cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
henrikstudson
Senior Contributor

Question for BA

Just wondering your take on Iowa new legislation on help funding tuition for private schools.  

I wouldn’t think it would affect the rural school district’s financial situation much as private schools are mostly located near larger cities.   Could lead to higher property taxes for certain districts though. 

14 Replies

Re: Question for BA

Lots of ‘em out in the rural areas and this will provide nutrients for scores more to sprout up.  

After spending 65 years just a short drive away, I’m not certain that the land of Jim Leach and Tom Harkin can be salvaged.  

BA Deere
Honored Advisor

Re: Question for BA

From my observation most rural Iowa and southern Minnesota public schools are equal or superior to  STP/MPLS  or Bay Area private schools.   That however is subject to change, so 1 year from now don`t hold me to that opinion.  

The thing with private schools is the parents pay their property taxes, funding the public school district, then if the school is crap they get no break on their taxes, plus they have the private school tuition if that`s where they send their kids.

I don`t know the details on the Iowa deal yet, I heard pat Grassley changed the rules to get it done.  My caution is if a private school takes public funding, in the future the fine print might be they have to teach woke propaganda because they took that money?    So, maybe it`s a "plot" to destroy private schools?

Re: Question for BA

The Arkansas action is where the Bullhead eaters want to be. 

sdholloway56
Esteemed Advisor

Re: Question for BA

Collateral damage from their beloved caucuses.

They turn on the teevee every four years to nonstop reminders of how wunnerful they all are.

Keystone of the farm welfare complex, though.

Packard27
Senior Contributor

Re: Question for BA: School vouchers?

 

I cannot comment on Iowa, or its proposals for using taxpayer dollars to provide private school stipends.  I can, however, reveal a dirty little secret from Washington, DC’s wealthiest and most exclusive private schools (e.g. Sidwell Friends, Georgetown Day, St. Albans, Bullis, Gonzaga, et.), and their long held views of public school vouchers.

The money itself, public, private or otherwise, is mostly irrelevant to the elite schools. Washington, DC could double or even triple the voucher amounts and the exclusive schools would still resist enrolling any more than a token number of inner city kids.

This is because each school’s administrators and their respective board of directors fully understands this one point. Their paying customer parents are not shelling out $50K/year/kid in order to have their own kid sitting next to some poor indigenous urban child whose own literacy and numeracy competency is far below grade level. Such underperforming kids are seen as deadweight to the entire learning process and a threat to their own children’s education.

Everyone in power in DC’s elite schools, of course, will always talk a good game about the plight of the poor child and the dire need for universal quality education. It is just that these same people do not want, nor will they accept, those sorts of children in their own schools. After all, that is why they are elite...don’t you know?

And so it goes for MAGA (Microsoft-Apple-Google-Amazon) Democrats in Washington, DC. So it has always gone.

 

dwillinois
Senior Contributor

Re: Question for BA


@henrikstudson wrote:

Just wondering your take on Iowa new legislation on help funding tuition for private schools.  

I wouldn’t think it would affect the rural school district’s financial situation much as private schools are mostly located near larger cities.   Could lead to higher property taxes for certain districts though. 


Whats your take on the morbidly obese JB Prickster  un constitutional "assault" weapons ban and his Safe T act that requires no cash bail for murderers and rapist among many other items in there.

We know how the leftist scum view private schools unless its their own kids of course

henrikstudson
Senior Contributor

Re: Question for BA

I strongly support the gun law Dippy but also realize it won’t do much.  Guess you will be able to keep your arsenal of assault weapons as long as you register them.  Isn’t a gun registered when you buy it?

 

As for the safe t act, believe they took it too far.   Probably comes back to bite us in the *****.  

dwillinois
Senior Contributor

Re: Question for BA


@henrikstudson wrote:

I strongly support the gun law Dippy but also realize it won’t do much.  Guess you will be able to keep your arsenal of assault weapons as long as you register them.  Isn’t a gun registered when you buy it?

 

As for the safe t act, believe they took it too far.   Probably comes back to bite us in the *****.  


What is the weapons ban accomplishing and if the safe T act will bites us in the a s s why are law abiding citizen always the ones punished by democrats, Sh`itcago and it "youth" problem are not  following any laws and most gun crimes are committed by had guns not the dreaded AR

henrikstudson
Senior Contributor

Re: Question for BA

I understand what they are trying to do with the safe t act.  Well documented that non whites receive higher bail amounts than whites as well as length of sentences if found guilty.   Instead of no bail money required to making punishments equal across the board would be better.   Those with the financial resources usually end up getting a slap on the wrist while the less fortunate get locked up for the same offense.   

As for the second amendment, will agree with the founding fathers, you should be able to have all the muskets and flintlocks you want. Illinois ban will fail when you have the conservative states next to it that wants guns in the hands of every citizen including 6 year olds.  A nationwide ban would work better.