|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
Hmmm...interesting question. 
Disgruntled taxpayers resent so heartily paying taxes for Social Security, Welfare, or War that they vote against every tax they get a chance to vote on---and the schools are about it. |
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:04 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
Well heres one for ya the Mi lottery claims to have contributed something like $600,000,000 to Mi schools last year .In fact look at 2003. When i checked on the number of schools in Mi that came out to around $1,000,000 per school. Now with all the tax dollars collected per district plus fed money plus what the lotto kicks in why would their be a shortage of funding for education in Mi.
Thirty-one years ago, the Michigan Lottery was created to generate funds to support Michigan’s public school system. In 1972, the Lottery provided almost $37 million for education. This year alone, Lottery contributions to the state School Aid Fund exceeded $586 million! When the Lottery was created, no one could have imagined the phenomenal success it has achieved, nor the record amounts of money it has raised to help educate our families. The increasing revenue the Lottery has generated over the past 31 years to support K-12 public education proves it has remained true to its number one commitment – Michigan’s schoolchildren. The staff of the Michigan Lottery is very proud of both their commitment to Michigan’s schoolchildren and the more than $586 million that was generated for the state School Aid Fund in fiscal year 2003. The money that the Lottery generates each year saves every Michigan taxpayer hundreds of dollars and it provides a tangible benefit for K-12 public education programs statewide. It’s hard not to get excited about Michigan Lottery products when you consider that every decision and action is motivated by such a worthy cause! Each year, the Lottery finds new and innovative ways to attract more and more players, and that hard work is paying off for Lottery retailers and their customers. The more than $1.68 billion in ticket sales in fiscal year 2003, in turn, provided lucky Lottery winners with over $919 million in prizes, and over $121 million was paid out in commissions to the over 9,200 Michigan retailers who sell Lottery products. While only a few lucky Lottery players will ever experience the thrill of becoming an instant multi-millionaire, the children of the Great Lake State hit the jackpot every year thanks to the Michigan Lottery. In its 31-year history, the Michigan Lottery has generated over
$11 billion to support public education in Michigan.
With a new fiscal year underway, the Lottery is facing ever-increasing competition in the gaming arena and other entertainment venues. This competition is not viewed as an obstacle, but rather as a challenge to be met. Rest assured, the Michigan Lottery is deeply committed to doing whatever it takes to ensure that the maximum amount of revenue is raised for those who benefit most from Lottery ticket sales – Michigan’s schoolchildren.
Gary C. Peters LOTTERY COMMISSIONER
Jennifer M. Granholme, GOVERNOR
Last edited by twotap on Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:13 am |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
There's actually an easy answer for that. The taxpayers were misled when they voted in the lottery. They were told the lottery would increase funding for public schools. Instead they reduced the $$$ that came from the general fund for education and used those dollars for other projects.
In other words, they lied. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:16 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
In other words, they lied.
They being?  |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:18 am |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
twotap schreef:
quote:
In other words, they lied.
They being?
Sorry. The Michigan legislature. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:19 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
| I wonder what pet projects all those dollars were funneled to, and wouldnt those dollars help offset the claims of the need for more taxes in Mi. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:25 am |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
| I've given up arguing against taxes. My hope is that we can somehow scrounge up enough money to fund the areas I feel are vital---and education tops that list. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:27 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
My hope is that we can somehow scrounge up enough money to fund the areas I feel are vital---and education tops that list.
Deena if history has taught us anything it is that there is never enough money when it comes to funding projects like that. Taxpayers must make due with what they have, politicians and their pet projects never do. If more money per pupil added up to a better education Washington DC would be number one in the nation.  |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:04 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Deena schreef:
There's actually an easy answer for that. The taxpayers were misled when they voted in the lottery. They were told the lottery would increase funding for public schools. Instead they reduced the $$$ that came from the general fund for education and used those dollars for other projects.
In other words, they lied.
School funding did not increase by one cent when the Lottery went into effect. The Legislature just put it all in the general fund, then called the school funds "Lottery Money". |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:13 pm |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Deena schreef:
quote:
Dave Starr schreef:
If they have the equipment and materials they need, how would a new building improve things?
OMG Dave, this is exactly what was said when the schools began using laptops. It's a short-sighted and CHEAP assessment of the needs of 21st century students. A modern buiding would make a HUGE difference.
Laptops and buildings are 2 different things. Given the same equipment, how does a new building educate kids better than an old one? Northern is in a newer building than Central. Does that mean that the kids at Northern are getting a better education? |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:17 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
| I have to say that one reason that many (myself included) taxpayers are so inclined to defeat any new millage to fund the school system is brought on by the school system itself. Statistics show that as a whole most educators have a leftist view of the world and have no reservations on attempting to pass their own liberal ideology onto the children they are supposed to be teaching. Their is a reason that home schooling and private schools are so popular and that is certainly one of them. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:16 pm |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
twotap schreef:
I have to say that one reason that many (myself included) taxpayers are so inclined to defeat any new millage to fund the school system is brought on by the school system itself. Statistics show that as a whole most educators have a leftist view of the world and have no reservations on attempting to pass their own liberal ideology onto the children they are supposed to be teaching. Their is a reason that home schooling and private schools are so popular and that is certainly one of them.
Schools don't come with political agendas. What they teach is students to
think
. They offer up varying viewpoints. That's the problem with private schools and home schooling. By design, they offer only ONE viewpoint. Sometimes it becomes difficult to distinguish between education and indoctrination. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:30 pm |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Dave Starr schreef:
quote:
Deena schreef:
quote:
Dave Starr schreef:
If they have the equipment and materials they need, how would a new building improve things?
OMG Dave, this is exactly what was said when the schools began using laptops. It's a short-sighted and CHEAP assessment of the needs of 21st century students. A modern buiding would make a HUGE difference.
Laptops and buildings are 2 different things. Given the same equipment, how does a new building educate kids better than an old one? Northern is in a newer building than Central. Does that mean that the kids at Northern are getting a better education?
Northern ceased being a new school years ago.
Today's schools have adequate wiring for today's technology. They have state-of-the-art science labs and theater and broadcast facilities. They have distance learning settings. They are built for a different world than the schools of the 20's.
I'll tell yiou straight up. I love old buildings and charming architecture. I live in an 80 year old home. I think every school should have the beautiful of oak woodwork and library shelving BUT it doesn't work for this school.
Whittier was built to house about 1200 kids (my guess---there were 1500 there when I attended the school). It was built to be a junior high. It now houses 260 kids from grades 7-10 with grades 11 and 12 to be added. A new school should probably be built for about 600 students. Whittier has very large classrooms, but wonderfully small classes. The gym and locker room facilities are woefully inadequate. The building is drafty in winter and stifling in summer---there is no air conditioning. Back in the day the school was built with wood and metal shops and home economic rooms that are relics of a different era. This building is under-utilized and expensive to heat. Realistically it is in serious need of upgrading that will still not fit the needs of 21st century kids.
Even if it was in tip top shape, would you want to still be driving a 1920's auto everyday? Sometimes things simply become obsolete. |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:43 pm |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
From Deena's last 2 posts.
Schools don't come with political agendas. They don't come with anything, it's a building. The teachers, however, DO come with political agendas in many instances.
Buildings - My question was, do students get a better education at Northern because the building is newer than Central's? Buildings have nothing to do with the quality of education. Kids that want to learn and teachers who care have everything to do with a quality education. Sadly, we're lacking in both. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:50 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
they offer only ONE viewpoint.
Yes Deena you are correct the one that their parents wish them to have. The conservative side of any viewpoint is rarely if ever taught in todays public schools and it gets worse much worse once they head off to some university. In a recent poll it was shown that 90% of college profs vote democrat all the time, in fact I have read of many accounts of students having their grade reduced because they dared question some elitists one sided view. And you talk about private schools or parents who home school with one viewpoint. Im afraid you just lost that one.  |
|
|
|
Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:10 pm |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
