Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, November 16, 2011
Education / Olympia All Talk, No Money for Education
Posted by Goldy on Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:39 PM
At a news conference this morning at Renton Technical College, Gov. Chris Gregoire proposed spending an additional $10 million on aerospace training and education in an effort to keep Boeing jobs in the state.
Too little, too late.
For all the talk from political and business leaders about the need to invest more in education in order to keep Washington's economy competitive, their refusal to address our state's structural revenue deficit assures that we will continue to do the exact opposite. According to a report released today from the Washington State Budget and Policy center—"Declining Support for Education Threatens Economic Growth"—legislators have slashed almost $5 billion, about 25 percent, from our education system over the past three years alone, resulting in larger class sizes and greatly reduced access to both early and higher education.
But raw dollars don't give the whole picture, for these cuts have occurred at a time of rising enrollment and rising costs. Between 2008 and 2010, 12,135 students were added to the state's K-12 rolls, while the number of classroom teachers was cut by about 3,000, and state funding for early education—once a centerpiece of Gov. Gregoire's agenda—has been all but eliminated. And for higher education, the cumulative cuts have been even worse, shifting an ever greater burden—and debt—onto the backs of recent and future graduates.
For example, tuition and fees for undergraduate resident students at the University of Washington have more than doubled over recent years, from $5,286 in 2005 to $10,574 today. College seniors who graduated in 2010 carried an average student loan debt of $22,101, as the share of higher education costs shouldered by the state flipped from 70 percent in 2000 to 35 percent for the class of 2013.
So forgive me for not cheering the additional $10 million Gregoire proposes to spend on aerospace education when she's signed budgets slashing annual funding by $200 million over three years at the University of Washington alone. As for appeasing Boeing, gimme a break. If Boeing executives really cared about investing in education here in Washington they wouldn't have held us up for billions in tax breaks in exchange for keeping 787 jobs in Everett... a deal they didn't even keep. So do you really think $10 million on aerospace education is going to keep the 737 in Renton, when their long term production strategy is clearly focused on breaking organized labor?
Politicians and business leaders love to talk about investing in education—even Rob McKenna. But until they start talking about how they plan to pay for it—you know, taxes—I'm going to continue to refuse to take them seriously.
1
3
So it seems to me the real crime is letting middle and upper middle class families get a subsidy of $80,000 for no good reason.
4
No property taxes.
No suspensions of tax exemptions until the economy returns.
No 2/3 majority Citizen Votes on all Tax Exemptions every 2 or 4 years or they die.
Nothing.
It's like they're begging the courts to enforce the State Constitution and toss out the tax exemptions for them.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obama-job…
Education for the left is like the military for the right. No amount of money is enough.
8
Inflation adjusted with materials and building costs and pop adjusts, it has DECREASED.
Got a 10th Congressional seat? It's cause your population is growing.
So, if I report losing one dollar from my front pocket – while not drawing attention to the cash being stuffed in my back wallet – can I really say I'm "poorer"?
Washington State spending is down, but that doesn't mean spending is down, as the Democrats have simply federalized education spending, and we're lined-up at the trough.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/chart-of-…
And, these figures reflects cuts from budgets, that were already hyper-inflated. Gregoire increased State spending 30% in her first 3 years, and lo' and behold now we have a problem.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/z…
Finally, there's virtually no correlation between a further increases in spending and quality improvements in education. So it doesn't substantially matter to anyone but the WEA, and the other political apparatus.
Also, since 1970, I wonder if there has been any social progress that may make a teacher's salary less competitive in the job market. Let's see. It says here in my handy book of common sense that the majority of teachers in 1970 were women and that they had quite a bit of trouble getting jobs in any other field. I wonder if that did anything to depress the wages of quality professional teachers?
12
Do none of you read the actual line items in the business annual reports that itemize them?
To them it's an exception, therefore it's a subsidy.
If current teacher salaries aren't competitive in the market – why are there qualified candidates lined-up in the thousands to take those jobs, and hundreds of thousands more crushing into colleges to study for those "low paying" jobs?
It's not discrimination that pushes down teacher salaries. The union doesn't want teachers to make more money. They want many more teachers making less money than they think they should be making, because THAT -- dear friends -- makes for a very powerful and profitable political engine.
800 really good teachers making $100,000 per year isn't nearly as useful to them as 1,200 mediocre teachers making $60,000 per year.
14
hmmm? o.k. then.
Funny-enough the rest of the developed world seems to do really quite well with class sizes the same as – or in many cases larger than – our own. Fuck it THAT isn't a bummer for your argument!
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0…
And here we are: Making the highest financial investment, with the same class sizes, and getting the worst results.
The fact are we spend plenty of money, the results aren't improving, and you're still repeating the same bullshit excuses we've heard for 30 years – despite clear evidence to the contrary.
What is it about Australian, Japanese, Irish, German, Dutch kids, that they can put just about as many or more kids in one class, for far less money, and get WAY better results.
- Parents are less involved in US public education, and only a market which drives school choice will raise the level of parental accountability at an individual child level.
- A protect-the-useless union mindset has diminished the professionalism, initiative and effectiveness of all teachers and administrators.
- A redundant and inefficient services structure (breakfasts, lunches, buses, after-school care, family counseling) invites schools to becomes the parents of kids, breeding intergenerational dependency.
- A bloated bureaucracy takes money out of classrooms, creates an attentive block of voters for the Democratic party, and a keeps the teachers hungry and active on behalf of their union.
- The education oligarchy has an indulgent Baby Boomer mindset, so we coddle, nurture and reward - instead or challenging, preparing and coaching.
Thank you for being such a wonderful poster child for the intellectual atrophy extending from our school system.
18
Now it's true those are absolute numbers that don't account for inflation and population growth. (Since the graph was in absolute numbers, I needed to give you absolute numbers to counter it.) If you look up inflation and population growth over that time, you find it is about 10%. So in real, per-capita terms, during the worst economic downturn since the great depression, state spending on education has dropped by a measly 4%. That's the first drop in those terms you'll find for as far back as the LEAP records go.
So how does the "Budget and Policy Center", a think tank whose mission statement says it exists to "support the essential role of government in promoting a just and prosperous society", turn 4% into 25%? For a clue, read more of the fine print on that graph, where is says "Reductions are based on most relevant maintainance levels". Clearly they do not believe "relevant maintaince levels" means "inflation plus population growth". Perhaps they believe "relevant maintaince levels" means "as fast as we would like to see it rise".
Homogenous societies? Race and class?
Been to France since World War ll to see their economic profile?
Seen the income and racial disparity in Brazil?
Been to Australia since Hong Kong got handed over and Lebanon exploded?
Of course not.
Excuses. And tired excuses. That's all you've got?
But the increases in pay don't explain things nearly as well as the increases in hiring. 10% increase in students equals 95% increase in faculty.
Like I said, for the right, you can't spend enough on the military, no matter what the facts are. For the left, it's education.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
An I-5 Bridge Over the Skagit River Has Collapsed by Paul Constant
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me... by Dan Savage
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
The Only Thing More Tragic than a Bridge Collapse Would Be a 10 Cent a Gallon Increase in the Gas Tax by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (23) RSS