Well, I remember trying to pass a bond to build more schools. We were one of the fastest growing school districts in the nation when my kids were in school, and if we did scare up some construction money somehow, we would be on double sessions in a few short years. But we knew that the senior citizens vote in large numbers, and they would defeat the bond because of the tax reequired to service it. So, we exempted them under a law unique to our state. No matter. They turned out in huge numbers and voted against it anyhow. Somehow they did not trust the exemption or perhaps they did not even read about it. So I do understand why districts consider expempting seniors from the obligation, but it doesn't always help.

School funding should not be put on the backs of home owners, through real estate taxes.There has got to be a better way.
If we could have any say in the way the School Dept. spends it's money that would be one thing, but we don't.
They spend, and we have to foot the bill.

I agree that school funding should not be on the backs of homeowners, through real estate taxes...and it is not fair to take the meager incomes of seniors to pay for school funding.

My father will be 90 in May and is living on Social Security. Because his income is small, his real estate taxes are reduced dramatically. I think that's a wonderful program, and if it isn't nationwide, it should be.

Education costs have skyrocketed and are spiraling out of control. The union is a major part of the problem, but that's an issue for the "Hot Topics" forum. I think it would be wise to abolish the Department of Education, and send its funding to the states. Education should be a state issue, IMO. In the olden days, education was a part of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. That department was replaced by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education. Whenever the government creates a new bureaucracy, it incurs tremendous new administrative costs. If necessary, oversight at the national level could be absorbed within the Department of Health and Human Services.

A major source of funding for education should be lotteries. I remember when the Maryland Lottery started, they said proceeds would go to fund education. The lotteries are a huge source of revenue. Unfortunately, the politicians play games with the lottery money (if a state has revenue from lotteries, they reduce the funding for education so they can divert the funds to other projects). Just like the politicians took the Social Security and Civil Service retirement fund monies out of the "lockbox" and put them into the general treasury for their own spending spree. [The subliminal message here is to get rid of all 536 spendthrifts in Washington, D.C.]

There is a push in Washington to raise the mandatory education age to 18. That's a wonderful thing in theory, but I can't imagine that it will work. It's hard enough for parents to keep their kids in school until age 16! I heard that only 43% of Washington, D.C. students graduate from high school. If members of congress can't keep their own kids (and those of their neighbors) in school, how are they going to enforce that in the rest of the country?

Sorry, nanny, I didn't mean to hijack your post. I'll get off my soapbox now....

Thank you, nanny. I agree completely. We are all in this together. Or should be.

Sounds like a 'healthy' conversation, but I need to get dressed (3:30 pm)

Recent-generation kids have come to be in global competition for many varieties of work, and it'll become wider and deeper, especially in the knowledge-based part of business and commerce, for much of that can be shipped from computer to computer easily, wherever in the world.

Not so with slinging hash in a restaurant, making hotel beds, not well-paid situations ... or repairing sewer pipes, as lazypup just alluded to ... and many of those skilled jobs do pay well.

It seems to me that our kids need to have their skills developed and sharpened, in order to compete - and our school systems aren't the best in the world.

I'm somewhat unhappy that, while basic educational services are usually covered, many of the peripheral needs of schools aren't met and must be covered by local fund-raising, which causes difficulty for schools in less affluent neighbourhoods.

I'm a suuporter of democratic rights enough to believe that every kid should have the same educational opportunities in life.

But even then, kids in poor neighbourhoods are somewhat behind the 8-ball, from the first day of school, for they often have received less training, education and encouragement at home, so find it hard to keep up.

ole joyful