No. of Recommendations: 2
Switzerland, Iceland, and Norway are the top three. US exceptionalism brings up the rear at #16.

https://www.fa-mag.com/news/these--2018-global-retirement-in...

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Switzerland Population: 8.42 million
Iceland population: 338,349 (Yup, not even a million people. Iceland is essentially a city.)
Norway population: 5.26 million
Denmark population: 5.77 million
US population: 325.7 million

One of these is not like the others.

==============================================

I have a great anecdote about Denmark.
We (Motorola) had a division in Copenhagen that we were doing a software project with. One time 4 people from the Copenhagen division came to our Chicago office for a couple of weeks for meetings.

On Friday afternoon, we asked them what they were planning to do over the weekend. They said that they planned to hop in their rental car and drive to New York to sightsee and maybe take in a play. They have no concept of the size differences between their country and the US. We informed them that it would take the entire weekend just to _drive_ to NYC.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 15
Rayvt posts,

Switzerland Population: 8.42 million
Iceland population: 338,349 (Yup, not even a million people. Iceland is essentially a city.)
Norway population: 5.26 million
Denmark population: 5.77 million
US population: 325.7 million

One of these is not like the others.

</snip>


Exactly! You'd think there'd be some economies of scale if the US retirement landscape was being managed for the benefit of workers. Instead we have a Wall Street focused system where many people are getting hosed on fees and costs.

Remember, if your financial advisor and the mutual fund managers he recommends are skimming the 2% per annum required by Wall Street's business model, you need to save twice as much money for retirement.


The 2% Rule for Retirement Savings

http://www.retireearlyhomepage.com/twopercentrule.html

</snip>


intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
Switzerland Population: 8.42 million
Iceland population: 338,349 (Yup, not even a million people. Iceland is essentially a city.)
Norway population: 5.26 million
Denmark population: 5.77 million
US population: 325.7 million

One of these is not like the others.


==============================================
That's right. With all of the resources we have, we should be able to do better than them at anything. But in just about all quality-of-life measures, (health, education, life expectancy,) they beat us to death. It's ridiculous.

Sure, they have higher taxes. But it pays off for them. We could learn something.

Bill
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Bill:"Sure, they have higher taxes. But it pays off for them. We could learn something."

In general, their tax load is another 20% of your paycheck.

If Americans were forced to put 10% of their paycheck into an IRA with target date funds, they'd be better off than the Euros. The Euros are living on borrowed time. Populations decreasing without mass immigration and you see how well that isn't going in most European countries.....


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
They do have higher taxes, but have you realized that they also are the top countries for overall happiness? I heard they put up with high taxes because they believe higher taxes can create a better society.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
In general, their tax load is another 20% of your paycheck.

I had a bit of cultural shock on a cruise that spent a day in the Reykjavik, Iceland port.
Sales tax was 25%.
Plus about 45% personal income tax.

Good thing their health care is almost "free"; they wouldn't be able to afford it with what's left of their paycheck.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
They do have higher taxes, but have you realized that they also are the top countries for overall happiness? I heard they put up with high taxes because they believe higher taxes can create a better society.

With populations in the 5 million area, they are more like an extended family than a multi-demographic country like the US.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
" I heard they put up with high taxes because they believe higher taxes can create a better society. "

They've been brainwashed into that idea for the last 80 years.

It won't end well. Soon they will run out of other people's money.

They are having to import millions of workers since their folks aren't reproducing fast enough to avoid population decline. That isn't going to end well since most of them go on benefits, don't have western values, and bow down to Mecca 5 times a day and are interested in converting the government into an Islamic Republic****......

t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"Good thing their health care is almost "free"; they wouldn't be able to afford it with what's left of their paycheck.

OH, did you leave out the $6/gal gas, too?


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
" Switzerland, Iceland, and Norway are the top three. US exceptionalism brings up the rear at #16.

https://www.fa-mag.com/news/these--2018-global-retirement-in......

intercst"
***************************************************
Quote from the article:

"If we are to look to a future when ... 17 percent of the total global population will be over age 65 by 2050, we must view global retirement security as a multi-dimensional problem at the leading edge of human sustainability," the report stated."

This sounds like an analysis applicable to everyone.

Another quote"

" The index, which is a product of Natixis Investment Managers, tracks 18 factors across four sub-indices—finances, material well-being, quality of life and health—to provide a baseline for retirement security around the world."

What could be simpler?

The article published by Financial Advisor - Wells Fargo.
Note that the company headquarters is not in Switzerland, Iceland or Norway.

Howie52
Somehow or other I suspect that the study as well as the article has nothing to
contribute to retirement investing - other than to incite folks to fear a life of
opening cat-food cans without the actual joy - or suffering - of cat ownership.

UK with its healthcare system is ranked lower than the US - as is Japan.
Sounds fripperish.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4

Sure, they have higher taxes. But it pays off for them. We could learn something.


What would we learn?
That a small, relatively homogeneous society can mostly agree on what they "want" to spend taxes on, so they heavily tax themselves to do this?
How does this apply to a country that has about 50 times the population and 50 such groups?
Oh, that the individual states should be more responsible for their citizens than the federal government? No one wants that.

Mike
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
howie52 writes,

UK with its healthcare system is ranked lower than the US - as is Japan.
Sounds fripperish.

</snip>


Don't forget that Margaret Thatcher privatized the UK old age pension system in 1986. So the UK financial services industry has had more than 30 years to suck the accounts dry with fees, commissions and costs. The UK now has the stingiest Social Security benefits of any G8 country. I bet that has an affect on your retirement security.

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 13
Rayvt,

You wrote, I have a great anecdote about Denmark.
We (Motorola) had a division in Copenhagen that we were doing a software project with. One time 4 people from the Copenhagen division came to our Chicago office for a couple of weeks for meetings.

On Friday afternoon, we asked them what they were planning to do over the weekend. They said that they planned to hop in their rental car and drive to New York to sightsee and maybe take in a play. They have no concept of the size differences between their country and the US. We informed them that it would take the entire weekend just to _drive_ to NYC.


Google maps says it's just a 13 hour drive one way. There also appears to be a train route that if you leave Saturday night will get you there about 1:30pm on Saturday.

My own anecdote: I once worked with a team from India (not that small a country) and some of the team was here visiting us in Allen Texas (north of Dallas). One guy wanted to go visit the Grand Canyon.

I blew the comment off as wishful thinking. I mean it's like a 16 hour drive - I've never managed that trip without stopping for the evening. For me trying to cram that into a weekend would basically mean turning around right after I got there.

The next Monday he came in and told everyone about his trip. Turns out he'd left Friday evening and drove through the night. When he got there he slept in his car for a few hours and then did some of the usual tourist things. Sunday afternoon he left and drove back.

He did complain that he didn't have enough time to do everything; but he was so proud of making that trip and seeing the Grand Canyon... And I have to say I was impressed that he wanted to go badly enough that he was willing to drive a car for 32 hours over the weekend just to have that brief experience.

- Joel
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"that the individual states should be more responsible for their citizens than the federal government? No one wants that."

I'm not so sure that no one wants that. Some of the states would be fine with more control and view federal government as meddling.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"that the individual states should be more responsible for their citizens than the federal government? No one wants that."

I'm not so sure that no one wants that. Some of the states would be fine with more control and view federal government as meddling.


I think it is insane how things change from state to state. It's not as though we live in horse and buggy days anymore. This is supposed to be the UNITED States of America. Why should things change so much when you cross state lines?

Time for the Constitution to be updated to reflect new abilities for quick interstate travel, television and internet, all things that were not envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. Like how about same day primaries/caucuses? Am so tired at having my options restricted by the time my state's ability to cast their vote comes into play. It's a process that doesn't need months of drawn out torture anymore.

IP
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Joel:"Google maps says it's just a 13 hour drive one way. There also appears to be a train route that if you leave Saturday night will get you there about 1:30pm on Saturday."

Good luck with that......there's usually slow downs, one weather event can add 8 hours.....and one accident can add 4 hours to that trip....and don't try it at rush hour......

Back in the 1980s, the air traffic controllers went on strike while I was in NJ for xmas week. I had to get back to work in Chicago..... I took the train....well, it left Penn station about 10am on Sunday and was supposed to arrive at 7am in Chicago......a long trip. Weather was bad, too

Well...... the train left 2 hours late. An hour out of Penn Station the train 'ran out of food'....seems that if you filled every seat.....they didn't have food for all or even tried to have food for all. It was a long, cold, miserable trip with sections of track down to 10-15 mph and through some of the most polluted places on the planet - air wise. Gary IN for one. Got in late, got to work late, but at least I got in. Some others who went to CA and further didn't make it back for days.

Fortunately , all the air traffic controllers got fired.....think it was Reagan.....

Yeah, it's along way from Chicago to NY....done most of it a few times, including this last summer. But not in one day.

t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
""that the individual states should be more responsible for their citizens than the federal government? No one wants that.""

Really?

Most states select their own text books for schools. You think that Ms Obama would be a better person to select your kids books for indoctrination by the feds?

Most states issue their own drivers licenses and register cars.

Most states provide Medicaid and come up with the benefits that are included in the state Medicaid packages.

All states/localities collect taxes for the education of the kids. You think the feds would do a better job of it?

Most states maintain most of their roadways. You think the feds would be better at fixing potholes at 'highest prevailing local wages within 300 miles'?......

No thanks.. The fed government should get out of 90% of what it is doing these days.


t
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
IP:"This is supposed to be the UNITED States of America. "

Actually, it's better if you put United STATES of America. The Union was formed of 13 original states, each of which had different interests and industries and wanted to protect them. They agreed the federal government had SEVEN and only SEVEN enumerated powers.

- -----




IP:"Why should things change so much when you cross state lines?"

Because you are going into different 'entities' whether you like it or not. Different drivers licenses. Different car registrations. Different VOTER REGISTRATION rules and procedures. Different TAXING jurisdictions. Different ways of funding education per state/locality. Different price gasoline.

- -------

IP:"Time for the Constitution to be updated to reflect new abilities for quick interstate travel, television and internet, all things that were not envisioned by the framers of the Constitution."

Like greenie taxes, taxes on cellphone bills, income taxes!.......how about LGBT rights? Same sex marriage? Mosques? POT? Medical marijuana? Cigarette smoking? Airplanes? Space craft? Birth control? X-rated videos and movies and DVDs? AIDS?

- ------



IP: Like how about same day primaries/caucuses? Am so tired at having my options restricted by the time my state's ability to cast their vote comes into play. It's a process that doesn't need months of drawn out torture anymore."

Then fix your STATE ......


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Then fix your STATE ......

Heh. Which one? Which territory for that matter? We've moved around a lot.

We have evolved greatly in ways the framers of our constitution never imagined. Yes, people should have the same rights everywhere in the USA, be you male or female or undetermined, gay, straight, white, black or some mix in between....

IP,
a fiscal conservative, not a social conservative
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
OCD:

I wrote, There also appears to be a train route that if you leave Saturday night will get you there about 1:30pm on Saturday.

I meant it leaves Friday night and arrives Saturday afternoon.

- Joel
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"We have evolved greatly in ways the framers of our constitution never imagined. Yes, people should have the same rights everywhere in the USA, be you male or female or undetermined, gay, straight, white, black or some mix in between...."

You do. Sort of. While the fed recognizes 'rights', remember that marriage is often a state statute or religious determination.

And no, it depends upon what 'rights' you are talking about.

Yep, they can vote. Yep, they can get drivers licenses. Register cars.

gay marriage is in the works is is upteen categories of 'sexual identity'.......male, female, it, whatever, neutered,.....


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
some of the most polluted places on the planet - air wise. Gary IN for one. - tele

-------------------
My first job out of college was Consumers Power in Jackson, Michigan followed by another job in Toledo, Ohio. The succubus' (ex wife) parents lived in Chicago. During the seven or eight years we lived in Michigan or Ohio, we drove I-94 to Chicago and back countless times.

You could always tell when you were approaching Gary as the air got progressively worse. The haze was bad enough to make your eyes burn sometimes but really it was the stench that was the worst part, really concentrated as you passed through the heart of the beast. Among other things they had a lot of paint factories there.

Not sure Gary is still like that (how could it be) but back in the 70's it was reliably bad. I can't imagine living there and what that would do to your lungs over a lifetime.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Google maps says it's just a 13 hour drive one way.
Add in the time for gas stops, pee stops, meal stops, traffic delays, etc. I've _never_ been able to get a trip time to be what google says.



There also appears to be a train route that if you leave Saturday night will get you there about 1:30pm on Saturday.
Yah, we took a train from Chicago once (family vacation). Never again, once was enough.

One of the other Chicago guys talked to them about traveling in the US, and how BIG it is compared to Denmark & the neighboring countries. Pointed out to them that they could hop in a car and drive south all day long and they'd STILL be in Illinois---but if they drove southward all day long frm Copenhagen, they'd be 5 countries away.

They finally decided to just go to downtown Chicago and Navy Pier.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
I think it is insane how things change from state to state. It's not as though we live in horse and buggy days anymore. This is supposed to be the UNITED States of America. Why should things change so much when you cross state lines?

Didn't they teach American History at your high school? It was founded as the United STATES of America. Sovereign states joining together. While not giving up their sovereignty.


Time for the Constitution to be updated to reflect...

No problemo. The way to update the Constitution is laid out in simple terms. Have at it. The only stumbling block is that you need to get 3/4 of the states to agree that they'd like to be ruled by New York and California.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4

IP:"Time for the Constitution to be updated to reflect new abilities for quick interstate travel, television and internet, all things that were not envisioned by the framers of the Constitution."

t: "Like greenie taxes, taxes on cellphone bills, income taxes!.......how about LGBT rights? Same sex marriage? Mosques? POT? Medical marijuana? Cigarette smoking? Airplanes? Space craft? Birth control? X-rated videos and movies and DVDs? AIDS?"


These guys all figure they'll be the commissar and not the body in the ditch.

Since they don't know history, they've never heard what happens next. Night of the Long Knives. The purges of the naifs after Lenin consolidated power. The 2nd tier cadres after Pol Pot had full control (explained well in the last half of The Killing Fields).

The leaders (Hitler, Lenin, Pol Pot, Saddam, etc.) early on kill all the useful idiots who helped them get into power because....well what strong man in his right mind wants stupid idiots around after they've performed their usefulness?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
All states/localities collect taxes for the education of the kids. You think the feds would do a better job of it?

I think I'd rather see that at a federal level. If only that the money SHOULD be more equitably distributed. The funding to teach kids shouldn't be dependent on local resources. For example, IIRC, some "senior communities" have been able to excuse themselves from such taxes because no schools reside in their tax district.

But whether the feds could do a better job overall? Probably not.

And COL differences would complicate things. As they do for all forms of national funding.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
t:"All states/localities collect taxes for the education of the kids."
-----

rhar:""I think I'd rather see that at a federal level. If only that the money SHOULD be more equitably distributed."

And what formula would you use, and would it have 'quotas' involved like race, religion, country of origin, etc?

Here in TX, students speak over 140 languages...... is that the case in ND? How about the inner city minority students? THose teachers probably make $50,000 plus a year, maybe twice that in NYC......vs farm belt students?

- -----



rhar:" The funding to teach kids shouldn't be dependent on local resources. For example, IIRC, some "senior communities" have been able to excuse themselves from such taxes because no schools reside in their tax district."

Well, good....no kids....no need for schools and education dollars. And likely those folks pay state taxes and real estate taxes that partly fund education.

In TX, the county assess a 'school tax'. But the state also provides money from education from state taxes collected. The school tax is upon everyone in the county...

- -------

rhar:"But whether the feds could do a better job overall? Probably not."

No way. Politicians would be messing with the 'formula' every chance they get to garner new votes from 'groups' of voters ........and pandering to union demands....... you'd have nationwide school strikes.....

- ----



rhar:"And COL differences would complicate things. As they do for all forms of national funding"

Of course...you don't have school buses in NYC but probably have armed guards.... you've got sky high teacher salaries there but don't need them in Bumpass ND....but the heating costs are triple there compared to VA.....and who pays for special ed teachers in towns of population 1,000? and how many and what types?

t.




You bet funding.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Well, good....no kids....no need for schools and education dollars. And likely those folks pay state taxes and real estate taxes that partly fund education.

I agree with most of what you said, but the above is my biggest issue.

Who SHOULD be funding schools and education dollars? Only those that actually have kids in school? If so, why use tax dollars at all? Should the "inner city minority students" you mentioned get less education because their neighborhoods are less able to fund the schools?

In TX, the county assess a 'school tax'. But the state also provides money from education from state taxes collected. The school tax is upon everyone in the county...

From what I see on the Internet, TX allow seniors to avoid education taxes, or at least part of the funding that goes into education (e.g. school bonds)? Or do I have that wrong?

Many retirees can afford to "shop" for counties that have little (or no) education taxes. Just as they can "shop" for other taxes. At one point, I was looking at retiring to Las Vegas because of no state income taxes. That meant I could defer Minnesota state taxes via 401K and IRA until I moved to a state without income taxes.

======================================

But, yes, there are lots of issues that require more or less money in various school districts. To me, distribution of funding and collection of funding should be independent of each other, except for the fact that they have to come out to the same total.

I guess I could say the same for health care?

In the end, the issue is how to equitably fund the system and dispense the services. There will be no way that everyone agrees on, on either side, funding or dispensing. You mentioned a number of complications. And everyone will have their hand out, claiming they need more. And many will be saying they can't afford to pay that much.

Some old, same old. :(
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
From what I see on the Internet, TX allow seniors to avoid education taxes, or at least part of the funding that goes into education (e.g. school bonds)? Or do I have that wrong? - rharmelink

------------------

In Texas, the portion of your property taxes that is levied by your school district is frozen at the dollar amount you paid the year you turned 65.

I turned 65 in July 2016. The school tax I paid at the end of 2016 was $5,248. In 2017, I again paid $5,248 but without that freeze, my school tax would have been $5,941. Same for 2018 tax bill.

So the age 65 freeze saves me right at $700 per year but I still must pay the $5,248 every year. Not even close to avoiding education taxes. Again this is just ISD taxes. The rest of my tax bill continues to escalate each year with no mercy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
telegraph: "In TX, the county assess a 'school tax'. But the state also provides money from education from state taxes collected. The school tax is upon everyone in the county..."

Counties assess a school tax that covers K-12 education?

You sure about that?

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
rhar:"From what I see on the Internet, TX allow seniors to avoid education taxes, or at least part of the funding that goes into education (e.g. school bonds)? Or do I have that wrong?"


Well, partly right and partly wrong. Taxation for school taxes is by county. If you live in a county like Collin TX(a Dallas suburb) with a million people and probably a median home price of well over $200,000..... you can raise a lot of taxes.

If you live in a small population county like Loving County TX, pop 110 or so out there in west TX......you don't even have a school...the kids are send over to the next county...and of course, with 110 people, there's not much 'real estate' to tax. Fortunately for them, they get lots of money from oil companies......

So the state works to even out the funding. Of course, in west TX, teachers earn less - lower cost of living.....lower home prices...... real estate for schools is less..... etc....

The rich counties fork up a percentage of their school tax collections too.....

----

Now, when you turn 65 in most counties in TX, your school taxes - about 2/3rds your total county tax bill, is 'frozen'. Doesn't increase. Of course, most seniors don't have school age kids in the household any longer. So it sort of makes sense, and something like 1.1% of homes in the county are owned by seniors. Not a big deal.

---------
-------------


rhar:"Many retirees can afford to "shop" for counties that have little (or no) education taxes."

Well, yeah....if you want to live in the middle of the boonies, in places where you drive 120 miles to the nearest Walmart or doctor.....you can find some dirt cheap places to live in TX.

If your residence is $42,000, there isn't going to be much tax on it anyway!


----------
-------------



rhar:" Just as they can "shop" for other taxes. At one point, I was looking at retiring to Las Vegas because of no state income taxes. That meant I could defer Minnesota state taxes via 401K and IRA until I moved to a state without income taxes."

Of course...but many retirees don't make enough to worry about taxes that much. If you live on $35,000 a year...between the exemption for you and wife....., well, heck...you don't pay income taxes and if you live in a small home in Bumpass ND, probably only paid $42,000 for it...

Yep, living in a no income state tax state has no taxes on money coming out of a 401K or IRA. I avoided a bit of that as I take my RMDs in TX....some of that money went in while I lived in VA......

But in the end, you'll find the tax load not that much different other than the democrat run hellholes like IL, New England, CA, OR, etc.....with $800,000 starter homes, $15,000 a year real estate taxes, 8-10% income taxes, $500/yr car registrations, etc.....

My taxes between VA and TX were within a couple percent. VA had income tax and tax on personal possessions, including cars - but fairly low real estate taxes in Arlington (which was the lowest tax place around DC) ...... TX had no income tax, but real estate taxes were 3 times higher for me. Came out about the same each year.....

======================================

rhar:"But, yes, there are lots of issues that require more or less money in various school districts. To me, distribution of funding and collection of funding should be independent of each other, except for the fact that they have to come out to the same total."


Not true. It costs a lot more to run a school in Dallas TX as in west TX. Probably 2-3 times as much. Austin probably costs 4 times as much as in Dallam County TX.

- -------

rhar:"I guess I could say the same for health care?"

Could be. Small town docs have lower overhead....Around here, docs need fancy buildings and offices.....$$$$$$$ and we pay for them. Out in the boonies, they can operate out of a 40 year old building and no one says anything.

- -------

rhar:"In the end, the issue is how to equitably fund the system and dispense the services. There will be no way that everyone agrees on, on either side, funding or dispensing. You mentioned a number of complications. And everyone will have their hand out, claiming they need more. And many will be saying they can't afford to pay that much."

totally true...and we don't need politicians and boards in one central location trying to slice and dice PC crap, federal mandates, gender issues, transgender bathrooms, school bus routes and timing, fourteen languages in each school, school size and school district assignments, etc.

- -------

rhar:"Some old, same old. :( "

Most education is controlled at the state level in most states....but other than a few states like NJ, the funding varies all over the place.

Do the Native American reservations still get schools run by the Bureau of Indian Affairs?
They did for 100 years or more......and they get their healthcare the same way, right? Direct from the feds?

t
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
BHM:"I turned 65 in July 2016. The school tax I paid at the end of 2016 was $5,248. In 2017, I again paid $5,248 but without that freeze, my school tax would have been $5,941. Same for 2018 tax bill.

So the age 65 freeze saves me right at $700 per year but I still must pay the $5,248 every year. Not even close to avoiding education taxes. Again this is just ISD taxes. The rest of my tax bill continues to escalate each year with no mercy. "

-----

My total real estate tax bill is about $4000 of which 2/3rds is school tax.....and was frozen at age 65 - 7 years ago......

My taxes went DOWN this past year, thanks to Toyota and a half billion dollars in new real estate contributing to the tax base!...just a little but better for sure than going up!


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Yep....here's an article

"How does the funding get to Texas public schools?

Funding our schools is a shared responsibility between the state and local property tax payers. Using a set of formulas that take into consideration the particular makeup of each school district, the state determines how much total funding each school district is allowed to have. The goal is to ensure that a student's ZIP code doesn’t determine his or her educational opportunities. Districts first use local tax dollars toward meeting this allowable amount. If a district is unable to raise the allowable funding level locally because it doesn’t have a wealthy enough property tax base, then state dollars fill the gaps. If a district is able to generate more funding locally than allowed by the state’s formulas, then the excess property tax revenue collected locally is “recaptured” or sent back to the state for redistribution to other school districts and charter schools. This is what's known as the "Robin Hood" provision.

the state will fund about 38 percent of public education through the school funding formulas by 2019, down from about 49 percent in 2008.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/So-...

Naturally, liberal progressives are always complaining about 'not enough funding' and 'more spending. Always.....

The system works for the most part.


t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
rhar:"But, yes, there are lots of issues that require more or less money in various school districts. To me, distribution of funding and collection of funding should be independent of each other, except for the fact that they have to come out to the same total."

Not true. It costs a lot more to run a school in Dallas TX as in west TX. Probably 2-3 times as much. Austin probably costs 4 times as much as in Dallam County TX.

Not sure how it makes it not true. The total funds collected and total funds disbursed still should be the same total. You're just talking about HOW the funds need to be disbursed. But they still need to be collected before they can be disbursed.

But it again goes back to the question of who should be paying what.

Does it come down to the same as typical insurance? Contribute premiums at the same rate that you contribute (risk of) costs? Or do we treat it like no-fault insurance, and just divide the cost equally? And then what do you do with those that can't afford their share of the costs, no matter what method you choose?

What about parents that take care of it themselves, either via home schooling or private schools. Does that relieve them of contributing, or entitle them to some form of reimbursement?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Does it come down to the same as typical insurance? Contribute premiums at the same rate that you contribute (risk of) costs? Or do we treat it like no-fault insurance, and just divide the cost equally? And then what do you do with those that can't afford their share of the costs, no matter what method you choose?"

1) You can only tax people on some 'metric'. Usually that is real estate value or income. Nothing else. We don't tax people on a 'per kid in school' metric or anything else.

So with widely varying real estate values - of over 1000:1 from $10,000 trailer homes in west TX to 25 million dollar mansions in Austin and Dallas.....and even larger 'ranches' out in West TX (but usually owned by 'corporations'..... that's a big problem. The people in a $10,000 trailer home on a 20x30 foot lot aren't going to forking up a lot of cash.

Of course, if you rent, you don't directly pay 'real estate' taxes and taxes on commercial real estate is figured out differently.

----

2) Car insurance - which you don't need if you don't have a car or 'self insure' where possible varies on the value of the car, the type of coverage you have (comprehensive, liability and collision, as well as 'uninsured motorist' ).....and LOCATION. An expensive car in Dallas will cost you probably 5 times that as in west TX. Oh, and it depends upon the driver and his/her driving record, too, and age/sex/marital status.

----

3) today, home schoolers get to pay for local schools they don't use.


The fact remains that the tax base of Cimarron County OK, with population 2700, has a lot smaller tax base that Dallas County TX with nearly 1 million people, skyscrapers, corporate headquarters, etc.

t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
rharmelink: "What about parents that take care of it themselves, either via home schooling or private schools. Does that relieve them of contributing, or entitle them to some form of reimbursement?"

NO!

We have decided the public schools are part of the price of civilization.

Your question opens the door to a slippery slope that essentially kills public education.

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 18
But it again goes back to the question of who should be paying what.


We should all pay, because everyone benefits from a well-educated society.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
We should all pay, because everyone benefits from a well-educated society.

Agreed. But the point in contention was how do we do collect and disburse funds equitably throughout society? Local or federal?

If local taxes support local education, it's not likely lower income areas will have equitable education opportunities compared to other areas. And living in a district without kids means some of the "all" get excused from their share of those payments.

For example, school bonds:

https://yourvalley.net/yourvalley/news/education/second-peor...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
TL;DR...

JAFO31,

You wrote, NO!

We have decided the public schools are part of the price of civilization.

Your question opens the door to a slippery slope that essentially kills public education.


The Royal WE?

But seriously, I do agree that an educated population benefits the entire civilization. But sometimes I have to wonder if our public education system actually fulfills this goal.

I'm not arguing that we shouldn't support public funded education. I'm just wondering if we actually do that good a job of it. In fact I'd argue that for some children public education is a fiasco.

Certainly I did okay in a public K-12 system, but I think most of my peers did not. I think a large part of that was due to me being motivated, while they were not. I simply didn't like not knowing, so I learned about things - especially things that interested me. I also didn't want to be stuck where I grew up with so many "losers" and I figured I needed to be prepared to go out on my own.

Many of my class peers seemed to view school as little more than an extension of daycare... And they got about as much out of it. In my view, the money and time spent on them was mostly wasted. The few of those I've talked to at class reunions that actually did something with themselves mostly learned on the job and mostly because they had to - not because they wanted to make something of themselves.

So aside from the opportunity to become (arguably) better socialized, I'm not sure the money spent on our current system is actually well-spent on our children...

FWIW, I think most kids today probably get more knowledge by browsing the internet than they actually get in school. Given some of what's on the internet, that's a bit scary.

More and more I wonder if the US shouldn't just develop one national curriculum that is made available online. Locally teachers would become more like support personnel that would be available to answer student questions over something like Skype or in pre-arranged one-on-one tutoring sessions. Socialization and physical education could be provided through more robust civic centers that offer free (and possibly mandatory in the sense that the child would need to participate in a minimum number of hours of different types of programs, unless they have a medical excuse) curriculum to minors.

I think this would reduce the cost of an education (one teacher could probably support maybe twice as many students this way), increase the level of participation, allow students to self-pace and reduce the number of distractions inherent in large group settings. Grade advancement would still occur in much the same way - by accomplishing some minimum curriculum requirement for each level - but it would allow students to either study more elective topics or reclaim more free time for their own interests.

Obviously this wouldn't work for the first couple of years of education as our youngest children probably lack the dexterity to operate a computer and they probably need more personalized attention. But certainly middle school and high school (as well as some late elementary school) students would probably be best served with such a system.

Of course the current system is thoroughly entrenched, so I have no hope that such changes will happen in my lifetime...

- Joel
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
joelcorley:

JAFO31: "You wrote, NO!

We have decided the public schools are part of the price of civilization.

Your question opens the door to a slippery slope that essentially kills public education."


"The Royal WE?"

No. The citizens of the USA. But from reading the rest of your post, I realize that you are not opposing public education (like the poster to whom I was responding seem to, whether he or she realized it or not).

"But seriously, I do agree that an educated population benefits the entire civilization. But sometimes I have to wonder if our public education system actually fulfills this goal."

That is a different question.

"I'm not arguing that we shouldn't support public funded education. I'm just wondering if we actually do that good a job of it. In fact I'd argue that for some children public education is a fiasco."

And your wondering is a different discussion.

"Certainly I did okay in a public K-12 system, but I think most of my peers did not. I think a large part of that was due to me being motivated, while they were not. I simply didn't like not knowing, so I learned about things - especially things that interested me. I also didn't want to be stuck where I grew up with so many "losers" and I figured I needed to be prepared to go out on my own.

Many of my class peers seemed to view school as little more than an extension of daycare... And they got about as much out of it. In my view, the money and time spent on them was mostly wasted. The few of those I've talked to at class reunions that actually did something with themselves mostly learned on the job and mostly because they had to - not because they wanted to make something of themselves.

So aside from the opportunity to become (arguably) better socialized, I'm not sure the money spent on our current system is actually well-spent on our children..."


Education done right is not necessarily inexpensive. And we do not accord public school teachers much respect.

"FWIW, I think most kids today probably get more knowledge by browsing the internet than they actually get in school. Given some of what's on the internet, that's a bit scary."

Agreed.

"More and more I wonder if the US shouldn't just develop one national curriculum that is made available online. Locally teachers would become more like support personnel that would be available to answer student questions over something like Skype or in pre-arranged one-on-one tutoring sessions. Socialization and physical education could be provided through more robust civic centers that offer free (and possibly mandatory in the sense that the child would need to participate in a minimum number of hours of different types of programs, unless they have a medical excuse) curriculum to minors."

I have not really thought that through, but on its face I am not necessarily opposed. And a national curriculum at least through way 5-6 grade would make much sense.

"I think this would reduce the cost of an education (one teacher could probably support maybe twice as many students this way), increase the level of participation, allow students to self-pace and reduce the number of distractions inherent in large group settings. Grade advancement would still occur in much the same way - by accomplishing some minimum curriculum requirement for each level - but it would allow students to either study more elective topics or reclaim more free time for their own interests."

Same thoughts from me.

"Obviously this wouldn't work for the first couple of years of education as our youngest children probably lack the dexterity to operate a computer and they probably need more personalized attention. But certainly middle school and high school (as well as some late elementary school) students would probably be best served with such a system.

Of course the current system is thoroughly entrenched, so I have no hope that such changes will happen in my lifetime..."


Dream big.

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top