We can do better, but not if we stay married to a structure who’s primary goal is not, IMO, to teach children.
LikeLike
“he bottom 80% will still continue to use the nearest public school they possibly can due to transportation or add’l costs issues.”
part of the idea behind vouchers is that the public schools will be forced to improve if they are facing competition for resources. if more of their students had the ability to jump ship, they’d either improve or close.
LikeLike