First of three Iowa Republican flat tax plans wins approval

Apr 18, 2021
2,285
1,682
113
44
Buckhead GA
I did some research into exactly how much tuition costs at places like Regina and then compared them to the public costs. The Regina information was found from a PDF on tuition rates from the Diocese of Davenport for 20-21 school year, the other from US Public Education Spending.

Regina K-6th - $9,630 a year.
Regina 7-8th - $11,915 a year.
Regina 9-12th - $17,995 a year.

Iowa Public K-12th - $11,656 is spent a year. 3.96% of our state taxes go towards public education so a 4% flat tax would absolutely cripple public education. One thing to note is that nothing was listed for how many students were special education needs students, I suspect if that was removed it would be even cheaper.

Btw, stop bringing CRT into the discussion. CRT being taught in elementary/middle/high school is a red herring made up to scare gullible fools. CRT is only being taught in a high-level college course and would be something a regular Bachelor's degree wouldn't even sniff at. It would only be seen at the Masters or Ph.D. level.
Liberal babbling.
 

kcnole63

All-Conference
Jan 11, 2021
492
617
93
Why is it a punishment? I don't understand this feeling of grievance.

You are INVESTING in a society/community/government structure that is designed to support your business, your livelihood, etc. Better schools mean better and smarter workers. A better environment means better recreational opportunities, safer drinking water, etc., etc.

A real world example: Mrs. Torbee's company has a fleet of trucks that take product between branches in 3 states. Better infrastructure means less wear-and-tear on the trucks, less frequent replacement, etc. A better healthcare system that is affordable for her workers means less days missed and higher efficiency from workers. Those types of expenditures by government save money to businesses and individuals in the long term.

My wife and I are in a fairly high tax bracket here in Iowa -- but Iowa has been a FANTASTIC place for us to raise our family and for us to work and build wealth. We want to see it remain fantastic -- and since we can afford it, we don't feel overly burdened by being asked to contribute more than others who have not been as privileged or lucky or - gasp - even as hardworking as we have. We consider it part and parcel of being good citizens.
\
Too bad more people don't feel the same you do. BTW, I feel the same way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: torbee

your_master5

HR All-American
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2002
4,291
1,471
113
Private schools are for-profit schools. I don't think public tax money should go to fattening some schools' bank account. Another aspect that I have a severe problem with is that a lot of private schools are religious-based. Public tax money should not be funding Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, etc schools.
No concern about the billions to Pfizer and Moderna? No concern about Planned Parenthood? How about all the banks? Shall we go on? Tax money follows the kid. Kid goes where they want. Not really that hard.
 

your_master5

HR All-American
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2002
4,291
1,471
113
The CR Municipal golf courses are a pretty good value, especially if you play a lot and get a season pass. And, the last time I heard, the City loses money on the golf courses.

So, as a golfer, how about giving me that money the City spends on golf courses so I can join CRCC? Shouldn't all Iowa golfers be treated the same?

:rolleyes:
Didn't know golfing was a rite of passage in one's life like you know graduating and getting an education. Maybe rethink your false equivalency argument.....
 

Hawk_4shur

HR Legend
Jan 2, 2009
14,960
19,589
113
Didn't know golfing was a rite of passage in one's life like you know graduating and getting an education. Maybe rethink your false equivalency argument.....
Well, I'm not saying it's equivalent, but it's not that far off. Government provides certain services to the general public, but the money they spend to provide these services isn't portable.

It's an option to take advantage of taxpayer supported services or use private providers. Why should the government pay for both?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman

your_master5

HR All-American
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2002
4,291
1,471
113
Well, I'm not saying it's equivalent, but it's not that far off. Government provides certain services to the general public, but the money they spend to provide these services isn't portable.

It's an option to take advantage of taxpayer supported services or use private providers. Why should the government pay for both?
The argument is not for funding private providers. The argument is funding the child. Not really sure how you folks don't get this. For the sake of example, each kid gets $1k/month for education. How it gets spent is on them/parents. Why can't the parents make the choice? What's your argument?
 

HawkNester

HR MVP
Gold Member
Oct 17, 2001
1,887
3,215
113
Bay Area, CA
The argument is not for funding private providers. The argument is funding the child. Not really sure how you folks don't get this. For the sake of example, each kid gets $1k/month for education. How it gets spent is on them/parents. Why can't the parents make the choice? What's your argument?
LMAO! Yeah ok. Do some reading before you spout off with dumb statements.

I’m on the front lines of this and very well connected and versed. I’m not going to waste my time educating you on the nuisances, but he’s not even close in his article on ways to better our education system.
 

your_master5

HR All-American
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2002
4,291
1,471
113
I’m on the front lines of this and very well connected and versed. I’m not going to waste my time educating you on the nuisances, but he’s not even close in his article on ways to better our education system.
This seems like a real appeal to authority argument. You posted how I wasn't versed in the constitution, then didn't provide any reasoning as to why. If you can't backup your statements, they are hollow. Same for the reasons why you don't think what was portrayed in the article will work. Your "waste my time" schtick is just an excuse and lazy.
 

HawkNester

HR MVP
Gold Member
Oct 17, 2001
1,887
3,215
113
Bay Area, CA
This seems like a real appeal to authority argument. You posted how I wasn't versed in the constitution, then didn't provide any reasoning as to why. If you can't backup your statements, they are hollow. Same for the reasons why you don't think what was portrayed in the article will work. Your "waste my time" schtick is just an excuse and lazy.
Wrong, what’s lazy is coming on a message board, posting a single article from a white guy and then spewing it as gospel.
 

your_master5

HR All-American
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2002
4,291
1,471
113
Wrong, what’s lazy is coming on a message board, posting a single article from a white guy and then spewing it as gospel.
Nice work on the race card. Just sick minded bringing race into it as though this person can't possibly be versed into any issues of minorities. Nobody spewed anything as gospel, this is the position outlined by the conservatives. You seem to really suck at arguing based upon talking points and go with typical liberal tactics of attack mode.
 

Hawk_4shur

HR Legend
Jan 2, 2009
14,960
19,589
113
The argument is not for funding private providers. The argument is funding the child. Not really sure how you folks don't get this. For the sake of example, each kid gets $1k/month for education. How it gets spent is on them/parents. Why can't the parents make the choice? What's your argument?
"Us folks" completely understand your argument, we just don't agree with it.

As I have tried to explain, government funded services are not redeemable in cash. If my neighborhood doesn't like the way the City plows the snow on our street, we can't get a voucher from the city to hire a private company to do it. I don't get to decide that I'd rather beef up my own fire and security system by asking for my share of the cash that the City spends on Police and Fire departments.

The reason that is the way it works, is because it's more efficient for the government to plan, organize, construct and staff the departments of streets, fire and police, than it is for each member of the community to figure out how to get those services on their own.

In addition, a huge amount of the cost of public schools and City departments are fixed costs. Buildings and equipment are a big portion of the monthly "cost". The remaining costs are "semi-variable", meaning that the costs don't go down when one student or 1 customer for City services decides on an alternative.

A few years ago CR School district's enrollment was close to 17,000 students attending 31 different schools. If 3 students from each public school wanted to transfer to a private school, the public school costs would hardly change. So if the funding for those kids ($93,000/mo in your example) that the public school will lose simply cuts into the total funding for the school without a corresponding reduction in their costs.

BTW, if the government starts funding for "each child", then do I get some of my property tax money back since I no longer have kids in school?