There are a great many players, that's how democracy works. I have never once in my career worked for an organization that could command but a tiny fraction of the financial resources spent annually by either your buddies in the NEA or your pals in the AFT much less both of them combined.
Now if I am reading an above comment as some of the anti-123 flat earth crowd is mad at you for voting to increase public school funding by $3.5 billion, please standby while I pull up a couch and pop some pop-corn...
It is jolly good fun to be the colossus of your imagination, but alas out here in the real world I must content myself with playing a much more modest role in an ongoing pluralistic debate. Moreover, your tribe commands far more money, dark and otherwise, in this contest than does mine. It never fails to amuse when Xerxes attempts to portray himself as Leonidas.
I don't recall advocating for decreased funding. I do however recall efforts to accurately portray what we actually spending. In any case, the amount of spending is decided through direct and indirect democracy in Arizona through things like district elections, statewide ballots and the election of public officials. All of this is well outside of the control of a mere analyst such as myself. On your point on taxes, I would simply note that Fred Duval campaigned on a pledge of not-raising taxes, which tells you about everything you need to know about the preferences of the Arizona electorate on that front imo. You are of course entitled to your opinion regarding the desirability of higher taxes, but democracy has thus far trended in a different direction.
Ground Level- whatever the perceived shortcomings of the regulations of charter schools in Arizona may be, they have been knocking the ball out of the park academically. Arizona was the national leader in NAEP gains in 2015, and Arizona charter schools exceeded the statewide average, so we have a very positive trend working in both district and charter schools.
That is another creative reading of what I have to say. The point is that retirees are out of their prime earning years and thus their prime taxpaying years. The medicaid cost per recipient by age is a factual rather than an ideological point. It would be great if we could have 10k Baby Boomers per day reach retirement age until 2030 and keep everything the same, but it is not really an option.
David has provided a rather one-sided reading of the study referenced. The study points out the looming demographic challenge posed by the ongoing retirement of the Baby Boom generation, especially in states that the United States Census Bureau projects to simultaneously experience an increase in the youth population over the next 15 years. States like, ahem, Arizona for instance.
The study outlines a body of non-controversial involving the impacts of having smaller working age populations- the people who at any given time carry the primary load of paying the taxes that sustain state spending. The problem in a nutshell is that states/countries with large working age populations tend to grow quickly (and thus generate healthy tax revenue growth) while those with shrinking working age populations tend to grow relatively slowly. Second and perhaps even more crucially the elderly draw upon public health spending at far higher rates than the average spending. Thus the sustainability of the current provision of public funding is very much in doubt, and will need to be revised.
This not however to be understood as some sort of cartoon super-villain call to slash and burn education spending. If you can discover a giant ocean of oil under the cactus patch or something I'll be happy to spend a good deal of it on public services. Otherwise, expect a spirited competition in our pluralistic democracy, especially between the needs of health and education.
Fortunately Arizona already leads the nation in NAEP gains despite the post recession funding cuts.
You are far too kind to me, but don't forget to give credit to the school district industrial lobbying complex of Arizona. Without their legal effort to employ a 19th Century state constitutional provision that had been pushed by anti-Catholic groups such as the Know Nothings and the KKK to kill a small scholarship program for children with disabilities, we would never have developed the account based choice programs. At last count similar bills had been filed in about 22 states, passed in six, enacted in five and our friends and their lawyers deserve much of the credit!
Recent Comments
There are a great many players, that's how democracy works. I have never once in my career worked for an organization that could command but a tiny fraction of the financial resources spent annually by either your buddies in the NEA or your pals in the AFT much less both of them combined.
Now if I am reading an above comment as some of the anti-123 flat earth crowd is mad at you for voting to increase public school funding by $3.5 billion, please standby while I pull up a couch and pop some pop-corn...
I don't recall advocating for decreased funding. I do however recall efforts to accurately portray what we actually spending. In any case, the amount of spending is decided through direct and indirect democracy in Arizona through things like district elections, statewide ballots and the election of public officials. All of this is well outside of the control of a mere analyst such as myself. On your point on taxes, I would simply note that Fred Duval campaigned on a pledge of not-raising taxes, which tells you about everything you need to know about the preferences of the Arizona electorate on that front imo. You are of course entitled to your opinion regarding the desirability of higher taxes, but democracy has thus far trended in a different direction.
Ground Level- whatever the perceived shortcomings of the regulations of charter schools in Arizona may be, they have been knocking the ball out of the park academically. Arizona was the national leader in NAEP gains in 2015, and Arizona charter schools exceeded the statewide average, so we have a very positive trend working in both district and charter schools.
https://jaypgreene.com/2016/05/16/arizona-…
That is another creative reading of what I have to say. The point is that retirees are out of their prime earning years and thus their prime taxpaying years. The medicaid cost per recipient by age is a factual rather than an ideological point. It would be great if we could have 10k Baby Boomers per day reach retirement age until 2030 and keep everything the same, but it is not really an option.
The study outlines a body of non-controversial involving the impacts of having smaller working age populations- the people who at any given time carry the primary load of paying the taxes that sustain state spending. The problem in a nutshell is that states/countries with large working age populations tend to grow quickly (and thus generate healthy tax revenue growth) while those with shrinking working age populations tend to grow relatively slowly. Second and perhaps even more crucially the elderly draw upon public health spending at far higher rates than the average spending. Thus the sustainability of the current provision of public funding is very much in doubt, and will need to be revised.
This not however to be understood as some sort of cartoon super-villain call to slash and burn education spending. If you can discover a giant ocean of oil under the cactus patch or something I'll be happy to spend a good deal of it on public services. Otherwise, expect a spirited competition in our pluralistic democracy, especially between the needs of health and education.
Fortunately Arizona already leads the nation in NAEP gains despite the post recession funding cuts.
You are far too kind to me, but don't forget to give credit to the school district industrial lobbying complex of Arizona. Without their legal effort to employ a 19th Century state constitutional provision that had been pushed by anti-Catholic groups such as the Know Nothings and the KKK to kill a small scholarship program for children with disabilities, we would never have developed the account based choice programs. At last count similar bills had been filed in about 22 states, passed in six, enacted in five and our friends and their lawyers deserve much of the credit!
Cheers-
ML