Op-Ed: Vote “Yes” For Decatur Schools on Election Day
Decatur Metro | November 7, 2011By Katie Pedersen and Kyle Williams
On Tuesday, November 8th, we have a chance to vote “Yes” for City Schools of Decatur. Tomorrow, Decatur voters decide whether to continue the Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) by answering “Yes” or “No” to a very long, legalese question that begins “Shall a special one percent sales and use tax for educational purposed continue to be imposed in DeKalb County for not longer than 20 quarters, beginning July 1, 2012, to raise not more than $645,000,000 in the aggregate. . . .”
First passed in 1997, SPLOST provides a means for school systems to meet capital improvement needs through the collection of a 1% sales tax. SPLOST is not a new or additional tax – it is already a part of our 7% sales tax. But the sales tax will expire in the next few months unless we ‘Locally Opt’ to keep it in place.
Since its inception, SPLOST has funded 38% of all capital projects for CSD, bringing in more than $34 million dollars. Thanks to SPLOST, CSD has:
- Built the new gymnasium and performing arts center at Decatur High School,
- Added new science labs and built a new gymnasium at Renfroe Middle School,
- Renovated our elementary schools adding additional classrooms, a new media center, new cafeterias, play areas, and
- Made our facilities more accessible for all students.
Capital improvements to our schools and facilities are crucial to the success of our school system and broaden the educational opportunities of our students. Each SPLOST dollar spent on these capital improvements is a dollar saved from our general fund that can be spent for classroom and education costs, operating expenses and teacher salaries.
If passed, SPLOST is predicted to generate an additional $17.2 million for CSD through 2018. We will benefit from this continuing stream of revenue and be able to offset state and federal education budget cuts by:
- Continuing classroom and greenspace renovation and improvements at Renfroe Middle School
- Acquisition of facilities currently leased, including College Heights Early Childhood Learning Center and Fifth Avenue (rental costs must come from general funds and take away from classroom spending)
- Creation of a new Central Office Building
- System wide technology and equipment repair, design and improvements
- Facility maintenance and repairs, including energy-efficiency changes improvement HVAC and boiler systems, roofing repairs and replacements
If passed, CSD will be able to borrow against future SPLOST revenues to begin projects today without waiting on a year-to-year collection of SPLOST. However, CSD cannot borrow more than SPLOST revenues and must repay any borrowed money solely from SPLOST revenues.
Whether or not you have children in CSD schools, ALL Decaturites benefit directly from SPLOST revenues. It is estimated that more than 30% of SPLOST revenue comes from outside DeKalb County shifting a portion of our school expenses to those who shop, dine and visit our county. By collecting sales tax from thousands of visitors to Decatur each year, we avoid raising our property taxes to fund capital improvements. Without SPLOST our school system would need to generate the lost revenues by raising our property taxes.
While Decatur stands to separately benefit from continuing SPLOST, we must stand and vote with our friends in DeKalb County on Election Day. A majority of all DeKalb County voters, not just Decatur voters, must say “Yes” to our schools and vote to continue SPLOST.
We urge to vote “YES” for Decatur schools and vote “YES” on SPLOST – and encourage our DeKalb County neighbors to do the same! Vote tomorrow, Tuesday, November 8th!
For more information, visit www.splostforschools.org, www.dekalb.k12.ga.us/splost-iv (DeKalb County School District), www.atlantapublicschools.us/splost4 (Atlanta Public Schools), or www.csdecatur.net/SPLOST/more (City Schools of Decatur).
On Tuesday, November 8th, we have a chance to vote “Yes” for City Schools of Decatur.
Tomorrow, Decatur voters decide whether to continue the Special Purpose Local Option Sales
Tax (SPLOST) by answering “Yes” or “No” to a very long, legalese question that begins “Shall
a special one percent sales and use tax for educational purposed continue to be imposed in
DeKalb County for not longer than 20 quarters, beginning July 1, 2012, to raise not more than
$645,000,000 in the aggregate. . . .”
First passed in 1997, SPLOST provides a means for school systems to meet capital
improvement needs through the collection of a 1% sales tax. SPLOST is not a new or additional
tax – it is already a part of our 7% sales tax. But the sales tax will expire in the next few months
unless we ‘Locally Opt’ to keep it in place.
Since its inception, SPLOST has funded 38% of all capital projects for CSD, bringing in
more than $34 million dollars. Thanks to SPLOST, CSD has:
§
§
§
Built the new gymnasium and performing arts center at Decatur High School,
Added new science labs and built a new gymnasium at Renfroe Middle School,
Renovated our elementary schools adding additional classrooms, a new media center,
new cafeterias, play areas, and
Made our facilities more accessible for all students.
§
Capital improvements to our schools and facilities are crucial to the success of our school
system and broaden the educational opportunities of our students. Each SPLOST dollar spent
on these capital improvements is a dollar saved from our general fund that can be spent for
classroom and education costs, operating expenses and teacher salaries.
If passed, SPLOST is predicted to generate an additional $17.2 million for CSD through
2018. We will benefit from this continuing stream of revenue and be able to offset state and
federal education budget cuts by:
§ Continuing classroom and greenspace renovation and improvements at Renfroe
Middle School
§ Acquisition of facilities currently leased, including College Heights Early Childhood
§
§
§ Facility maintenance and repairs, including energy-efficiency changes improvement
Learning Center and Fifth Avenue (rental costs must come from general funds and
take away from classroom spending)
Creation of a new Central Office Building
System wide technology and equipment repair, design and improvements
HVAC and boiler systems, roofing repairs and replacements
If passed, CSD will be able to borrow against future SPLOST revenues to begin projects
today without waiting on a year-to-year collection of SPLOST. However, CSD cannot borrow
more than SPLOST revenues and must repay any borrowed money solely from SPLOST
revenues.
Whether or not you have children in CSD schools, ALL Decaturites benefit directly from
SPLOST revenues. It is estimated that more than 30% of SPLOST revenue comes from outside
DeKalb County shifting a portion of our school expenses to those who shop, dine and visit our
county. By collecting sales tax from thousands of visitors to Decatur each year, we avoid raising
our property taxes to fund capital improvements. Without SPLOST our school system would
need to generate the lost revenues by raising our property taxes.
While Decatur stands to separately benefit from continuing SPLOST, we must stand
and vote with our friends in DeKalb County on Election Day. A majority of all DeKalb County
voters, not just Decatur voters, must say “Yes” to our schools and vote to continue SPLOST.
We urge to vote “YES” for Decatur schools and vote “YES” on SPLOST – and
encourage our DeKalb County neighbors to do the same! Vote tomorrow, Tuesday,
November 8th!
For more information, visit www.splostforschools.org, www.dekalb.k12.ga.us/splost-
iv (DeKalb
Schools), or www.csdecatur.net/SPLOST/more (City Schools of Decatur).
County
School
District), www.atlantapublicschools.us/splost4 (Atlanta
Public
Latest from Decaturish
Nope.
+1
+1 from this DeKalb Co. resident.
+2 from another Dekalb Co resident voting NO.
Just voted a big fat no on this one.
If I understand this and other threads: voters should know that CSD students will be hurt if SPLOST is not passed and taxpayers will see their local taxes increase to cover what SPLOST would have paid for. Whether or not voters knew about the mechanism that CSD used to finance Fifth Ave and whether they agreed with it, we are stuck now. If SPLOST does not pass, both students and taxpayers will suffer. How financing is handled in the future by CSD can be changed, but the past cannot be.
Those who understand the lease mechanism for Fifth Ave. feel free to jump in and dispute or explain better. But smart people I trust are saying that CSD’s financial health depends on the passage of SPLOST.
I love that I have the chance to vote to lower my taxes tomorrow instead of voting to keep them from growing. This is a perfect example of how a step backwards is actually moving forward.
The way I heard it explained, a vote no equals a vote for higher property taxes automatically.
Huh?
Property taxes will be raised significantly if splost does not pass.
Why the “huh?” SPLOST is already in place, so it’s a vote to take a tax away, not put a new one in place.
Decatur has committed itself to some tremendous building projects that factored SPLOST into the budget. If SPLOST does not pass, the City and County will have to make up the difference somehow. And that will most likely come in an increased millage rate – aka, higher property taxes.
So, in my view, those who feel that a vote against SPLOST is a vote against higher taxes are mistaken.
Those who make spending decision based on the hope that a future SPLOST will pass are the problem. I voted NO against SPLOST now and I will do my part in the next battle of property taxes when that time comes. Using a hostage arguement to support SPLOST just boggles my mind.
But is it a no vote or a yes vote that lowers your taxes?
Does a yes vote lower a Dekalb Co/CoD resident’s taxes bc it raises revenue from non-residents who come to spend $ here and leave. Does a yes vote lower taxes for residents who spend less on purchases?
+1
A no vote is a vote for massive property tax increases. I’d rather stick with the existing 1% sales tax.
How “massive”? How much is 1% sales tax costing you? What will the net effect be? I wish I had firm answers to these questions. Keep in mind the property tax is tax deductible for homeowners.
I get what you’re saying – let those who come into Decatur to buy things help pay the cost of maintaining our schools. Got it.
But does anyone really believe our property taxes aren’t going up anyway?
That either/or argument doesn’t sell me. It’s more likely that both hands will be reaching into my pockets, not just one.
But how much? That’s the real question. SPLOST spreads the burden out among all consumers who are not necessarily residents. Without SPLOST, the burden is on the residents alone.
Sorry, the “Huh?” was directed at Keith F.
Although I am not disagreeing that property taxes will go up, I would like to see the math before deciding how significant it will be. An annual shortfall of $2,400,000 spread amount approx. 8500 households results in a tax increase of less than $300, and that assumes zero commercial properties (and zero cost cutting measures). How much will the average family save if the 1% sales tax is removed in Dekalb and Fulton counties (where a sizable portoin, but not all, of my taxable purchases are made)?
So using your example, the average Decatur homeowner would pay $300 more per year in property taxes if SPLOST doesn’t pass.
If it does pass, the average Decatur household would have to spend $30,000 in Decatur/DeKalb in order to pay the same $300 in taxes.
For me, I get why Dekalb residents don’t want to send another dime to their corrupt government. But here in Decatur, we are well run, transparent, and unfortunately need higher tax rates due to our lack of scale. And as an overall philosophy, I prefer consumption taxes over property and income taxes – a consumption tax is essentially voluntary. You can buy everything you need from Amazon and skirt the tax if you want.
Please don’t rely on my numbers! They are over-simplified and leave out way too many factors. People are using adjectives like “massive” and “substantial” when describing the imminent tax increases, and I just want to quantify.
A couple of pieces explaining the reasons why some choose not to support SPLOST:
http://www.thecrier.net/our_columnists/article_23859d36-0497-11e1-9447-001cc4c03286.html
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/school-splost-has-opposition-1209780.html
More information to inform your decision:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2011/10/to-splost-or-not-to-splost.html
we should totally give more money to dekalb! maybe we can get in some more racketeering charges superintendents!
“for the superintendents” rather!
I support this vote and continuing SPLOST!
Decatur’s school tax already increased by one mill this year.
Significant cost cutting has already taken place. Voting no for SPLOST will hurt our students because cuts will impact class size and programming. That, in turn, impacts school quality and your property values.
A vote for SPLOST is a vote for Decatur students, teachers and schools.
Why do government schools spend almost double per student than private schools? Politicians use schools, police and firefighters in there little game to obtain more money. Every time we here that costs have to be cut, they say it will be in schools, police and fire. Really? Why? Are you telling me that there are not more insignificant areas that can be cut? Of course there are, they know that if they say that those three will have to be cut, people will approve more taxes and we will have again, accepted the behavior of politicians just getting more money instead of working hard to cut waste.
A vote for SPLOST is a vote for Politicians, nothing more.
Walrus, have you checked private school tuition lately? Private tuition around these parts is approaching 20K or more a year.
But that is supply and demand. Outside the city of Atlanta, it is substantially less (not all of course).
Tuition costs do not speak to how much they spend per child, it may speak more to the profits they generate.
Many, if not most, of those schools are non-profits.
Oh, many are not.
Well, if they are non-profit, and they charge $12k or more per year, then how are they spending half of what Decatur is spending per pupil? You can’t have both sides of this argument.
I say compare Decatur’s spending per pupil to that of QUALITY private schools. That would be a more fair comparison. I think we come out pretty well.
Why would anyone send their child to a for-profit school? Does not seem like a good idea.
Wow. I could respond, but I think we would have to delve into a whole deeper economic discussion that I have not the time for. Simple economics though…
based on some quick online research, the number of for-profit k-13 schools in the metro area is 0 to miniscule.
erm, K-12
The 2011-2012 CSD budget is$49.3 million. Divid that by 2900 students (+/-) and we’re spending…
$17,000 per student on average.
NOT the $12K-$13K as some posted.
Compare to private schools (from their web-sites):
Paideia charges $17,517 for K-7 and $19,500 for grades 7-12
Marist charges just $15,850 for 7-12.
St. Thomas Moore, right here in Decatur, charges $6,545-$9,085 for K-8
Greater Atlanta Christian: $13,375 for k-5 and $14,700 for 6-12 (but that includes a MacBook !!!for each student, and have you seen their athletic facilities ???)
Woodward & Westminster top $20K for high school
Voting NO.
Maybe if it doesn’t pass the CSD will be forced to look up the meaning of the word “frugal” instead of planning to build a new central office building.
Amen. Thanks for that aggie!
I had pulled the $13k number (was actually $12,750 or therabouts) from a Google search that seemed like a reputable source, so I am happy to stand corrected if I was wrong. Thanks for the info.
According to the CSD website, the total enrollment at CSD is 3,542 students.
http://www.csdecatur.net/about/
And according to the published CSD budget, total expenditures for 2011-2012 are $41.5 million.
https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Documents/ViewDocs.aspx?S=4052
So that comes out to $11,716 per pupil spending.
Correction, total expenditures were $49 million, as you noted. I was misreading the budget, excluding the other columns.
So the per pupil spending is $13,834.
One thing this brings up, though, is that the tuition numbers for private schools are not necessarily accurate representations of the cost per pupil at those schools. Many are subsidized, such as parochial schools by their parish. “old schools” like Marist or Westminster have foundations that offset the tuition costs – but the per pupil spending is still there. etc. etc.
I think Decatur is pretty much where it ought to be in terms of spending and quality. It’s one of the best systems in the state. I’d like to see us cut transportation spending, and put the administration in a leased office. But overall I’m happy with the state of things.
“Politicians use schools, police and firefighters in there little game to obtain more money.” Right, got it. That’s why I see 3 cops for every citizen and all those gold-plated Glocks they carry. And the lavish classroom trailers at elementary schools, etc.
But in all seriousness, local governments are responsible for raising most of the funds to pay for schools, and services like police and fire. That’s what they do. I don’t really care too much whether the money comes from a sales tax or property tax. But if you don’t want to pay anything, the impact is having no or poor services. If your argument is, as it has been in the past, that “government is wasteful,” then please enlighten us where all those millions in savings in Decatur City’s budget are.
No offense, but you and I have been here before, and if you cannot acknowledge the fact that govt. is the most inefficient wasteful entity on the planet, we really do not have a basis from which to start a conversation.
I submit: Kim Kardashian
Ha! Fair enough Parker, fair enough.
I’m kvelling with pride to get the nod from The Walrus. Even as he’s beset on every side.
It’s a lonely world for The Walrus…
I’d submit just about any electronics manufacturer. Planned obsolescence that wastes resources and pollutes the planet sounds pretty inefficient to me–efficient at making profits maybe, but wasteful and inefficient if all externalities are taken into account.
So you can’t, or won’t, substantiate your claim that Mayor Floyd (they are real humans, not just nameless job titles) and the city commissioners are purely using this to stash coffers and not to actually use the funds for real needs? You made the claim, I’m just looking for the support behind it.
I don’t mean it is always on purpose. And we are not just talking about COD here. But govt. is a bureaucracy and they are not as efficient because of it. This is from contracts doled out to relatives and friends instead of the best valued offer, to ridiculous regulations that makes costs higher than would be otherwise, to operations and services that could be contracted out to private companies at a cheaper cost (with better service). You have pulled me back in, but we must just agree to disagree. You apparently believe that our govt. has eliminated all waste and I don’t. Fair enough.
Never said that gov’t has eliminated all waste. That would be an absurd standard for any individual or group. And I don’t really agree or disagree with you. But the hyperbole you have used this time and others is a distraction. Get fired up about government if you want. That’s a complete waste of time and energy IMO – it has nothing to do you with you or how to live happily and comfortably. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to go vote “yes.” Peace.
I think the key thing here for you guys to digest is that not all governments are equal. Ours is scaled just right – because our community is scaled just right. They can’t get away with corruption here like they can in DeKalb county or the Federal Government. So many of us are sympathetic to your general anti-tax view, but are ok with funding responsible governments.
Rscott if Decatur has strong confidence in its city leaders and wants to spend even more on its schools (it already spends just under $13k per student), no one is stopping it. The issue here is a county-wide tax, not a city of Decatur tax. Now if you want to make the case that Dekalb Co. will suddently stop its corruption and waste after SPLOST IV passes, then good luck to you. On the other hand, if Decaturites want to divorce the issue of DeKalb Co. from a DeKalb Co. tax, then they can go ahead and pay the higher property taxes they so often claim to be happy to pay. Except now, apparently.
Please tell me you don’t think the corruption will stop if SPLOST is defeated.
I suppose it won’t but ending corruption and incompetence isn’t on the ballot. What’s on the ballot is should we give even more money to a corrupt and incompetent government? A no voter will keep the money from being wasted, but ending the corruption altogether is a longer-term project.
A “No” vote only means they will get the money from somewhere else.
That’s unfortunate, but we get that. But why approve it by vote? We understand they will likely get it in other ways.
If they are going to get the money regardless, why vote against it just based on principal? Why not look at the merits of the tax and the alternatives to determine which you think is best?
ITS NOT ON PRINCIPAL!!!! I don’t think we should be taxed more, so I will vote no on this. I will also be against raising taxes in other ways and I will fight against those as well (prior to them raising taxes and by voting them out if they do). I have never been a “lesser of two evils” kind of guy. I vote on what I believe is right for my city, state, country.
You say it’s not on principle, but then you only give principles to defend this point. I’m confused, Walrus, and I think you may be, too.
If you would read my other posts, you would see it is more than principle. If i didn’t think schools could be funded any other way, then I would agree with you. But that is not the case. Confused? Hardly. I would more than welcome a debate with you anytime. I don’t think you would last 10 minutes…
I still would like an answer to my earlier question. Besides taxes, what “other ways” can government funds the schools (or any other government function)?
And meanwhile students, teachers, and tax-paying homeowners are hurt. You can fix bad administration and leaders in other ways than hurting schoolchildren who are not at fault.
Tax paying homeowners are hurt? How, by having to pay for the capital projects their city voted for? Sorry, no sympathy for you there.
As for the school kids, not buying it. Decatur schools are currently operating at huge levels of spending and funding and have a teacher to student ratio of 12 to 1. These kids are not suffering and won’t be suffering it SPLOST IV is not passed. Amazingly, public schools managed to survive for decades without SPLOST.
And therein lies the larger problem. SPLOST has become a go-to source of funding that many voters view as nearly free. Witness the many posts here advocating SPLOST so that Decatur residents don’t have to pay the higher taxes they otherwise treat as a badge of sophistication. No one tracks what they pay in sales taxes year over year, so they don’t much feel the tax in their own pocketbooks. We’re also told that much of the burden is foisted off onto others who don’t live here, so why not dip out hands in their pockets? It’s a recipe for the profligate spending we’re now seeing where every project is oh-so-urgent and must not only be done now but never at the expense of anything else in the budget. That leads us to where we are, where 15 years of SPLOST have done nothing but left us with an additional $2.2 billion in “needs,” and a series of DeKalb scandals to boot. What a rousing success.
Once the schools have a major revenue source that does not seem to cost anyone anything, it becomes divorced from stringent oversight and painful trade-offs and sacrifices that are supposed to be a part of the budgeting process. SPLOST is a bad idea badly executed, and after 15 years, it needs to come to an end.
DEM, I get it- you like taxes to be painful so people dislike them. But you are not thinking about the fact that people are not just thinking about the taxes; they are also thinking about the benefits, which include schools. Dekalb has its own problems, but here in Decatur we love our schools. You’re arguing a losing case. Let me help you rephrase your anti-tax case in a manner that may have some traction here in Decatur. Just think of it this way: a penny tax is regressive, and a property tax is progressive. (Poor folks spend all their money, in other words, but don’t own land.) You’re arguing for the progressive tax option. I would actually be really happy with that, too, because I think we should try and have the poor pay as little tax as possible.
I think you missed my point entirely but I’m sorry to say that I sense a bit too much condescension in your posts to assume this is a real conversation.
Sorry, but I gotta ask: 12 to 1 ratio? Where are those classrooms? If they exist, my kid’s been getting the short end of the stick…..And maybe we don’t need the SPLOST money as badly as I thought!
I’m entirely serious. If you want to fight SPLOST next time around to replace it with a progressive real estate tax, I’m all for it. I’d help, even.
And no, I didn’t misunderstand your point. You said that you want people to be aware of painful trade-offs, the consumption tax means people can’t feel the pinch, etc. You want people to be fully aware of every tax dollar raised, because this will force them to confront the actual tax burden. I don’t think this matters much to people when it comes to education taxes because most folks see benefits. You need to rephrase your attacks in order to gain any traction here. If you said “the consumption tax is regressive, I’m for a progressive homeowner tax,” I’d jump on board.
I agree that DEM is actually arguing for the more liberal position here. Conservatives like consumption taxes since it taxes everyone evenly on the amount the spend.
If schools were funded by only property taxes then the tax burden would fall the the more wealthy among us, i.e. people that actually own property. Even then, the more wealthy you are the more likely you are to own a more expensive house and thus even more of the burden falls to you.
“Even then, the more wealthy you are the more likely you are to own a more expensive house and thus even more of the burden falls to you.”
I think you guys are off base here. Actually, property taxes (in theory) are very conservative principles as you have stated above. If rich people had to pay a higher RATE, then conservatives would disagree. Say a flat tax for instance; conservatives like this and your above statement fits that exactly because the more you make the more you spend. If the property tax rate of the income tax rate was higher (which it is for income taxes), then conservative disagree. So, I think y’all are missing the point.
I meant, “the more you make, the more you are taxed”
Here was one source for the student teacher ratio, I saw another earlier today but now I can’t find it.
http://www.atlantaparent.com/education/Public_Schools.shtml
BB sorry if I was being touchy but I’m not re-phrasing my so-called attacks to fit your apparent worldview. I’m saying that if a city wants very expensive schools then the city should pay for them. How it does so (regressive or progressive taxes or whatever) is up to the city residents. But here we have a wealth city quite explictly supporting a county-wide tax for the express purpose of passing off as much of the tax burden for capital projects as possible onto third parties. You are correct that I view this as bad government precisely because it insulates the residents from the true cost of the projects they support.
Your assertion that “I don’t think this matters much to people when it comes to education taxes because most folks see benefits” is belied by many posts in this very thread which make clear that Decaturities see benefits to SPLOST but do not want to pay for those benefits through their own property taxes. They want others to pay. if it were otherwise, Decaturites would be indifferent to SPLOST, but clearly they’re not.
Re 12:1 ratio: When they come up with ratios like that, they are counting all the specialists, e.g. special ed and gifted instructors and paraprofessionals who go in and out of the classroom. There’s still one teacher and 22-28 kids per classroom in the elementary classrooms, depending on the grade level.
Maybe you are right but I’ve always preferred to go down swinging.
Bingo. The sheer numbers involved here are pretty staggering. About 15 years ago SPLOST I was passed. At that time, how many SPLOST proponents said “we’ll pass three of these taxes, raise $1.5 billion over 15 years, and then we will still need $2.2 billion and a SPLOST IV.” And of course, SPLOST IV isn’t the end, though I have yet to see a single SPLOST proponent admit that. It won’t even raise the $2.2 billion the schools claim to need after spending the first $1.5 billion. So 5 years hence we’ll be right back in the same place, with the schools claiming that the children will be harmed if we can’t build yet more central office buildings for administrators. This is more of a ransom demand than a plan for improving schools.
We have a perfectly good school building (Westchester) being used as administrative offices, and we are out of classroom space. So, we either build/purchase an administrative office or a new school.
What law says CSD has to buy/build a new central office????
I just saw 3 “space available” signs for commercial office space…on Commerce alone.
If they rent the space, maybe when enrollment dips, as it probably will sometime down the road, they won’t end up shuttering “under-utiilized” schools.
Certainly worth exploring. But, I think the leased space must come out of the operating budget whereas SPLOST funs can be used for purchase. Could be wrong though.
I think you’re correct “… that the leased space must come out of the operating budget whereas SPLOST funds can be used for purchase.”
IF SPLOST passes.
Which is another reason I voted NO. SPLOST almost encourages CSD, APS, and the others to spend, spend, spend just as long as it is on “capital” projects.
Walrus, I agree with your logic, but I am not sure I come to the same conclusion. Politicians all want more of our money to spend to keep their asses in office. But, with the SPLOST in place, the tax is set at 1% of taxable purchases, and I have some control over it. If the SPLOST is defeated, the politicians have a built-in excuse for raising taxes, but what will prevent them from raising taxes even higher than is necessary to cover the shortfall? I can already hear it now: “We don’t want to raise your taxes, but since you voted “No” for the SPLOST, we have no choice”.
I hear you, I do. I like consumption taxes better myself, but I can’t put my stamp of approval on any tax.
Maybe it is the lesser of two evils,. The money has to come from somewhere, and unless people start deciding to eliminate their own positions to eliminate waste, we can’t rely solely on cost cutting.
I can’t put my stamp of approval on any tax.
So you admit to being short sighted, and voting against your interest, just to score a political point.
That is a typical Republican for you.
Marty, for one, I am not a Republican. Thank you though for your label. Two, it is not about political points, it is about using my right to vote to speak my mind (which is what voting is). I don’t believe in this tax, so I vote no. If they tax another way, I will speak my mind by voting against the tax raiser when they go up for re-election. This has nothing to do with scoring a political point. I couldn’t care less about party politics. You have clearly missed the point. Typical Democrat….
Who was the last Democrat you voted for Walrus?
Never. And I have never voted for a Republican. You’re welcome.
Probably the biggest factor in private school costs being lower is the ability of private schools to select their students, allowing them to not enroll students with special needs and learning deficiencies. Public (or as you say “government”) schools have to accept every student who shows up and provide them with a raft of services if they need them. Private schools can exclude by policy or practice students with a range of factors that increase their educational costs, thus they can spend less per pupil and achieve results. Moreover, private schools don’t have to provide some very expensive services such as transportation or nutrition, which have to be a component of public schools.
In the end, because we rely on public schools to mitigate the impacts of poverty and to serve the needs of children with special needs, the costs they have to provide services are much higher than those for schools that can only server an audience of election and selection. This doesn’t speak directly to the SPLOST, but is does illustrate that public schools have costs that private schools do not, and that private schools essentially shift back onto public schools.
Very good points. In the end, I just revert to my base view that government should be out of education all together and I think all students would be better off (not perfect, but better). I know this opinion is going to garner lots of comments and questions, but don’t be surprised if I don’t answer as I don’t have the time to go through a lesson on the free-market and the kindness of the american people (and yes, these things can apply and work in education as well!).
Lots of economics terms being thrown around here. But as far as I can tell not the one regarding the fact that most economists agree that certain things the free market cannot feasibly do a better job in handling, and thus are left to the public sector. They are called public goods. Things like roads . . . and schools.
Does this contingent of “most economists” include professors at the elite public institutions of higher learning like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Dartmouth, Williams, Amherst, Rice, Swarthmore, or Columbia? Or perhaps teachers at elite public secondary schhols like Phillips Exeter, Westminster, Pace, Trinity, or St. Paul’s?
Yes – and in any Economics textbook used at any of those schools, plus any others that you might find agreeable, or disagreeable, to your tastes.
Harry Truman once said he wanted a two-handed economist – I’ll let you figure out why, but on this, mainstream economists agree: free markets have failures and the public sector can help solve this problem by providing for public goods.
So the fact that the private sector manages to provide some of the best schools on the planet is irrelevant to this consensus concerning the private market’s supposed inferiority in supplying schools? If schools are a market failure how do you explain the existence of Harvard? Westminster? It seems to me that a bunch of rich people in Buckhead demanded a really good private secondary school and the market provided it.
My guess is that you mean to say the market won’t necessarily supply funding for universal education, and that’s probably right. But public funding of education doess not necessarily mean that the government has to run the schools. Two different issues.
I don’t find private schools all that impressive. We’ve toured at a few with our kids and I did as a kid too. The only difference I see is in who attends. Teachers are usually a bit lower paid at private schools but better treated so it all evens out. Sometimes a child is a particularly good fit to a private school philosophy or specialty (e.g. learning disabilities) or sport (e.g. tennis), but otherwise it’s a lot of money and chauffeuring for a dubious benefit. Now, private school is a status symbol for some folks and that’s ok if that’s how you like to spend your money.
beautifully stated. Thank you
@mbabbazi
Great post that succinctly explains the absurdity of comparing the expenditures of selective private schools to public schools. Hope to see your unpronounceable screen name again.
The new Dekalb Superintendent makes more than the governor of GA and the Vice President of the United States, that’s not including the 3k a month in perks she does not have to account for. They have paid out 17 million dollars to settle lawsuits, and have ongoing corruption investigations.
Just last week Dekalb made it possible for cell companies to start putting towers on top of schools despite parents wishes. Does this sound like a group who is interested in input, and changing their ways? Not to me.
And on a related note DM’s morning links includes a story in which Burrell Ellis claims that spending $5 grand to send him to Portland for 4 days “saves” money for taxpayers. This is the mindset of the people running this county.
Completely agree that elected officials or salaried government employees behaving like CEOs is inappropriate. They work for the people, no more, no less. But don’t vote down SPLOST, which truly benefits students, teachers, and Decatur tax-payers, just because we need to change the culture at the top. That’s a bigger issue that will not be solved by voting down SPLOST.
I have mentioned this before, but I will never VOTE for a tax. That is just plain silly. It just tells government that they have exhausted all other alternatives in coming up with the necessary funds (or being more efficient in its spending). If they raise property taxes (which they would do regardless), then fine, nothing I can do about that (except vote them out next election). But if I get a say, I say no every time. Government is far from efficient in how they spend money and I will not vote to give them more to squander.
Yes sir. +1 and I’m currently wearing my I’m a Georgia Voter sticker. Just wish they were passing one out that said, “I voted NO to SPLOST.”
The waste is there, and no I’m not going to be doing a forensic audit to prove my point. As long as we continue to grant SPLOST after SPLOST after SPLOST we’ll never find and fix the waste. We spend money now that COUNTS ON future SPLOST initiatives being passed because the government is so confident that their silly “Pass this or the poor children will suffer” will be swallowed hook line and sinker. We will, unfortunately, prove that we’re suckers once again today and the cycle will continue, but at least it won’t be for my lack of trying.
Yup, we must not vote against “the children!”
I’m going to guess you don’t have a kid whose quality of education is affected by this decision.
I have a child in COD schools.
Wow. That’s some strong commitment to anti-tax ideology.
Your comment assumes my child’s quality of education will suffer. I don’t agree. And if it does, I will take my property taxes, move elsewhere and put my child in a private school.
good point. The “Kids will suffer” rally cry merely is is alarmist rhetoric. Really? CSD goes down the drain if this doesn’t pass? Give me a break.
An appeal from the P.E. teacher (at F.AVE, I believe) was circulated on my neighborhood’s listserve just this last week. Turns out that the school doesn’t have enough money to buy playground equipment like kickballs and basketballs. So they’re asking parents to pitch in and help.
But I’m sure that it’s just some greedy administrator hoarding all of the cash in his or her golden gilded office so that the kids can’t play at recess. Yes I’m sure that’s right. Once we squeeze our schools for every spare drop of cash they’ve got, by golly, we’ll root out all of the corruption for sure.
Two questions:
1. When exactly will all of the corruption be gone, so that we can adequately fund our schools again?
2. How many kids will be hurt in the mean time?
But it’s a great plan. Really.
I’ll give some balls. I don’t have a problem with donating and helping. What’s your point?
No money for a few balls, eh? This in a school district that has used past SPLOST funds thusly:
$7 million for an auditorium
$16.3 million for a new gym
$5.1 million for a new football stadium
Together these account for 32% of the SPLOST I-III funds spend by CSD over the past 15 years. So again, I’m not buying the “children will suffer” argument.
The PE nor anyone from CSD ask for playground balls. It was a request from a parent at the school. The school has plenty o playground balls. There is a shortage during recess of 500 kids and the PTO graciously and willingly provides extra play equipment to our hard working teachers.
You would never, under any circumstances, vote for a tax? That’s pure ideology. Please add some nuance to your thought.
So what? In my view of the way government should be run, we would need very very few taxes. I won’t compromise that view. What’s your point?
My point is that you are committed to an inflexible ideology that cannot possibly function in the real world. Even in your preferred world, there would be some taxes. So you even could not vote for your own best possible world. You should think about that.
Yes, thank you. I have certainly not considered my views on how govt. should operate. I will go home and think it over…
I understand your point of living in reality, but I will not let those that run things convince us that they need more, when that is not the case (reality). We all know that govt. is not efficient and there tends to be a significant amount of incompetence and even corruption. Your dedication to voting with emotion instead of rational thought allows them to get away with it. You should think about that.
Immediately after I point out the logical flaw in your own argument, it’s quite ironic that you claim that your position is rational. It’s not; it’s a knee-jerk reaction to anything labeled a tax. That’s thinking with neither logic nor emotion. It’s problematic, to say the least.
As I have stated, there is a difference between implementing needed taxes for the basic functions of govt. and VOTING for an additional one. To say my reaction to this tax or any other issue i discuss with regard to politics is “knee-jerk” is just ignorant.
I don’t follow your logic (if you want to call it that). What is the difference betweeng implementing a “needed” tax and voting for an “additional'” one? You vote for the politicians who “implement” the tax, so, either directly or indirectly, you vote for all taxes.
At this point, I clearly don’t expect you to…
Not picking a fight, but BB is right. You have yet to articulate any specific opposition to the SPLOST; you basically just keep repeating “I won’t vote for any tax” and rehashing your objections to taxes in general.
Really? I think the locals governments can come up with other ways to fund the schools (and/or make schools spending more efficient where less funds are needed) than add or continue another tax on people. DeKalb County government has been a disaster in almost every way. Why should we VOTE to continue to fund this incompetence? It will only embolden them. If we refuse, they will have to come up with other ways to do what they need to do. Is that possibly a tax elsewhere? Perhaps, but I will be there fighting that as well. Hopefully, we fight all the way until they fix things on there end instead of asking for of us. It’s unfortunate that COD is lumped in with DeKalb, but there is waste there too.
Is that clear enough. Am I wrong, or have I not stated these reasons already?
Governments essentially have one way to raise money – taxes. What other ways can the government fund the schools?
Dekalb is a mess, but it has nothing to do with the SPLOST. It has everything to do with the voters continuing to put corrupt people in power and the corrupt individuals themselves. If it isn’t this program, they will loot another. I don’t agree that you are “solving” this corruption by voting against SPLOST. Let me add that if I thought those in power would take a hard look at removing inefficiencies and waste from spending if SPLOST was voted down, I might think differently about this.
I cannot continue to argue against a point I have not made. It is really getting tiresome. I have never said voting against SPLOST will solve the corruption problem. It obviously will not. I do believe that continuing to VOTE for more taxes emboldens them and makes it worse.
Wait… that’s your argument? That the act of voting for a particular tax “emboldens” politicians to act in a corrupt manner? Have you ever seen a sociological study wherein citizens voting for a tax altered the actions of the politicians appropriating the money? Or is this just something you imagine would happen? I’d imagine that citizens voting for the tax increase would make politicians more wary of spending it properly, since the citizens could always vote it down. I don’t have any data for that, either. But then again, it’s not influencing my vote either way, so my made-up scenario isn’t important.
You’re supporting the position that taxes should not be subject to votes, because you think that this leads to tyranny. Again, your logic is turning me in circles.
What I have said is by voting for this tax in this situation, we are effectively telling the politicians that they have done a good job with the SPLOST funds and other funds in the past and we hope they keep up the good work with this money!
The worst thing a person can do in a debate, bb, is to change someones position and then argue against it. You have done that once again and I am done with you.
The bottom line is that CSD is growing, folks. Just look at this year’s bumper crop of kindergarten students who are not going anywhere for the next twelve years. Property taxes will probably riseup anyway to handle staffing needs. We may as well let eSPLOST spread out the pain as far as building renovation and maintenance costs are concerned.
My gut tells me this will easily pass in Decatur and Fulton. Whether it will squeak by scandal-ridden Atlanta and DeKalb is anyone’s guess, but I’m keeping my fingers crossed that all those folks coming out to vote for primarily for Sunday alcohol sales will show some love for the kids!
And DM, how come you didn’t post an Op-Ed in opposition? Just curious…
Did someone write one?
See Rebeccab’s post above.
Wanted to, but no one offered one. I wish I was awash in op-ed requests, but honestly they are few and far between.
Did you solicit one?
Nope. Why?
I’m just following the logic, DM. I thought I might have missed the solicitation. I suppose I would ask, “why not?”
Seemed a little odd, asking for an op-ed on a specific topic. I thought I’d receive the op-ed a bit sooner so folks could reply if they wanted with there own op-ed. Ultimately I thought it would be OK because folks would have their say in the comments. And boy, did they!
Okay, so I just voted “yes” on SPLOST. But I’m not very happy about it. Still would rather have a consumption tax than property tax increase, but I’m extremely disappointed in our school board for forcing this choice.
Any of you southsiders who are looking for a choice in school board representation, please feel free to vote for me as a write-in candidate. I promise not to take your future wishes for granted, and I promise to do what’s best for our children (even if it goes against the established educational orthodoxy).
There will be another School Board election in two years for a northside, a southside, and an at-large position! Having more than one candidate run for a position ensures more dialog, discussion, sharing of data, and communication about the issues, from candidates, Board members, and CSD administrators, even if the incumbent turns out to be everyone’s favorite candidate.
Opposition can produce really useful dialogue, but the history of invincible incumbents makes it hard to convince a challenger’s family that the large demands of the campaign on them (and campaigning is awful for a candidate’s family) will yield success. My fear is a little different: a board member can resign in mid-term. Their replacement is then chosen by the board. That person then runs with all the advantages of an incumbent. So, a board member who fears that an open seat would result in the election of someone unlikely to follow his or her voting pattern may be tempted to resign mid-term so that someone more to their liking has a leg up in the subsequent election. Two of the three school board members whose seats are up in 2013 have been there for a fairly long period. I hope they serve out their term and run for re-election, or they serve out their term and let the community choose their successor without resigning early.
Yeah, I’d like to get rid of the appointment mechanism for replacing Board members who resign. New election at the next election opportunity is what should happen.
You should have qualified KC. Julie Rhame ended up being unopposed.
Check the final results!
Nice twist for this SPLOST to be (on) IV
It’s a shame that SPLOST passage is dependent on passage from two different constituencies. If I lived in DeKalb I’d be against it. I live in Decatur and I’m for it. The difference is effective, transparent, responsible government, or in DeKalb’s case, the lack thereof.
Also, the notion that property taxes will have to go up in Decatur if SPLOST fails might need to be questioned, somewhat. I think we’re close to the state millage limit already. I don’t know if we CAN raise property taxes much more. So the real alternative to SPLOST is more like an increase in property taxes AND a decrease in school spending.
Perhaps Decatur should secede from DeKalb County? Of course, the name Decatur County is already taken. Possible alternatives: Two-by-Two County, Festival County, Brick Store County…
The Shire
Growler County
Where-Berkeley-Meets-Mayberry County …
“So the real alternative to SPLOST is more like an increase in property taxes AND a decrease in school spending.”
Yep. And even with SPLOST I’m counting on the millage rate going to the maximum.
I have an idea, how about government gets out of the education market all together? May the arrows start flying!
I think that is a wonderful long term goal. If nothing else, we must get the unions out of the public education system (although I know that statement is gonna piss off a lot of people, that is not my intention). But, we can’t ignore the fact that we currently dependent on the public school system and we must address out current needs and try to improve the public schools.
Agreed. Can’t wait for the first person to state that there is no teacher’s union in Georgia. This person clearly does not understand how the teacher’s unions work.
How do you propose poor children attain an education in that scenario?
I don’t have time to go through this, but simply put, if a free-market was at play, the cost of education would go down tremendously. Also, many non-profit schools would offer free tuition. Corporations could even sponsor schools (The Apple School anyone?) that provide education for low income children (I know, the horror!!!). We could also just go to a system where vouchers are provided by the govt. and parents use them to choose any school they can get their kid in to (not preferred by me, but govt. funded through vouchers, but privately run schools would be so much better than what we have now). We are the most giving people in the history of the world and I would imagine as a people, we would make sure every kid received an education. Someone like you would surely donate to such a thing, right? Me too.
key word in your post: “imagine”
there is no magic dust sprinkled over the private sector–the quality of goods and services ranges from excellent to abysmal. the same would hold true for for-profit education: some schools would be good, while there would be others you wouldn’t send your worst enemy’s children to. this would lead to the market dictating which schools remained opened and thrived vs. those, who for lack of being able generate profit, would be forced to close (in the absence of gov’t intervention which I’m sure you’d oppose).
seems like clean capitalism that allows darwin to work his magic on eduction, eh?
questions:
1. what do you think the success rate for newly opened for-profit schools would be? in the general sector, the survival rate for new businesses is < 50% over 5 years owing to a whole range of factors: capitalization, quality of management, quality of service provided, micro and macro economic factors, work pool dynamics, consumer demand . . . you want to educate your community's children based on those odds and vagaries?
2. what would you propose doing with all of the children who were attending a failed school, particularly if there was little excess capacity in surrounding schools, and if the only options they had were for more expensive schools than the one they'd been attending. would you be willing to allow them to sit out a year or so until they could work things out?
First off, I never said these schools had to be or should be for-profit. Also, I cannot explain the free-market system to you if you don’t already understand. Yes, there would be a difference in quality of education (but less so than what we have now), but the difference is that in the private system, the parents aren’t forced to send their children to the failing schools. If there is a market needed for another quality non-profit school for low income children, the market (and philanthropists) would make that happen. These issues are not in a vacuum for me. I will grant that it is hard to understand some of these views without delving into every other aspect of limited government (Libertarian if you will) ideas.
As for question “1” of yours, I would see that as a wonderful thing. This would mean that schools that do not meet parents’ expectations would close. That’s exactly how it is supposed to work!
As for #2, the market will always take care of demand.
Again, you can point out negatives of this (which is fair), but I am not claiming that it is perfect (nothing is). But it would certainly be better than what we have now.
Having been a self-employed entrepreneur for over 25 years, I’m quite familiar with the free market system.
I’m as familiar with the tenets of Libertarianism as I am Communism and Anarchism, and feel they all live on a cloud of intellectual abstraction that makes idealistic assumptions about human behavior that history has yet to validate. Ugly as it is, our form of representative democracy still remains the best game in town because it accurately reflects the will of its citizens *when those citizens actively practice their responsibility to participate in the democratic process.* In the absence of their participation, and as we have seen in our country’s recent history, a plutocracy begins to emerge. I’m gratified, of late, to see our country waking up in this regard.
Back to my questions and your responses:
There is nothing wonderful about schools closing down and leaving hundreds, perhaps thousands of children with no where to go. Without a centralized governing body whose responsibility is to ensure there are contingencies for closings and the successful transition of children, the market will not, of its own accord, provide that function in the short run. In the long run it will react to that demand, hence my question #2:
How long are you willing to make children and their families wait until the market creates a new school for them to attend?
I don’t think a Representative REPUBLIC and Libertarianism are mutually exclusive. Maybe I missed your point (in all seriousness).
Who said I was against a centralized governing body? I completely agree that this would be necessary. But why does it have to be one run by government?
What? By definition, this centralized governing body would be government. No coincidence that “governing” and “government” start with “govern”.
The governing body will, by definition, be a government of some sort. The question is this: will it be composed by people who are subject to elections by the people? Or will the governing body be responsible only to “the market”?
There is an abdication of democracy in here that I find somewhat chilling.
A HOA is a “governing body” but not government. Of course it doesn’t have to be government and it would also be voluntary to be under this system. As an example, your appliances/electronics probably have the UL seal on them. This is a private organization that regulates how electronics should be built (safety and the what not). Every reputable electronics company follows these guidelines to get the seal of approval. But it’s not mandatory. There could be a governing body that makes general regulations to alleviate some of the concerns addressed by Rick and reputable schools would likely join.
And BB, we are not a democracy.
We are a representative democracy, which is a form of democracy. Or are you saying that we aren’t “really” a democracy, because the system is rigged, etc?
We are a representative republic. Democracy entails a majority rules philosophy. The founders of our nation were scared sh!tless of a democracy and majority rules.
OK, in theory, it doesn’t have to be run by the government.
Would you please point me to a single private sector entity whose responsibility has, *in fact*, been for the welfare of a any local, regional or national community with regard to: education (or health, defense, infrastructure, etc.)?
And who gets to appoint that private sector entity? Highest bidder? Surely not by public vote.
And how is that entity funded? (It won’t survive without a profit motive.) Surely not by taxes.
And if the populace is not satisfied with its performance, what are the protocols for it’s removal?
How long until we find a suitable replacement for that entity?
Every heard of International Baccalaureate? Renfroe kids might have. Private…
There have always been organizations like this that set guidelines for education. Private schools now belong to certain “governing bodies” that provide basic guidelines. This is nothing new.
Rick, your phrase — “cloud of intellectual abstraction that makes idealistic assumptions about human behavior that history has yet to validate” — is probably the best comment I think I’ve ever read on the internet. A lovely summation of most political philosophy.
+1
that’s a very nice thing of you to say.
thanks, dsw
You can’t even get a grocery store to open in a poor part of town, I don’t too many private schools going there. And for-profit colleges are among the worst abusers of the magnanimous desire of Americans to educate everyone. I tell you, the free-market worship is just the other side of the ideological coin from left wing dreams of utopia. Naive idealism on both sides.
Oh, quit being a negative Nancy. Just because the conditions necessary for purestrain anarcho-capitalism to usher in a new golden age of peace and prosperity have never even come close to existing throughout recorded history doesn’t mean the ideology itself is flawed in any way.
+1
Agree on all accounts.
I voted yes on the SPLOST today, but I am confused by this article. I also voted for the bonds on my Decatur taxes that I thought paid for the improvements at the schools that are referenced in the op-ed. Anyone know the details on the difference there?
SPLOST pays for the bonds.
“Even then, the more wealthy you are the more likely you are to own a more expensive house and thus even more of the burden falls to you.”
I think you guys are off base here. Actually, property taxes (in theory) are very conservative principles as you have stated above. If rich people had to pay a higher RATE, then conservatives would disagree. Say a flat tax for instance; conservatives like this and your above statement fits that exactly because the more you make the more you spend. If the property tax rate of the income tax rate was higher (which it is for income taxes), then conservative disagree. So, I think y’all are missing the point.
Sorry, posted in wrong spot…
No, we’re not missing the point. A consumption tax is a flat tax. Everybody pays the same rate on every transaction. A property tax is much more progressive, because folks who have the means to own property are statistically more wealthy than the people who do not own property. There are some rich folks who live in apartments and some poor folks who live in homes, but on the whole the median homeowner is more wealthy than the median apartment dweller. The property tax is then a “progressive tax,” which means that it taxes people at different rates roughly along income lines. The property tax is more progressive, and the consumption tax is more regressive. This is not a question of opinion, it is a fact agreed to by conservative and liberal economists alike.
If the property tax is progressive, then so is the flat tax. It’s the same concept. If you earn more, you pay more. If your house is worth more, you pay more. A progressive tax espoused by liberals is one where the rich pay a larger percentage, i.e our current tax code. The only way the property tax would fit this is if the millage rate was higher for the wealthy.
No, it’s not the same concept. Think of a property tax in terms of a luxury tax. If you only taxed diamond necklaces, you’d be instituting a progressive tax, because only fairly wealthy people own such things as diamond necklaces. If you tax all purchases equally, on the other hand, you’d be instituting a regressive tax, because everybody makes purchases. Replace “diamond necklace” with “property” and you have pretty much the same thing. This is not an “agree to disagree” kind of thing. It’s an objective fact.
Not all progressive taxes are progressive in terms of rates. It just means “a tax that discriminates between poor and wealthy,” which a property tax, in general, does.
Plus, there are usually property tax exemptions for lower income people.
Your point assumes that those that don’t purchase homes don’t pay property taxes. The amount a renter pays to rent a home or apartment is based, in part, on the landlords property taxes. His taxes are passed on to the renter. I hear what you are saying, but I just don’t think it is the same thing.
You’re assuming complete price inelasticity, where all taxes are borne by the consumer. But rents are set more or less at the level that the market will bear, right? So the tax money may come out of the landlord’s pocket, or at least cuts into the landlord’s profit. If SPLOST went down, I wouldn’t think rents would change one bit.
I can tell you that I would not reduce rent if my property taxes were lowered.
Absolutely right.
Conservatives arguing (like they do for the “Fair Tax” or the corporate tax) that all taxes are passed on to the consumer is BS and shows their fundamental lack of understanding of economics.
The price that a consumer pays has nothing to do with the taxes the company selling them the product has to pay – whether it is the price of bread or a rental home. The company is going to charge the consumer as much as the market will bear. If the price is $100 and the market is wiling to pay $100 then the price will remain $100 regardless of any taxes being raised or lowered.
Exactly. I sure can’t tell that “corporations don’t pay taxes,” based on the number of executives who go on television everyday claiming they need to pay less.
Wrong, just wrong. All costs, inlcuding embedded taxes, of a product are included in the price and passed onto the consumer. Although the corporation may stroke a check to the government, its customers have paid a higher price for the good or service to cover that tax bill.
Regarding your earlier post, you may not reduce rent now, but your neighbor will and your property will be vacant unless you follow suit. Look at is this way – if your taxes went down $200/mo, why not reduce rent by $50 or $100 if market conditions dictated you do so. The tenant pays less and you increase your profits. Win/Win. Or, as I said above, keep your rent the same and see if your tenant renews at the end of the lease.
That is a hugely simplified view of how prices work. Embedded costs cannot automatically be passed on in a competitive market. And to make the next leap that lower costs for goods would automatically offset the negatives elsewhere is not economics, but ideology.
Marty, sorry but you clearly lack an understanding of economics. If the price of bread is a dollar and 20% of that embedded taxes and those go away, economics dictates that market share becomes an issue. If you now have twenty cents to play with and still make the same profit, you will reduce your price to gain more market share. 100 costumers at $1 a loaf is not as good as 1000 customers at 90 cents a loaf. Simple economics…
That presumption has been discredited by so many economists, including many conservative ones. Not that it’s worth arguing about; no way is any kind of national sales tax or flat tax going to be adopted in the lifetime of anyone on this blog.
Walrus, we agree again.
You are simply wrong Walrus. Just because you are a conservative doesn’t make you right.
A company will charge as much as the market will bear for a product. That has nothing to do with the embedded taxes they pay.
He’s not a conservative. Pay attention. And he’s never voted for a Republican. Or a Democrat.
Which begs the question. My guess is that Walrus is a libertarian or one of the political philosophies that lives on Rick Julian’s cloud of intellectual abstraction.
Maybe he writes in Bob Barr on every ballot. Or maybe he just writes in The Walrus.
Either way, you can be d@mn sure he’s not voting for any tax.
Dammit, now that you say that, I’m thinking I may have wrote in “The Walrus” for something this morning. I hope it wasn’t for school board…
[edited]
What is with your desire to label everyone? Once again, I am not a conservative. If i must be labeled, label me a libertarian.
[edited]
You are only looking at this from the consumer/demand point of view. What the market will bear also takes into consideration what the supplier (landlord) must charge to make a profit. It is not only what the consumer will pay.
The property tax certainly is not as progressive as a progressive income tax, but it’s not the same as a flat tax either. The renter/landlord point is valid, but it is not always possible to pass on the cost of property taxes (unfortunately I know this all too well).
That’s a bit of an apples and oranges comparison. The value of a house for tax purposes effectively acts like a “rate,” because it can be moved up or down independently of the owner’s actions.
The Walrus – What the founding fathers wanted and what we have now are very different. And that is not a bad thing. Would be silly to run the country as if it were 1787. Things began to change dramatically under Jefferson and especially Jackson. It’s ok, really, to admit that.
A republic is a form of democracy – it just is. It’s ok to admit that too. We elect leaders to make decisions for us – that’s a representative democracy, otherwise known as a republic. Why is this a sticking point? Seems to me that there is a witch hunt out on democracy by Republicans and I can’t help but think it’s about semantics. As if they can’t admit that we live under a form of democracy because it somehow would give in to the Democrats. Democracy’s, with a little d, negative connotation went out of style around 1800 – see the changing name of the political party, which started out as the Republicans but changed their name with the change in attitudes and where the country was headed.
And there really are no labor unions to speak of in Georgia education. There just aren’t. The educator’s associations offer life insurance and legislative lobbying, but have no, none, nada, collective bargaining power. They just don’t. Could not imagine how you could equate what they do to a real union.
What the founding fathers wanted and what we have now are very different. And that is not a bad thing. Would be silly to run the country as if it were 1787.
+ 1,000,000
The Constitution was drafted by the founders intentionally so that it could adapt to changing times. That is what the founders wanted. Not to stick to an rigid ideology just for the hell of it.
What the founding fathers wanted and what we have now are very different. And that is not a bad thing. Would be silly to run the country as if it were 1787.
+ 1,000,000
The Constitution was drafted by the founders intentionally so that it could adapt to changing times. That is what the founders wanted. Not to stick to an rigid ideology just for the hell of it.
I do not agree that they wanted it to be easy to modify. They would not have wanted it to be amended at all to allow women to vote (with a few exceptions). They did not want slavery to be easily outlawed in all places (with a few exceptions). I could name many more. At any rate, the Civil War effectively remade the country anyway, so original intent arguments leave me yawning.
And another thing that gets me is that some would seem to think that the we were a freer society in the early days of the country, when nothing could be further from the truth—though I suppose some rich white men might disagree.
Thank you for your condescending, yet inaccurate views on our republic. That was helpful.
The national teachers unions play a large part in local politics through money and lobbyists just like any other cause.
Walrus, in contemporary political usage a “republic” just means a form of government that does not feature a monarch. You are conflating “direct democracy” with the general idea of democracy, which just means that citizens have a say in the working of government. Of course the signers of the Constitution did not want a direct democracy- neither does anyone. Your history and political knowledge leave some room for improvement, like your economic knowledge.
Ok, i’m going label now. Why the insults? It’s amazing how liberals (open minded and all) are so closed minded to differing opinions? It truly is impressive.
Sorry DM, but I am going the way of DTR. I will continue reading, but I am done commenting on this blog.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Just stop for tonight and come back fresh tomorrow. Your work in this thread is already done, redone, and well done. Enjoy your evening.
Just so you know, my Ron Swanson comparison elsewhere was not an insult, but an ironic compliment.
Seriously, I don’t like to see the personaL insults either.
p.s., brian, my post wasn’t directed at you, but rather the general dog pile that seemed to be forming
p.p.s, i’m not the boss of anyone — including my SPLOST guzzling kids, and Sunday growler filling wife–just ask ‘em.
Wow, took me a minute to get down here, but just read all that and as a Liberal, I support many of your ideas Walrus. I’m impressed you even bothered responding to some of those comments. We’re not all like that. And frankly, I’m over the tax happy Liberals. There will always be lists of things that need to be done, but more taxes cannot be the answer for absolutely everything that crops up. The government will take and take and take, as much as we allow them to, and some point you have got to put your foot down. Dekalb will continue on their arrogant path, but at least if I have say, they’ll have less $ to do it with. They have abused the trust and money they were given, and it would be naive at this point to give them more, and expect a different outcome.
It’s been a long day, Walrus. I feel your pain. Whenever I’m in a similar state I watch the following video, one of my favorites. Take an hour in your hiatus and recharge.
http://www.fee.org/media/video/how-to-advance-liberty/
Great. Thanks a lot BB. Funny thing is that such insults just weaken your argument, because it comes off like you need them to “win” the argument and can’t rely on facts alone.
Is it really an insult to say that someone doesn’t know something, especially if they actually don’t know something? An insult would be to say, “you aren’t smart enough to learn the facts.”
Anyhow, sorry to ruin the mood here. I’ll go, too. Seems like I’m a bit too invested in the discussion.
First of all you said “leave some room for improvement”. So, let’s see what we can do with that….”Your face leaves some room for improvement.” Yep, sounds like it’s got the potential to be a personal insult to me. Not to mention it was totally unnecessary, which is my main indicator of what classifies as personal insult.
But, really who cares? The damage is done.
“What the founding fathers wanted and what we have now are very different. And that is not a bad thing. Would be silly to run the country as if it were 1787.”
I’d say that is an understatement.
I bet Walrus wore a Ron Swanson mask for Halloween and handed out beef jerky to the trick-or-treaters.
OK, OK
[ throws a red flag on the field ]
i like a good heated discussion as much as anyone, but let’s skip the ad hominem, please.
Walrus clearly has a different viewpoint, but it yielded some good discussion, and that’s a big net positive in my book. The echo chamber of political consensus is a dreary place, just tune into FOX . . . and for the record, I’ve been in liberal salons that were just as mind numbing.
#vivaladifference