Now...how much of that is because of taxes, and how much of it is because of simple policy changes? I think it's going too far to say "well, taxes are responsible". Policy and changes to laws certainly have a hand in that. It sounds like what this ultimately comes down to is people's opinions on what they feel they should be paying for in taxes. I personally don't believe that people should be taxed more based on their income. Because, by that logic, I shouldn't pay anything in taxes because I'm poor. That just strikes me as wrong. Like you, I don't like paying taxes (in fact, I spent about $150 last night at Barnes & Noble, and paid a full $10 in sales tax...and that REALLY bugs the fuck out of me), but...I recognize that they are a necessary evil. Vancouver is as good as it is BECAUSE we have that sales tax (8.4%). I'm off to watch the game. Go Blazers.
Somebody needs to pay for the good teachers, excellent new facilities, band programs etc... - it certainly does not come from the air. Mathematically, this does not make sense. You can not get water from the desert, you need to get it from the river. It is not fair that you get a much higher percentage of the water from the river than the desert, but it is a necessity. You can only tax the people that have money. But, it is not as if the people that are taxed get nothing from it. Let's be fair, without society, these people would not be rich. They need the people to work in their companies and consume their services. Without people to work for them or buy the stuff their companies make, they will be poor too. If you need the services, you need to fund them - and since the poor can only pay very little - if everyone will only pay very little, you will not be able to fund the services, which means that you become a 3rd world country. I do not want to live in a 3rd world country, and I suspect you do not as well. I can assure you that the very wealthy are also not willing to live in a 3rd world country either (unless they are dictators, and there are only so many countries one can be a dictator at...). As you pointed out, even tho you are not rich, you pay taxes by your consumption - via the sales tax. So, it is not like you are getting off with no taxes. But it does not make sense to expect you to pay as much as somebody that makes tons of money - and that's why we have income tax and capital gains tax etc..., and as I said, it is not as if these people are not rewarded for their investment in society, they are, that's how they became rich...
Income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes.... All super high. Why do Cali public schools suck? It's an honest question. We were paying $11K in property taxes for our house in West Linn. We had a ton of parks, green spaces, great schools, etc. We considered moving to Cali (my wife is from SoCal and talked us out of all of Cali) but the three taxes are so high, and anywhere with semi-affordable homes (but much smaller than we were in), the public schools sucked. We're out where we are now, and pay small property tax, the kids are in a top-ranked public elementary school, and our utilities are allegedly the lowest on the west coast.
This is another thing that puzzles me. When I was in public school in the 90s in San Jose, the school I went to was a total ghetto school full of swearing teachers, poor policies, and terrible structure. My 4th grade teacher routinely swore and shouted, and one student even got up, swore, and left right in the middle of class one day, and then walked home. Just got up, walked out the door, and went home. Nobody stopped him, nobody called anyone....just let him go. And this wasn't even a terrible neighborhood either. It was rough in places (not far from from the school was an apartment complex that I grew up in until I was 6 that was VERY rough), but not "inner cities" rough. If Sartorette Elementary is an example of what the rest of California Public Schools are like, then the politicians of that State should be ashamed. Hopefully they've cleaned it up since I was a student there. Not many great memories of that place.
Stalin's daughter lives in Portland. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/03/31/my-friend-stalins-daughter?mbid=social_facebook
Data is your friend - CA seems to do a lot better than OR and WA (3rd in the nation overall): https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-states-compare If you actually go into the data and filter by public schools only - CA is even higher: 48 of 316 gold star schools (15%) and 293 of 1819 silver star schools (16%).
It's important to keep that in perspective: 2,099 eligible schools in California compared to Washington and Oregon 463 and 292 respectively. That's due to population numbers, of which California has a FAR higher population than most of Oregon and Washington combined.
California is not 30% of the country's population, but it has 30% of the country's public gold and silver star high schools. But, your point stands. If we look at number of public schools within the state: OR - Gold: 2 / 262 < 0.8%, Silver: 32 / 262 > 12% WA - Gold: 6 / 477 > 1.2%, Silver: 59 /477 > 12% CA - Gold: 48 / 1796 > 2.6%, Silver: 293 / 1896 > 16% The data still paints CA public schools in a pretty good light.
Boy, it sure wasn't that way when I was a child in San Jose. I saw three schools total just within several miles of where I lived that were either old and run down, or just lacked proper structure and leadership (like the one I attended). My mother was the cafeteria manager of a nearby elementary school (not the one I attended), and it seemed okay, but there was also one within walking distance of where I lived, and it was beyond awful. The building was run-down and everything around it was dead. Even the playground equipment was rusty and falling apart. And it was still in use, IIRC. Granted, perhaps things have changed over the years. This was, after all, over 20 years ago. And I'm quite sure that advancements in education in general have played a big part in that.
I am certain that there are many bad schools yet, just like in any other state. But, overall, the premise that California public schools are bad in general is just not true, and percentage wise, California is better than most states. FWIW - I lived in Marin county (North of the GG bridge) and my kids attended a public elementary school there, and I currently live in San Diego county and my kids attended an elementary school, a middle school and now a high-school. Each and every one of these schools was exceptional. In my opinion, the elementary school in Marin was the best they ever attended, the one in San Diego County was as good as or better than the 2 elementary schools they attended in Portland. The Middle School and High school are both on another level entirely - they are both amazing.
This reminds me of how I felt when I moved up here with my family in 1995. It was like night-and-day, the quality of schools and basic infrastructure of Vancouver verses that of San Jose. It was like stepping in to a whole new world. The first school I attended when we moved here was the then-new state-of-the-art Eleanor Roosevelt Elementary in central Vancouver. I had never seen a nicer building in my life. All enclosed, with no outside hallways, and lush green grass on the field? State-of-the-art computers? Clean hallways and organized classrooms? Amazing! Then my family moved to east Vancouver, Cascade Park, in about 1996 or 1997, and I attended the 6th grade there at a small, older school before going to a larger middle school and then high school. All were exceptional quality schools. That's what I love about Vancouver so much: it never really took on the big-city feel of Portland, it's still relatively small and conservative in places, but it also balances taxes with good infrastructure (mind you, parts of 4th Plain Blvd aren't very nice), and has the modern feel of a larger city, with newer businesses and business parks. I will say this though: West Vancouver is quite different than East Vancouver. Much of the neighborhoods there are older and not as well-kept, but as for the schools, they are still pretty good.
