DYSFUNCTIONAL, DISHONEST, INSANE & INTOLERABLE

[Ren]

[quote=flu]I don’t get some of you folks. On one hand, some of you argue that the decline of the education is due to immigrants because immigrants pull the curve down. On the other hand, some of you also argue that certain immigrants are making schools overly competitive to the point that you don’t like the schools being so competitive for your own kids. So which is it?????[/quote]

Both 🙂

The former is worse, though. I don’t want my kids in the same class with kids who are incapable of learning and therefore occupy themselves with distracting the kids who do.

I also don’t want my kids surrounded by the product of tiger moms (who, IMO, are sacrificing good childhood memories for a slightly increased chance at later success, which is APPALLING), damaging their self-worth because I refuse to make them endure 6 hours of homework and music lessons every night.

The only answer is segregation! But seriously, I have an answer for myself (pick the district that suits me), but those with lesser incomes don’t always have that choice.

[Coronita]

[quote=craptcha]Then there is this concerned parent arguing against mandatory year of chemistry for his son.

Because “his son will not be a scientist”, “He’s a really smart kid, just not in chemistry” and the dad wants to spare his son from a year long torture.[/quote]

Sorry, this is racist to say. But, I would say most Asian immigrant parent would never be caught dead doing something like this. So all you arguing “immigrants are pulling down the curve” sort of people and take that one to the bank….

I can see the same author of this article about also arguing against “financial management” in school a public school, despite a lot of people this country desperately needing that for some esoteric reasons. (and again… it wouldn’t be an Asian immigrant parent either….After all, credit cards/buy now pay later mentality/and making $50 minimum payments while the bank’s excessive interest compound are really an invention in this country, not nearly as popular overseas..).

[Coronita]

[quote=Ren][quote=flu]I don’t get some of you folks. On one hand, some of you argue that the decline of the education is due to immigrants because immigrants pull the curve down. On the other hand, some of you also argue that certain immigrants are making schools overly competitive to the point that you don’t like the schools being so competitive for your own kids. So which is it?????[/quote]

Both 🙂

The former is worse, though. I don’t want my kids in the same class with kids who are incapable of learning and therefore occupy themselves with distracting the kids who do.

I also don’t want my kids surrounded by the product of tiger moms (who, IMO, are sacrificing good childhood memories for a slightly increased chance at later success, which is APPALLING), damaging their self-worth because I refuse to make them endure 6 hours of homework and music lessons every night.

The only answer is segregation! But seriously, I have an answer for myself (pick the district that suits me), but those with lesser incomes don’t always have that choice.[/quote]

Ren,

I got news for you…You go to any any top notch school, with parents from the same social/economic background, the parents end up being all the same.

It’s not just the asian immigrants that are doing this. The asian tiger mom stereotype, though exists, is very much alive in a well-do white family too.

My kid that goes to the same CarmelV elementary school that has white friends who parents are doctors and lawyers and engineers who are very much in as much a tiger-mom/dad as any other asian tiger parent.

What’s more interesting on my observation is that while among the asian families I know where both parents both a full time job, a lot of the well-to-do white families have a stay-at-home parent, which spends almost the ENTIRE DAY shuffling the kid around from school to enrichment programs to sports to everything else they possibly can cram into one day…The say stay-at-home parent are the ones that constantly volunteer as class parent (which I find admirable, frankly) because they want to know what their kids are doing. And they were the first ones that approached the teacher and told the teacher “the work you are assigning is too easy for my kid, my kid is bored. And if you don’t make the work more challenging for my kid, it’s going to be a problem.”
So I’m not sure why some folks think this entire tiger-parent thing is strictly an asian thing. If at all, it’s more of a social/economic thing.

[Coronita]

Hey…But these days, you can get college credits for speaking to the dead!!!!!

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t3#/video/us/2012/10/22/radford-university-offers-course-on-reaching-out-to-dead.wdbj
Lol…

I don’t know what’s more disturbing. The “course” is actually offered, or CNN making it sound like it’s so cool…

I wonder is if there is Federal financial assistance for this sort of bullshit.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Ren][quote=flu]I don’t get some of you folks. On one hand, some of you argue that the decline of the education is due to immigrants because immigrants pull the curve down. On the other hand, some of you also argue that certain immigrants are making schools overly competitive to the point that you don’t like the schools being so competitive for your own kids. So which is it?????[/quote]

Both 🙂

The former is worse, though. I don’t want my kids in the same class with kids who are incapable of learning and therefore occupy themselves with distracting the kids who do.

I also don’t want my kids surrounded by the product of tiger moms (who, IMO, are sacrificing good childhood memories for a slightly increased chance at later success, which is APPALLING), damaging their self-worth because I refuse to make them endure 6 hours of homework and music lessons every night.

The only answer is segregation! But seriously, I have an answer for myself (pick the district that suits me), but those with lesser incomes don’t always have that choice.[/quote]

flu, I have a problem with the influx of foreign students being admitted to UC and CSU campuses (but mostly UC). In addition, BOTH UC and CSU admit a LOT of out-of-state students. Why? Because these students pay nearly triple the fees that in-state students do, and, after ten fee hikes since 2005, CSU is supposedly “broke.”

UC and CSU were created and set up to serve primarily native Californians and/or in-state-resident students. It is currently very difficult for mid-B and high-B-average HS grads to get accepted to a CA university as a freshman, due to all these “foreign” students taking their slots. Due to concurrent budget cuts, if all these “B” CA HS grads still won’t be able to get accepted into a major program of study (as a junior) at a UC/CSU campus (after completing GE’s at a “community college”), their only hope for finishing college is either private school (exorbitantly-priced Univ of Phoenix, for example) or leave the state and either pay out-of-state tuition there or take a break from school and work there for at least a year to establish residency before enrolling as a junior. The vast majority of CA families can’t afford out-of-state tuition, ESP if they will have more than one child attending college.

This situation is a bunch of BS, IMO. The “bar” is now ridiculously high for admission to many CA public university campuses. The avg CSU campus now wants a 3.91 HS GPA for an entering freshman!

A high school grad with a 3.5 to 3.75 GPA was not a “bad student.” I feel a “qualified” CA HS grad who attended all 13 years of their public school in CA “deserves” to be admitted to a university in their home state.

“Qualified” does not necessarily mean only 4.77 GPA HS grads (with multiple HS AP credits).

I don’t feel CA universities “owe” admission slots to foreigners and out-of-state students at the expense of deserving in-state students being admitted, whilst their parents are paying taxes to run these institutions. It is WRONG and other states realize the importance of giving their “own” HS grad-residents admission priority.

Even SUHSD’s well-known “Compact for Success” program was eliminated (guaranteed freshman admission to SDSU upon a 3.3 graduating GPA).

And Ren, picking a district that “suits you” will NOT enable you to control WHO attends your child’s school …. not even if you are able to choose a particular school within it. As a parent, you have no say in the matter and never will … even if you choose a private school for your child. Your “family income” makes no difference.

All parents who think they can (or will be able to) “cherry-pick” their kid’s classmates need to put their “control freakery” by the wayside and allow their children to experience “diversity.”

Or, you can try your hand at “home-schooling.” And good luck :=)

Take your pick.

[Ren]

[quote=flu]
Ren,

I got news for you…You go to any any top notch school, with parents from the same social/economic background, the parents end up being all the same.

It’s not just the asian immigrants that are doing this. The asian tiger mom stereotype, though exists, is very much alive in a well-do white family too.

My kid that goes to the same CarmelV elementary school that has white friends who parents are doctors and lawyers and engineers who are very much in as much a tiger-mom/dad as any other asian tiger parent.

What’s more interesting on my observation is that while among the asian families I know where both parents both a full time job, a lot of the well-to-do white families have a stay-at-home parent, which spends almost the ENTIRE DAY shuffling the kid around from school to enrichment programs to sports to everything else they possibly can cram into one day…The say stay-at-home parent are the ones that constantly volunteer as class parent (which I find admirable, frankly) because they want to know what their kids are doing. And they were the first ones that approached the teacher and told the teacher “the work you are assigning is too easy for my kid, my kid is bored. And if you don’t make the work more challenging for my kid, it’s going to be a problem.”
So I’m not sure why some folks think this entire tiger-parent thing is strictly an asian thing. If at all, it’s more of a social/economic thing.[/quote]

When I refer to tiger moms, I mean those that literally force their kids to do 6+ hours of work every night, even at the expense of sleep. Not those parents who simply want their kids to maintain a 4.0, get into a decent college, and make them do the work necessary for that. I define success as happiness – not being a Harvard med grad AND an orchestra violinist with no memory of ever flying a kite in the park, unless that’s what will make them happy. Race has nothing to do with my opinion on the subject, but since you bring it up, I don’t doubt many rich white families make their kids go through that. I will be avoiding those schools, too.

[Coronita]

[quote=Ren][quote=flu]
Ren,

I got news for you…You go to any any top notch school, with parents from the same social/economic background, the parents end up being all the same.

It’s not just the asian immigrants that are doing this. The asian tiger mom stereotype, though exists, is very much alive in a well-do white family too.

My kid that goes to the same CarmelV elementary school that has white friends who parents are doctors and lawyers and engineers who are very much in as much a tiger-mom/dad as any other asian tiger parent.

What’s more interesting on my observation is that while among the asian families I know where both parents both a full time job, a lot of the well-to-do white families have a stay-at-home parent, which spends almost the ENTIRE DAY shuffling the kid around from school to enrichment programs to sports to everything else they possibly can cram into one day…The say stay-at-home parent are the ones that constantly volunteer as class parent (which I find admirable, frankly) because they want to know what their kids are doing. And they were the first ones that approached the teacher and told the teacher “the work you are assigning is too easy for my kid, my kid is bored. And if you don’t make the work more challenging for my kid, it’s going to be a problem.”
So I’m not sure why some folks think this entire tiger-parent thing is strictly an asian thing. If at all, it’s more of a social/economic thing.[/quote]

When I refer to tiger moms, I mean those that literally force their kids to do 6+ hours of work every night, even at the expense of sleep. Not those parents who simply want their kids to maintain a 4.0, get into a decent college, and make them do the work necessary for that. I define success as happiness – not being a Harvard med grad AND an orchestra violinist with no memory of ever flying a kite in the park, unless that’s what will make them happy. Race has nothing to do with my opinion on the subject, but since you bring it up, I don’t doubt many rich white families make their kids go through that. I will be avoiding those schools, too.[/quote]

Where do people get the impression that tiger parents spend 6+hrs on homework? I think that’s a stereotype in itself. They’ll probably spend some time on homework, and then split the time with things like an instrument (piano or violin) something activity like skating or soccer and some homework. It’s no different than a soccer mom that drops their kid off of some afterschool learning program for 3 hours, then have them go to Sharks soccer practice, etc. And, yes some of the white upper income families spend as much time getting their kids enriched as asian parents do..In fact, I know because some of the same white parents asked me about the same enrichment programs other asian parents send their kids to that I don’t..They ask about kumon, and they ask about the math/science enrichment programs that teach korean and/or chinese, and they ask about if the programs are there on weekends in the afternoon, after their kid is done with golf/tennis/soccer or what have you in the morning. And frankly, I haven’t even heard of a lot of the enrichment programs they mention.

So, I don’t see any difference whatsoever.

[Coronita]

[quote=bearishgurl]
flu, I have a problem with the influx of foreign students being admitted to UC and CSU campuses (but mostly UC). In addition, BOTH UC and CSU admit a LOT of out-of-state students. Why? Because these students pay nearly triple the fees that in-state students do, and, after ten fee hikes since 2005, CSU is supposedly “broke.”

UC and CSU were created and set up to serve primarily native Californians and/or in-state-resident students. It is currently very difficult for mid-B and high-B-average HS grads to get accepted to a CA university as a freshman, due to all these “foreign” students taking their slots. Due to concurrent budget cuts, if all these “B” CA HS grads still won’t be able to get accepted into a major program of study (as a junior) at a UC/CSU campus (after completing GE’s at a “community college”), their only hope for finishing college is either private school (exorbitantly-priced Univ of Phoenix, for example) or leave the state and either pay out-of-state tuition there or take a break from school and work there for at least a year to establish residency before enrolling as a junior. The vast majority of CA families can’t afford out-of-state tuition, ESP if they will have more than one child attending college.

This situation is a bunch of BS, IMO. The “bar” is now ridiculously high for admission to many CA public university campuses. The avg CSU campus now wants a 3.91 HS GPA for an entering freshman!

A high school grad with a 3.5 to 3.75 GPA was not a “bad student.” I feel a “qualified” CA HS grad who attended all 13 years of their public school in CA “deserves” to be admitted to a university in their home state.

“Qualified” does not necessarily mean only 4.77 GPA HS grads (with multiple HS AP credits).

I don’t feel CA universities “owe” admission slots to foreigners and out-of-state students at the expense of deserving in-state students being admitted, whilst their parents are paying taxes to run these institutions. It is WRONG and other states realize the importance of giving their “own” HS grad-residents admission priority.

Even SUHSD’s well-known “Compact for Success” program was eliminated (guaranteed freshman admission to SDSU upon a 3.3 graduating GPA).

[/quote]

Welcome to the real world. When resources are scarce, this is such a thing as “competition”.
Whether it’s performance or financial capacity to pay for an education etc…And whether you like it or not, that’s how increasing the world is becoming in every aspect of your life.

Let’s put this in perspective…If people in state are willing to pay a lot more for the tuition, they wouldn’t need to recruit so many people from out of state to pay for education short. But obviously, people aren’t willing to do that. Meanwhile, the state have a severe budget crisis because of the plethora of social entitlement programs and general mismanagement, and yet when anyone is asked to take a cut, everyone who enjoys those benefits immediately will aren’t willing to give it up (from unemployment benefits, welfare, pensions, you name it)….Then, there’s the proposal to raise state taxes, which obviously taxpayers aren’t willing to do…So what is the state suppose to do? Everyone wants to have everything they way it was before, when there was funny money, not realizing everything was bought on credit. Now credit is due, and no one can pay, yet no one is willing to pay more.

*Are you willing to pay more for your kids education so that the school doesn’t need to recruit out of state more?
*Are you willing to give up your state/federal funded pension?
*Are you willing to pay more taxes to support the bloated CA budget?

So naturally, CA is going turn to people who can afford to pay…And apparently, that is people who are overseas who can afford to pay…

Be thankful that at least the schools have at least some academic standard before it admits people…Be thankful that you’re not asian and your kids aren’t asian, because as unfair as you really think it is, it’s not nearly as bad as asians in this country have had to put up with this sort of bullshit crap in admissions policies in which there are quotas against asians for admissions into a lot of the programs, now even more so because those limited slots that were available to asian americans are not going to foreign asians who can pay out of state tuitions. The rest of you not subject to these ridiculous quota rules have not nearly as many reasons to complain about this predicament as a lot of other people with anti-quotas have…

Sorry, you have a problem with people that are overachievers. I’m not sure why some folks will pay say that “grades don’t matter”, and then later on complain when in some cases they do. Afterall, if people really don’t believe grades matter (as a lot of people say) then it’s none of your business whether foreigners have a 3.9, can outscore others in math/science/technology or not…It doesn’t matter, because learning is suppose to be a a self-pace/self-competition anyway. And as I said before, if getting into a decent school isn’t not necessary (going to college is not necessary), who cares what foreigners are doing here.

I think it’s kinda ironic that it seems like a lot of you are experiencing this sort of increased competition for scarce resources for the first time…A lot of us specifically that work in the tech private sector has had to deal with this throughout most of entire career…Everything from education to even on the job where everyone wants things more, cheaper, faster all the time…. Is this really so surprising that it’s happening now that resources in general are more limited?

[bearishgurl]

flu, I believe educating our own residents is more important than choosing to educate foreign or out-of-state residents instead (taking our OWN residents’ slots).

In another vein, I also don’t agree with the US participating in foreign wars at a HUGE financial cost and sacrifice of our young people, while we have millions of people in this country who live in “food deserts” and are medically uninsured.

Our state and country’s priorities need to be focused on our own people. Other states and countries prioritize their own “citizens and residents” over outsiders so why doesn’t CA and the US?

In the case of CA public universities, the deans, dept heads and instructors need to get off their high horses and settle for less retirement pay for their 12-32 hr workweeks, eight months per year. A big part of the reason for rate hikes and budget cuts is because the state has to fund these ~exorbitant~ academic pensions which are way higher than other types of rank-and-file gov’t pensions in CA. This creates the slippery slope where the campuses begin recruiting elsewhere (and admitting students left and right from out of state/country for extra revenue). Meanwhile, there are less and less admission slots to fill every year due to the cuts.

Ask yourself why public universities in states in the midwest and southwest aren’t as impacted as they are in CA? Ask yourself why it is so much easier for an in-state student from one of these states (KS, AR, OK, TX, NM, AZ, for example) to be admitted to one of their own public universities than it is in CA. It’s very likely that these states don’t pay out these ridiculously-high pensions to their university staff members. Are these schools lesser schools than CA public universities? NO! In many ways they are better because a student can actually graduate in four years without constantly crashing desperately-needed classes of 500+ students and repeatedly being turned away semester after semester.

Even once admitted to a CA public university, a student has no guarantee of actually graduating there (thru no fault of their own) in the major field of study that they decided to attend it for in the first place! He/she may very well have to attend other campuses to get all the needed credits or take much longer to finish, costing him/her 25-50% more to actually obtain the degree. It’s no wonder that many 20-somethings are saddled with exorbitant student debt upon finally graduating!

Being a public college student today in CA is akin to (unwittingly) participating in a (very expensive) “comedy of errors.”

It’s ridiculous. College isn’t a “career.” It is simply a means to begin a career.

flu, how should HS seniors of today who do not at least have a 3.9 GPA be advised by their counselors? Should they all be advised to pay for separate applications to 10+ schools to see if any spaghetti sticks to the ceiling? Should they all be advised to crowd into the CC’s and hope they will all be able to get all their (needed) GE’s there, along with the rest of the masses? Can the CC’s accomodate all these students?? How many of these assoc degree holders do you think will actually be later admitted as juniors in CA public universities? Do you think HS counselors should begin recommending ROP (training in the trades) and cosmetology school (like they did in the ’60’s and ’70’s)?

Given that we can’t expect CA HS graduates with a ~3.7 GPA (or lower) to get accepted to a public university in CA in the future, what’s the solution for this crowd (90%+ of current HS grads)??

And why do all these foreign students from Asia want to attend school in CA (at great expense)? Don’t they have good colleges to apply to over there?

[flyer]

Whether you’re a “Tiger Mom or Dad,” (and I agree with flu, those terms can apply to people of all races and cultures) or any other type of parent, in the end, the proof of success will lie in whether your kids achieve their goals in life or not.

As someone with grown children, I’m seeing it from the “other side of the equation,” and, in at least 50% of the families of our kids peers (many raised in RSF, CV, DM, etc., etc.) it’s not a pretty picture.

Many parents we talk to about their grown kids have found that even though they crossed every “t” and dotted every “i,” there were still elements (attitude, personality, competition, etc., etc.) in the real world that were out of their control.

You can micromanage your kids, but you can’t micromanage the world they live in, so all you can do is the very best you can, and hope it all works out for them.

[Coronita]

[quote=bearishgurl]flu, I believe educating our own residents is more important than choosing to educate foreign or out-of-state residents instead (taking our OWN residents’ slots).
[/quote]

I’m not going to copy the entire post, because I don’t think you answered my question.

I’ll ask again

1. California is broke.
2. California apparently has huge entitlement programs that it cannot afford to pay (pensions, assistance for the poor, benefits for folks that do not have legal authorization to be here,unemployment insurance, etc,etc,etc,etc)
2. California’s budget that once subsidized schools is getting cut.
3. School costs are going up…..
4. CA residence who already has lower tuition than anyone out of state already complained that their tuitions are going up.
5. CA government wants to raise taxes…but most people are going to object
6. CA government can try to cut entitlement programs, but pension holders/entitlement beneficiaries complain.
————————————-

WHERE ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE MONEY FROM TO PAY FOR THIS, BESIDES FOREIGNERS WHO HAVE MONEY TO PAY FOR FULL TUITION????

You now a lot of people like say how “things should be”, “how fair/unfair” something is…Irrelevant Let’s do a reality check….ok??? Everything boils down to MONEY and WHO’S PAYING FOR THE BILL..

I know it’s a concept that many Americans have a problem grasping…Particularly since a lot of Americans are use to spending money they borrow and don’t have…But eventually, at sometime, someone has to pay the bills. For CA, BILL DUE…
—————————————

BG, if you want CA schools to have less students foreign students with stellar credentials and whos parents has a boatload of money to pay full tuition in CA, then please choose one or more of the following, so that SOMEONE pays for the bills other then the foreign students who’s full tuition are SUBSIDIZING the shortfall for in-state-tuition students.

1. If you have a CA public pension, please organize to shrink your and your peer’s pension..Because CA cannot afford it anymore, and as a result, CA will cut the school budgets.

2. Please be willing to pay more property taxes to fund schools by campaigning to have have Prop13 repealed for everyone, INCLUDING primary residence…None of this selective bullshit about only hitting investment property, because the percentage of investment property versus owner occupied is still small in comparison

3. Please campaign to have the state sales tax raised to 10%.

4. Please campaign to cut benefits to non-legal residence in the state of CA

5. Please campaign to cut unemployment benefits in the state of CA

6. Please campaign to cut workers comp, state disability insurance.

7. Please campaign to have in-state tuitions raised by another 25-30%.

More than likely more than 1 of the above things need to be done at the same time…

Otherwise, UC/CSU/community colleges will continue to get their budgets slashed, and the only way to make up for it is to get foreign students who can afford to pay full tuition to subsidize the shortfall.

——————
Like I said, I don’t think anyone are willing to make sacrifices #1-7…Folks want to eat the cake and have it too…So the default solution is to have foreign students pay the bills for every in-state tuition person…

Like I said, everyone is in it for themselves.

[bearishgurl]

I can’t right now but later this evening I want to show examples where in all of those states I mentioned, in-state university tuition is currently the same or lower than in CA. The last 10 fee hikes at CSU (abt 4-5 in the same time frame at UC) have equalized CA’s university “tuition” to other, less populous states. Those states also have illegal immigrants, TANF, people collecting UI, etc.

I vote we end the ~exorbitant~ attorney, court, jail and prison bills for non-violent “three-strikers” and also abolish CA’s death penalty (which is a bad joke unto itself, IMHO) by voting “yes” on Props 32 and 34.

I’m all for lobbying to repeal Prop 13 for all affected property owners except for the “original” owners who still occupy their affected properties which they have resided in since April 1978, until their deaths. However, my (or anyone else’s) “lobbying” won’t do any good due to our fine legislature allowing this perk (originally passed to keep senior citizens in their primary residences until their deaths) to be passed down to other family members via the (later-enacted) Props 58 and 193. There are now too many younger voters in CA who stand to be unjustly enriched from this (very expensive for the rest of us) perk for life and into perpetuity after they die. Prop 13 has now been allowed to feed on itself for nearly 35 years and for that reason it isn’t going anywhere.

If you’ve got any other ideas to put more money in CA’s coffers besides imploring your congressperson to lobby their brethren ad infinitum for more funds to reimburse CA for the effects of illegal immigration (which has been done and is being done, with mixed results), I’m all ears :=]

[CA renter]

[quote=flu]Which “immigrants” are people referring to when you mention “immigrants” are contributing to the decline of our education…

Because obviously, the non-english speaking immigrants here are pulling down the curve…

http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?cYear=2005-06&allcds=37680566117923

and here

http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?cYear=2005-06&allcds=37680560114686

and here

http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?cYear=2005-06&allcds=37680560114686

and here
http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?cYear=2005-06&allcds=37680566120596

I don’t get some of you folks. On one hand, some of you argue that the decline of the education is due to immigrants because immigrants pull the curve down. On the other hand, some of you also argue that certain immigrants are making schools overly competitive to the point that you don’t like the schools being so competitive for your own kids. So which is it????? Maybe the problem is just some folks just don’t like immigrants.[/quote]

flu,

Nobody’s saying that Asian immigrants are pulling down scores. Like I said above, it’s people who are coming from developing nations who are largely responsible for the declining outcomes in education — and these groups make up the majority of immigrants, especially in California. I’m willing to bet that the demographic shift in all of the districts with declining test scores will show that the number of students coming from more developed nations (and/or students of European heritage) has been shrinking vs. those coming from less developed nations.

The parents of most of these students are very good people, too, but they often lack the skills and knowledge that are passed from one generation to the next in more developed countries.

[CA renter]

[quote=flu][quote=bearishgurl]flu, I believe educating our own residents is more important than choosing to educate foreign or out-of-state residents instead (taking our OWN residents’ slots).
[/quote]

I’m not going to copy the entire post, because I don’t think you answered my question.

I’ll ask again

1. California is broke.
2. California apparently has huge entitlement programs that it cannot afford to pay (pensions, assistance for the poor, benefits for folks that do not have legal authorization to be here,unemployment insurance, etc,etc,etc,etc)
2. California’s budget that once subsidized schools is getting cut.
3. School costs are going up…..
4. CA residence who already has lower tuition than anyone out of state already complained that their tuitions are going up.
5. CA government wants to raise taxes…but most people are going to object
6. CA government can try to cut entitlement programs, but pension holders/entitlement beneficiaries complain.
————————————-

WHERE ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE MONEY FROM TO PAY FOR THIS, BESIDES FOREIGNERS WHO HAVE MONEY TO PAY FOR FULL TUITION????

You now a lot of people like say how “things should be”, “how fair/unfair” something is…Irrelevant Let’s do a reality check….ok??? Everything boils down to MONEY and WHO’S PAYING FOR THE BILL..

I know it’s a concept that many Americans have a problem grasping…Particularly since a lot of Americans are use to spending money they borrow and don’t have…But eventually, at sometime, someone has to pay the bills. For CA, BILL DUE…
—————————————

BG, if you want CA schools to have less students foreign students with stellar credentials and whos parents has a boatload of money to pay full tuition in CA, then please choose one or more of the following, so that SOMEONE pays for the bills other then the foreign students who’s full tuition are SUBSIDIZING the shortfall for in-state-tuition students.

1. If you have a CA public pension, please organize to shrink your and your peer’s pension..Because CA cannot afford it anymore, and as a result, CA will cut the school budgets.

2. Please be willing to pay more property taxes to fund schools by campaigning to have have Prop13 repealed for everyone, INCLUDING primary residence…None of this selective bullshit about only hitting investment property, because the percentage of investment property versus owner occupied is still small in comparison

3. Please campaign to have the state sales tax raised to 10%.

4. Please campaign to cut benefits to non-legal residence in the state of CA

5. Please campaign to cut unemployment benefits in the state of CA

6. Please campaign to cut workers comp, state disability insurance.

7. Please campaign to have in-state tuitions raised by another 25-30%.

More than likely more than 1 of the above things need to be done at the same time…

Otherwise, UC/CSU/community colleges will continue to get their budgets slashed, and the only way to make up for it is to get foreign students who can afford to pay full tuition to subsidize the shortfall.

——————
Like I said, I don’t think anyone are willing to make sacrifices #1-7…Folks want to eat the cake and have it too…So the default solution is to have foreign students pay the bills for every in-state tuition person…

Like I said, everyone is in it for themselves.[/quote]

Okay, not sure if you’re attempting to list these things in order from highest cost to lowest, but you’d be off (way off) if that’s what you’re trying to imply.

Firstly, penions comprise only 3-5% of the state’s budget, so even if you eliminated them altogether, it wouldn’t solve our budget problems. UC pensions have been self-funding almost since their inception.

The Prop 13 protection for properties *other than* primary residences is the majority expense of Prop 13. I believe the number of SFH’s in SD that are held as rental properties or second homes is around 57% of total SFHs. Owners of commercial properties that have been transferred through LLCs are the biggest beneficiaries of Prop 13, as they don’t even have to pay property taxes on their purchase price!

The reason Prop 13 passed was because people were told that it was designed to “keep granny from being taxed out of her home.” These are a small minority of those who benefit from Prop 13. This budget item is hardly minor; I’d say it’s one of the biggest (the biggest?) reasons for our financial problems at the state level. It certainly has more of an effect on our state budget than pensions (or worker’s comp, etc.) do.

You also need to understand that colleges and universities have been getting less and less public funding over the years. It is this reason — not pensions and pay — that is causing the tuition spikes. In addition to that, there is a major misallocation of resources at many college/university campuses. Read the link I posted, above.

[edit: the 57% number is coming from memory. I will try to confirm (not easily found), if you’d like, but won’t waste my time if nobody cares to read it…which is what happens most of the time when facts are presented.]

[CA renter]

Okay, tried to confirm, and think the 57% might have been owner-occupied (might have been investment properties + second homes). According to this, 45% of San Diego’s residents are renters. While many of these people are living in apartments, those apartment buildings enjoy the same Prop 13 protections as SFHs, and those benefits are passed directly on to the landlords since most landlords increase rents on a regular basis to whatever the market will bear.

We are subsidizing “investors,” which is very different from protecting people from being taxed out of their own homes due to speculators who regularly push prices of RE up in California. I sincerely doubt Prop 13 would have passed if it had been billed as a way to subsidize the profits of landlords and owners of commercial buildings at the expense of taxpayers (especially when their taxes aren’t even calculated on their purchase price, but the price paid by the original owners who formed the LLCs, which could have been decades ago!).

http://www.city-data.com/county/San_Diego_County-CA.html

More:

According to this, 62.4% of housing units in L.A. are renter-occupied. 52.1% of San Diego’s housing units are renter-occupied. [edited to add: 63% of San Francisco’s housing units are renter-occupied.] This includes some of California’s most expensive real estate.

Also, according to the same link, ~16% of California’s residents live in apartments, so many of those rentals are condos and SFHs.

http://www.nmhc.org/Content.cfm?ItemNumber=55508

We still haven’t dealt with the commercial/industrial properties or large plots of land that are being held by commercial interests (like Pardee, for instance). It also doesn’t account for owners of “vacation” homes, and there are quite a few of these owners sitting on very valuable property in CA. Are you still going to imply that Prop 13 protection for non-primary residences is insignificant?

How legal entities can avoid property tax reassessments:

http://www.realestateinvestorlaw.com/Articles/Using-Exclusions-To-Avoid-Reassessment.shtml

[Author]

Posts