Zone1 Designed for Inequality: The Real Problem Behind Property Tax-Funded Education

However you need money in the first place.
The schools have PLENTY of money - with some districts that get more doing worse than districts that get less.

I’m already paying more for my property taxes than my mortgage payment. Throwing more money at the problem will not solve anything.

Schools in DC, for example, are getting $33,000 per student. That isn’t enough? Fairfax County students get much less - and they still do better in school.

So tell me? How much more money should we throw at the schools while single women keep having babies they can’t afford while they’re still in their teens - and don’t care about their kids’ education, letting them roam around at night?

You liberals think the answer to everything is to take someone else’s money and redistribute it.
 
Huh? Got an example?
Weren’t you the one complaining that poor people couldn’t get a good primary school education?

How do you expect for them to pay for college? It’s ridiculously expensive, right? Why? It doesn’t need to be expensive with the internet, right? Why aren’t you angry that the university elites are screwing poor people?
 
Wealthier areas with higher property values often have better-funded schools due to more tax revenue.

Bingo. **** Chat GPT. This one, simple statement that anyone with common sense knows, is key to the whole matter.

Solution: Below a certain threshold needed to meet federal guidelines for education, poor school districts should get additional funding from the Fed so that kids there get at least a reasonably good education that they can compete in the ivy league and corporate world.

Tax revenue from property need not be the sole source of funding, otherwise, you have an impossible inequity akin to two teams playing football with one team getting much more favorable position and rules over the other.

WHICH school district would you rather come from and hire someone from, the first or the second?


Screen Shot 2025-12-23 at 8.33.51 PM.webp
istockphoto-520590832-612x612.webp
 
My city has one school system. Within that 1 system there is a convoluted set of options with school choice. So to simplify it, your child lives closest to Dekster Elementary (DE), then DE is their default school. Within DE, there is a specialized academy (all the schools have them) that is exclusive to DE. So if your little Johnny wants to learn lesbian basketweaving, he has to apply to DE's academy and earn one of it seats. If your little johnny doesn't get into the academy, he can still enter the lottery to attend DE instead of his designated school across town. To further complicate things, there are some schools like the autism school which is K-12 that some people like because it gets them out of the other schools and some people hate because their little Autistic Johnny is entitled to to a seat in DE's Basketweaving Academy because he is just like everybody else. There is talk of adding a dyslexia school. Some of these academies don't even meet at any of the proper school campuses, instead being anchored to organizations that do specialized work (think engineering and aeronautics). If you want to pursue a governor's diploma, you do your high school years at the community college; if you want to get an IBDP instead of a diploma, you do dual enrollment at the community college and the STEM magnet school. And then there are two magnet schools but for the life of me I cannot recall what the newest one is. I just know the other is the STEM school.

So, the solution to unfair funding/quality differences has made it a nightmare for parents because if your Autistic Johnny from across town wants to come to Basketweaving Academy at Dekster Elementary, it is up to you to get him back and forth if he gets in as the bus is only gonna haul him back and forth to his default designated school.

The governor diploma/IBDP students can take the bus to their high school and be shuttled back and forth to the community college but they just have to make sure all their classes fall within the available time frame for the shuttle to get them back in time to catch the bus home.
 
I agree but I'm not willing to give up on any of the children.

So, you agree that single mothers are a big problem and we should stop celebrating them?

That is a very positive and constructive thing for you to say.


Do you have any ideas or policies that you would support to ACTIVELY address that issue and encourage two parent families? As opposed to just NOT supporting the bad idea?
 
I agree but I'm not willing to give up on any of the children.
Who said we’re giving up on children?

We give them free lunches, free breakfasts, have special programs for slow learners, have guidance counselors to work with troubled youth, Pell Grants to pay for post high school training, etc., etc.

What else can we do when their parents are irresponsible lowlifes who have babies they can’t support and care little about their children’s education?

Be specific. And no, saying “we need more money for support” isn’t specific. How much more should we allocate to a DC student than the $33,000 we do each year - already double the average - and for what program that we don’t already have?
 
martybegan

My parents grew up up dirt poor, in tenements, in NYC during the Depression, and there was little money for public schools. Yet my grandparents (married of course) emphasized self-sufficiency, education, no babies before marriage, and giving up a game of stickball in the afternoon to come home and study instead.

Ah, the old "My family benefited from white privilege, why can't you!"
 
You mean you couldn’t understand it? Ok. Why should getting a college education cost as much as it does? We have the internet, right?
Weren’t you the one complaining that poor people couldn’t get a good primary school education?

How do you expect for them to pay for college? It’s ridiculously expensive, right? Why? It doesn’t need to be expensive with the internet, right? Why aren’t you angry that the university elites are screwing poor people?
The traditional college experience is very expensive but it always was. There are cheaper alternatives, including Community Colleges and online colleges.
 
Do you have any ideas or policies that you would support to ACTIVELY address that issue and encourage two parent families? As opposed to just NOT supporting the bad idea?
I don't think the gov't record on social engineering is a very good one so no. Schools might offer sex-ed classes, condoms, and basic financial knowledge.
 
The traditional college experience is very expensive but it always was. There are cheaper alternatives, including Community Colleges and online colleges.
Two points:

1) It was always expensive, but the costs have skyrocketed due to the government’s subsidizing of student loans. Because of this, colleges charge a fortune, and have built gyms that are like a four-star resort, all sorts of entertainment and eating venues, and apartment buildings. We need to stop all the subsidies and go back to dorms, shared bathrooms down the hall, and a main dining hall.

2) I always recommended community college for those whom money is an obstacle.
  • They can start there for the first two years (which will be paid entirely by Pell Grants if their family is of modest means).
  • They can then earn a B average, and transfer to the state university with an academic transfer scholarship. If they can’t earn a B average in CC, they are not college material.
 
Who said we’re giving up on children?

We give them free lunches, free breakfasts, have special programs for slow learners, have guidance counselors to work with troubled youth, Pell Grants to pay for post high school training, etc., etc.

What else can we do when their parents are irresponsible lowlifes who have babies they can’t support and care little about their children’s education?

Be specific. And no, saying “we need more money for support” isn’t specific. How much more should we allocate to a DC student than the $33,000 we do each year - already double the average - and for what program that we don’t already have?
I have no idea why DC spends so much but I do know that the Feds cover only a small percentage of local education and I suspect services offered in DC are not offered everywhere.
 
15th post
I have no idea why DC spends so much but I do know that the Feds cover only a small percentage of local education and I suspect services offered in DC are not offered everywhere.
But you didn’t answer my question: you keep calling for “mo money!” (the libs’ answer to every problem), but how specifically would you use the excess money?

We already pay for special help for the slow learners, guidance counselors for troubled youth, free lunches and breakfasts so everyone can learn without being hungry, and so forth.

  • What specific programs are we failing to deliver?
  • How much additional money would it take?
  • Where would the money come from?

Just saying “more money for support” is meaningless.
 
To add to my above, how would you feel about using the money the feds would save by deporting ilelgals? We are paying a fortune to educate and feed their illegal alien children, and it makes it worse for our own citizen children.
 
To add to my above, how would you feel about using the money the feds would save by deporting ilelgals? We are paying a fortune to educate and feed their illegal alien children, and it makes it worse for our own citizen children.

Given most of those kids are never going home, we should probably educate them to be out new workforce.

I'm sure a lot of Americans felt the same way about Jews in the 1930s.
 
Ah, the old "My family benefited from white privilege, why can't you!"
White privilege, pretty privilege, tall privilege, smart privilege... so many privileges, so little time.
 
Back
Top Bottom