Overall I am 100% sure OK's tax system is still progressive (probably less than systems of other states) except for a tiny minority.

Yea you completely ignored an entire class of people.

Also you ignored property taxes affect on the price of local goods. Cost of real estate is a thing. That's why a beer costs 10 dollars in Manhattan and 2 dollars in Waco TX. Property taxes are a component of said real estate cost.

Property taxes and sales taxes, both extremely large components of education funding, are wildly regressive.

In my example above property taxes were 27% and prorated the sales tax portion of the education funding was another 24% (rough proportion of sales tax as percent of state rev as percent of education budget).

That's 51% of funding from super regressive taxes. The only thing worse would be to start funding education with a state sanctioned lottery.....oh wait.

He is also making the logical mistake that if you raise more revenue via a system that *overall* is regressive, that the marginal increase in revenue is *also regressive*.

And ignoring that the way education money is distributed is typically re-distributive. For example, even IF the Georgia income tax were slightly regressive (which it is not), the way the funding is calculated, poorer areas end up with more than their "fair share" of the money.

lol

Yeah man but you called them a protected class, invented that they are demanding specifically higher property taxes(???), and, here's the tell.. you're posting about this **** at all.

The heart of the matter: Don't question group think.

Itt: Teachers == unquestionable force for good;

ergo don't even dare question paying them more money. If you do you hate teachers.

QED

I think he's referring to the fact that it's odd you jumped into a thread about how a state is going to raise taxes on oil companies to increase $38k teacher salaries to rail about property taxes and pensions.

Perhaps it does reveal a particular bias or point of view?

For a guy who was real ****ing smug when somebody had a brain fart about property tax incidence on renters like 5 posts before this your theory here doesn't even slightly make sense(rent of the store isn't a variable that determines market price of consumer goods sold in that store, it determines whether the store is open at all), and you're flatly incorrect about the basics here.


From like a 3 second google using the a rando zip code Waco residents pay ~1.7% while someone who lives in Manhattan is looking at ~1.9%.

The only problem with all this wonderful logic is that no one here is advocating raising regressive taxes to fund education quite the opposite. In fact the arguments that I have made and that most are making wrt Oklahoma have to do with reducing the corporate welfare that you and your ilk love so much. But keep on keeping on. I know it is your goal to completely derail the thread with this pointless tangent that you are on but you are strawmanning hard with your whole argument for the last half day.

You are confusing how education has been funded with how it possibly could be funded. In short you are arguing that education is bad because it is paid for through regressive taxes. The only problem with this level of analysis is that it doesn't have to be paid for through regressive taxes. It is your own party who chooses to pay for it in this manner rather than through more progressive or corporate taxation. You only have to look in the mirror to see who is to blame for the regressive taxation you are trying to pin on those of us who are pro-education. It is one of the most common tactics of the right. You are basically doing what Trump has been doing wrt DACA.

Also it isn't because of groupthink that most of us in this thread want better public education. It is basic common sense and decency.

Never remembered a post you made so went and looked. Wow your most recent posting spree before this was arguing against solar in favor of coal. Yep not a deplorable at all!

They just so happen to both be about 50%; I'm not making any error in reasoning at all. I cited each one. The error is on your part.

You are just flat out wrong. Vast majority is flatly incorrect.

Bucket of revenue state income tax ~24%; local property taxes ~41%.

So roughly 92% from state and local, where I said 93. I'm sure someone is furiously typing a post to correct me on that one.

I said cost of real estate; one component of which is property tax. It's all in black and white. Try and keep up.

Also you just accused someone of being smug. You. That just happened.

Ok sure, I will concede that vast majority from state vs local may overstate the case given your cite of a 56%/44% split.

In rural districts it can be more like 75%/25% and in wealthier metro districts it's more like 50%/50%.

I absolutely have a point of view; encouraging open debate to question the axiom that teachers are underpaid.

I was going to post a picture of a monkey mashing a keyboard, but none of them had a suitable, moronic facial expression.

Texas has the ~5th highest property tax rates in the nation on average.

Oh, but Texas real estate is cheap? Make it "tax paid per year on median-priced home in the state" and they're STILL ~14th highest.

2 dollar beers though LMAO

It doesn't necessarily follow that an increase is also regressive; agreed.

I'm all for Scrooge McDuck or Jeff Bezos (or you know oil and gas taxes or whatever) subsiding teacher salaries. I mean I might have a different preference for how to use that money, but sure, fine...go for it. But if you look at how education is actually funded it's not from Jeff et. al. Not by a long shot.

Like if there is a world whereby we can give teachers in OK a raise solely at the expense of the capital class and 1%, I'd like to see that happen. We don't live in that world.

TX teachers would be striking right now but a 1992 law passed by Republicans takes away a teachers' health care and pension if they strike. Texas has cut education spending by something like 20%, but they've cut the state portion of the funding by a lot so local school districts have had to jack up their property taxes to make up with it. That would be better but the sales tax has remained the same, they've just been giving tax cuts to business like Oklahoma, just not as drastic

For the last time we are talking about states like OK where the teachers are paid nothing, the schools lack books and basic supplies and the education budget had been shrunk by 30% over the last decade while huge tax cuts were given to the oil industry. If you agree with us that this is a huge problem why have you spent all this time trying to tell us how wrong we are to want higher teacher pay and higher education budgets in the 3 states that this thread is actually about.

Oh ya I know what it is you realize your original position is so out in left field that you are backtracking to a "REGRESSIVE TAXEZ BAD GUYZ" position rather than your original 100% deplorable position of "**** those ungrateful lazy overpaid teachers!"

As to your last paragraph we could live in that world if it wasn't for people like you supporting politicians who have set the current tax regime up the way it is. Most people in OK want the GPT to pay for all of the increase in funding. The people against it are Republicans and oil billionaires. Saying "we don't live in that world" is just infuriatingly wrong when people like you are the reason the system is how it is. There is a reason why all of the worst school systems are in red states and it is because of Republican tax/education policy over the last several decades.

Cost of real estate is not a variable in consumer retail pricing, and there's almost no difference in tax rates between the two areas YOU PROVIDED AS AN EXAMPLE. Like you personally gave yourself all of the information necessary to understand this.


Yeah but I know what I'm talking about so I get away with you. You don't understand Micro 101 and just invented a bunch of **** here.

It's real important to remember that your core thesis is bull****, that you've literally invented that the teachers want their salaries to be paid from regressive taxes. They do not.

Bolded is an obvious lie, btw. Please don't lie. Or if you have to, lie a little bit less. Anybody who gets this fired up about public workers getting pensions has unflinching loyalty to the capital class, a real deep seated emotional connection to them getting to keep their money instead of giving it to dirty proles.

thenewsavman basically intellectually arrived at the point that OK teachers may actually have legitimate grievances but his ideological leanings prevent him from acknowledging that.

Just wanted to chime in with my experience as a school counselor married to an elementary school teacher. My wife and I work in neighboring districts in Texas. She has been a teacher for 8 years and makes about 52k after a $1500 stipend for having a Masters. Her contract is for 187 work days and her required time is 7:30-3:30. She typically gets to school by 7:00 and usually leaves around 5:00. She will almost always bring something home like papers to grade or lessons to plan. She also goes up on the weekends sometimes. During the summer, she will normally attend 5-10 days of professional development beyond her 187 days and she usually spends another 5 days or so at the very beginning of August getting her room ready for the upcoming year. Her school is in an extremely wealthy area and parents value education. Many of her students are in outside tutoring but my wife also does after school tutorials to push those kids that need a boost. A few teachers at her school don’t do any after school tutoring. My wife still spends a lot of money on books, supplies, and other resources for her classroom every year.

As a counselor, I am on a 194 day calendar and my district sets our work day as 7:15-3:45 that includes a 30 minute lunch. I usually get there around 7:00 and leave somewhere between 4:30-5:00 depending on the day. Thankfully I don’t have to grade papers but I might occasionally have to bring something home. I do have more evening events and after school meetings that I am responsible for attending. My school has about 50% economically disadvantaged and the staff at my school has to work tirelessly to help the students make progress. Teachers at my school spend a good chunk of their own money on books and materials for their classrooms. We have a partnership with a local church that helps send food home with kids on the weekends. I make about 60k a year after 7 years teaching and 1 year as a counselor. I also have my Masters degree though it is required for my position.

Somebody ITT mentioned the idea of evaluating and compensating teachers based on several factors including test scores and I really don’t even know how that would be feasible. Each school’s situation is so unique even within the same district. The test scores would have to be judged based on growth rather than just achievement for this to be even remotely possible. I agree there are some bad teachers that need to be weeded out and it would be nice if teachers that worked harder could be compensated more.

A few bad teachers is barely a problem compared to the greedy ******s actively sabotaging the entire education system.

If teachers' salaries had been doubled twenty years ago and continued to increase proportionately, what percentage of those who teach today would have withstood the greater competition?

If I had a dollar for every good question you've asked would I have a dollar?