Category Archives: Education

Wisconsin: After the Collective Bargaining Law

On June 14th, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the Wisconsin legislature did not, in fact, break any laws when they passed the bill into law that removed a large portion of the collective bargaining rights from public sector unions.

From the Left, the words spewing from the bleachers were ones of destruction the end of education as we know it.

Teachers would have their power taken from them and, without said power, would be left–ahem, powerless in the streets.  Schools would crumble and a darkness would be upon the face of the deep.  But I wonder, is it possible that something might happen?  Is it possible that the passing of this law would allow districts the ability to save their schools?  Would communities be able to educate their children with teachers they loved and class sizes they want?

I think so.

Let’s check the tale of the tape:

Continue reading

Superior Court Judge: I’ll Write The State Budget

The North Carolina legislature passed a budget.  This budget passed both house of  properly elected lawmakers.  Then, this budget was vetoed by the Good Govna’ of the Great State of North by God Carolina, herself properly elected.

Bev Purdue certainly can veto bills she doesn’t like.

After learning of said veto, the legislature convened and took up  vote to over-ride the veto.  And over-ride that veto the legislature did.  And so, the budget became law without the consent of the governor.

That, however, is not the end of the story.

Continue reading

About That “Disaster”

Wisconsin.

Unions.

Scott Walker.

The Prediction:

“This is a disaster,” said Mark Miller, the Wisconsin Senate Democratic leader, in February after Republican Gov. Scott Walker proposed a budget bill that would curtail the collective bargaining powers of some public employees. Miller predicted catastrophe if the bill were to become law — a charge repeated thousands of times by his fellow Democrats, union officials, and protesters in the streets.

Still think so?

Continue reading

Words To Live By: Or Govern

New material out recently.  Even before the official body of work begins I’m impressed:

10 Golden Rules of Effective Taxation

This is gonna be good, I can just TELL!

1.  When you tax something more you get less of it, and when you tax something less you get more of it.

It is wise to keep taxes on work, savings, and investment as low as possible in order not to deter people from participating in these activities.

2.  Individuals work and produce goods and services to earn money for present or future consumption.

Workers save, but they do so for the purpose of conserving resources so they or their children can consume in the future.

3.  Taxes create a wedge between the cost of working and the rewards from working.

This is why all taxes ultimately affect people’s incentive to work and invest, though some taxes clearly have a more detrimental effect than others.

4.  An increase in tax rates will not lead to a dollar-for-dollar increase in tax revenues, and a reduction in tax rates that encourages production will lead to less than a dollar-for-dollar reduction in tax revenues.

Lower marginal tax rates reduce the tax wedge and lead to an expansion in the production base and improved resource allocation. Thus, while less tax revenue may be collected per unit of tax base, the tax base itself increases. This expansion of the tax base will, therefore, offset some (and in some cases, all) of the loss in revenues because of the now lower rates.

5.  If tax rates become too high, they may lead to a reduction in tax receipts. The relationship between tax rates and tax receipts has been described by the Laffer Curve.

…within what is referred to as the “normal range,” an increase in tax rates will lead to an increase in tax revenues. At some point, however, higher tax rates become counterproductive.  Above this point, called the “prohibitive range,” an increase in tax rates leads to a reduction in tax revenues and vice versa. Over the entire range, with a tax rate reduction, the revenues collected per dollar of tax base falls. This is the arithmetic effect. But the number of units in the tax base expands.  Lower tax rates lead to higher levels of personal income, employment, retail sales, investment, and general economic activity. This is the economic, or incentive, effect. Tax avoidance also declines.

6.  The more mobile the factors being taxed, the larger the response to a change in tax rates. The less mobile the factor, the smaller the change in the tax base for a given change in tax rates.

A study by the American Enterprise Institute  has found that high corporate income taxes at the national level are associated with lower growth in wages. Again, it appears a chain reaction occurs when corporate taxes get too high. Capital moves out of the high tax area, but wages are a function of the ratio of capital to labor, so the reduction in capital decreases the wage rate.

7.  Raising tax rates on one source of revenue may reduce the tax revenue from other sources, while reducing the tax rate on one activity may raise the taxes raised from other activities.

…an increase in the tax rate on corporate profits would be expected to lead to a diminution in the amount of corporate activity, and hence profits, within the taxing district. That alone implies less than a proportionate increase in corporate tax revenues. Such a reduction in corporate activity also implies a reduction in employment and personal income.

8.  An economically efficient tax system has a sensible, broad tax base and a low tax rate.

Ideally, the tax system of a state, city, or country will distort economic activity only minimally. High tax rates alter economic behavior. Ronald Reagan used to tell the story that he would stop making movies during his acting career once he was in the 90 percent tax bracket because the income he received was so low after taxes were taken away.

9.  Income transfer (welfare) payments also create a de facto tax on work and, thus, have a high impact on the vitality of a state’s economy.

Unemployment benefits, welfare payments, and subsidies all represent a redistribution of income. For every transfer recipient, there is an equivalent tax payment or future tax liability. Thus, income effects cancel. In many instances, these payments are given to people only in the absence of work or output.

In some high benefit states, such as Hawaii, Massachusetts, and New York, the entire package of welfare payments can pay people the equivalent of a $10 per hour job (and let us not forget: welfare benefits are not taxed, but wages and salaries are). Because these benefits shrink as income levels from work climb, welfare can impose very high marginal tax rates (60 percent or more) on low-income Americans. And those disincentives to work have a deleterious effect.

10.  If A and B are two locations, and if taxes are raised in B and lowered in A, producers and manufacturers will have a greater incentive to move from B to A.

No explanation given.

Liberals And Economics

Don’t mix.

Recently I posted about an Economics Literacy Test.  The Minneapolis Federal Reserve conducted a survey and asked people to answer 13 economic questions.  Those 404 people didn’t do so well.

While I took the test I wondered who would do well and who would do so well.  It occurred to me that some people will do better just because they want the answer to be something other than what it is.  For example, if asked, I suspect a vast majority of Liberals would say that the oil companies make too much profit.  Indeed, the oil companies rank 114 out of 215 industries in profits.  Hardly gouging, huh?

Then I was reminded of a post I blogged here about a year ago.  It described who did well and who did poorly on questions of economics:

Best to worst, with an average number of incorrect responses from 0 to 8:

Very conservative, 1.30

Libertarian, 1.38

Conservative, 1.67

Moderate, 3.67

Liberal, 4.69

Progressive/very liberal, 5.26.

Not so good if you are Liberal.

Economics Literacy Test

Mark Perry over at Carpe Diem continues to deliver the goods.  The most recent is his post where he links to an Economics Literacy Test.  This is a test administered in 1998 by the Minneapolis Federal Reserve.  There are 13 questions on the test.  Each question is multiple choice.

I took the test and finished in nearly 5 minutes; maybe a little more.

Take the test.

As an FYI, the average score for the test’s 404 participants was 45%.

I scored 92.3%.  12 out of 13.

Governor Purdue: Spend More on Education – Tax More on Citizens

North Carolina government continues to debate the budget.  Even as the state’s deficit grows, the governor refuses to step back from spending.  And the number 1 line item in the budget?

Education.

This is governor Purdue’s explanation:

“We cannot go backward on education. It’s part of who we are as a people in this state and it’s what has differentiated us as a leader in the South,” Perdue said, according to her staff. “We are North Carolina, and we have chosen to become that because of our generational legacy of education.”

We cannot go backward.  Backward.

In what way and manner is she thinking we’ll go backward?

Spending?

Sure, but more spending doesn’t equate to better education.

She is preaching the old Democrat canard; Defend the defined solution – Don’t debate the problem.

See, the Democrats feel that the only way to improve education is to spend more.  Therefore they feel that as long as they are able to defend the fact that we want to improve education, and who doesn’t, we should only continue to spend more and more.

Yet not one once of study goes into the fact that education outcomes don’t always depend on money.

Third Grade Readers

I recently engaged in a small debate with some friends of mine on Facebook.  The subject is 3rd grade readers and what should be done with those kids who are struggling to read at that age.

Minnesota just passed, or is getting ready to pass, a new law that requires kids who are not reading at grade level by 3rd grade be held back:

The bill would direct school districts and charter schools to develop plans to monitor students’ literacy skills from kindergarten through grade three and inform parents at least twice a year of their child’s reading progress. Struggling students would get extra help such as tutoring, summer school or extended time programs.

It would also limit “social promotion,” or advancing students automatically to the next grade. With certain exceptions, students would only be promoted to the fourth grade if they demonstrate reading proficiency by the end of third grade — but if not, they’d repeat third grade and receive intensive, specialized intervention.

As is my nature [i’m kind’ofa a smartass] and the fact that I used to teach [okay-okay, 1 year] combined with the fact hat I have a rising 3rd grader got me interested.

So I asked what we should do with 3rd graders who can’t read?  In my mind, this is a larger question and should be answered at every grade or measurement period.  That is, if you haven’t mastered the 8th grade, you shouldn’t move on to 9th.  Same with Jr. Social Studies or Algebra I.  But whatever, 3rd grade is the topic so we’ll stick with that.

It turns out that there is a study that shows reading ability at 3rd grade is a strong predictor of graduation.

One in six children who are not reading proficiently in third grade do not graduate from high school on time, a rate four times greater than that for proficient readers.

This is powerful stuff.

Now, to be sure, correlation doesn’t imply causation.  It could very well be that the factor that contributes to poor 3rd grade reading is the same factor that contributes to dropping out.  In fact, the study finds poverty is a massive indicatr as well:

Overall, 22 percent of children who have lived in poverty do not graduate from high school, compared to 6 percent of those who have never been poor. This 4 rises to 32 percent for students spending more than half of their childhood in poverty.

Does poverty cause poor reading? Are parents who are poor unable or unwilling to do the needful in order to get their kids to read?  Intelligence in inherited.  Is it possible that folks with lower IQs raise children with lower IQs?

Fascinating questions.  However, schools and administrations, along with states and other governments, are taking this study to heart.  By getting kids at their grade level achievement in reading by the 3rd grade, they feel they are increasing the chances these kids stay in school and graduate.

Teacher Insurance Rates: Teachers Pay Their Own Premium

North Carolina is broke.  Ba-Roe-K.

Hear it people.  We have no more money and things are gonna have to change.  And one of those things is that people who used to have the State pay for things are now going to have to pay for those things themselves!

Some will say that this is a pay cut, but I disagree.  It’s not a pay cut.  After all, it can’t be a pay cut if you didn’t count it as pay to begin with!

Continue reading

Did Sexist Men Make Education Better?

I write part time -Trying to write full time- over at The Constitution Club.  I’m cross  posting this here:

I’m gonna be upfront here. Don’t read this if you are faint of heart or can’t handle true things. There are gonna be things called facts strewn about and they may hurt.

I’m just sayin’.

I remember awhile back tellin’ my wife that I thought she was one of the reasons that our education system isn’t doing as well as we would like.

She looked at me and asked “Why?”

I said, “Because you are a woman.”

I had to walk home, but I have my reasons.

Continue reading