Print
E-mail
Share
delicious
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitter
Related files
In letter to board, governor says he was generous last time -- he signed the biggest higher ed budget in history, he brags! -- but not this time. Read his letter at right.
Gibbons tells regents to take their increase and…..
Discussion: 68 comments so far...
Post a comment
Politics: Ralston's Flash
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Fourth fireworks light up valley sky
- Ensign’s pal lacked usual qualifications for job as senator’s senior aide
- Jay-Z lights up Las Vegas, lives life to the max
- Cousins attracting attention from college football recruiters
- Popular in their cities, could Reno or Las Vegas mayor be governor?
- Las Vegas to sizzle for the Fourth
- Strip performer is eBay high bidder for Elvis ring
- With success of Singapore campus, UNLV eyes United Arab Emirates
- Henderson house fire displaces family of three
- Swarm of crickets descends once again on Northern Nevada
Blogs
The Bull's-Eye
Real drama follows Desert Classic victory by 'The Power' (UPDATED)
Elsewhere
Spike TV's 'UFC's Ultimate 100: Greatest Fights' airs tonight
The Kats Report
LV Phil 'Spectacular' at Springs Preserve was great -- for the music
Punchy Points: UFC 100
No. 6: The Ref: Dean relishes role, making right calls (1 Comment)
The Bull's-Eye
Canadian is first in Desert Classic's final four, Barney joins him (UPDATED) (2 Comments)
Sports: Upon Further Review
July 4 at Wimbledon
The Kats Report
It's the fourth, it's the Phil, but it is not fireworks
Calendar
- Backyard BBQ at Bare Pool with Steve Aoki ( to )
- Dubfire of Deepdish at Prive (10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.)
- Fourth of July party at Charlie’s Lakeside Casino ( to )
- Brooklyn Bridge Beer Bash at NYNY (noon to 11:59 p.m.)
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Without some sort of reworked funding structure, or successful constitutional lawsuit, NSHE is in deep doodoo. The Economic Forum are a well-meaning bunch, but their optimism since 2006 has not been borne out... on the contrary.
The entire financial sector is now on the verge of collapse, and it's becoming increasingly clear that a major depression is inevitable at this point. The only question is when and how, i.e. will we enjoy deflation or hyperinflation. My own prediction is that the federal government will have to default sometime in the next few months as foreign nations make a run on U.S. debt. When that happens it will be game over for the dollar, we will print and a can of Coke will cost $20.
I suspect some way will be found to keep NSHE on life support through some sort of emergency funding scheme.
The solution is to tax-tax-tax businesses that are surviving by the thread.
They can just lay off more employees or even better go out of business.
That is an excellent solution to this problem.
The $100k+ professors need to be protected.
The Jane/Joe on the street can suffer.
Nance: Jane, Joe, and every business in NV aside from the repo man are about to get it in both holes. There is no avoiding it at this point and it's everyone's fault, including theirs and yours. That you deny any culpability and blame it on so and so almost strikes me as a little dishonest.
P.S. AIG is done. The virus is spreading.
I do not understand what you are saying.
Do you want to raise taxes on businesses that are barely staying alive?
WE have learned year after year. No matter how much money is sent to education the unions and administrators immediately start asking for more and pledging disaster if they don't get it.
Nance, what I am saying is that the economy is in the process of collapse and it's anyone's guess as to whether a dollar will be worth five cents by the end of this fiscal year (debt default), or whether dollars will be so scarce that nobody including the State of Nevada can find enough of them to fund anything (deflation). So, these discussions of far-off projections are probably moot.
I am OK with that statement.
neiman: A 5% cut is a cut. A 16% cut is seppuku. NSHE is not asking for a funding increase, recent symbolic posturing notwithstanding. They are asking not to be disembowled. Now, Nevada has a choice. It can find a way to maintain funding at some reasonable level to remain (or I should say become) remotely economically competitive. Or, it can cut its own nuts off.
Few people or businesses want to reside in a state with egregious taxation. And few people or businesses want to reside in a state full of untrained, illiterate morons. It's a delicate balance that other states have shown is possible to achieve. There are many reasons Nevada is not an economic powerhouse and for the most part, it's not the tax rate.
P.S. NSHE academics are not unionized. The $100k salaries that Nance cites are set by the free market, not by administrative largess.
Now, you are saying to want to tax businesses that are struggling.
I guess the Democratic Party does not care about the average Joe that might lose his job because of higher taxes.
alexant
I have some bad news for you. Nevada was not built by the NSHE. Cities and States all over this country have thrived without Systems of higher education. This city in particular survives on tourism. I say lets cut the NSHE budget by 50%. Let the students pay more, cut out millennium scholarships for illegals, send all remedial students back to public schools, make the sports program support itself, get rid of the do nothing professors and make all professors work eight hours daily five days weekly.
odog,
I defy you to name one city in America without a decent institution of higher education. Economic success and an educated populace go hand in hand. Try building a casino without a few engineers. Try running it without a few MBAs.
Nance: Please drop the rhetorical cheap shots and reread paragraph #2 of my comment from 9/15/08 at 9:49 p.m.
P.S. I am not a Democrat.
odog:
- Nevada was built by a number of entities, but its growth was certainly assisted by the NSHE. Ask any casino etc. that employs NSHE students whether they would rather train workers themselves, or relocate skilled workers from out of state at great expense. NSHE's positive economic impact is huge and indisputable. Most Nevada graduates stay in Nevada, earn in Nevada, and spend in Nevada.
- The Millennium Scholarship already requires U.S. citizenship.
- Basketball and football at UNLV are already self-supporting. The rest of the athletic department is not, but be careful what you wish for. If enough sports get cut it is conceivable that UNLV/UNR would have to pull out of the MWC, which would basically kill basketball and football. Both provide huge national exposure and are a prime attractant of academic talent and donor money.
- There is not a single professor in all of NSHE who works less than 45 hours per week, and most work at least 60.
Good posting, odog.
Alexant, I think I could find at least one professor in all of NSHE who work less than 45 hours per week.
If it comes down to a lost of private average everyday Joe losing his job because of higher taxes over NSHE not getting some fancy new program then I choose the average Joe not losing his job.
Alexant
The Millennium Scholarship IS available to illegal imigrates.
NRS 396.930 Eligibility requirements for Millennium Scholarship; duties and powers of Board of Regents; outreach to certain students. [Effective through June 30, 2008.]
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsections 2 and 3, a student may apply to the Board of Regents for a Millennium Scholarship if he:
(a) Has been a resident of this State for at least 2 years before he applies for the Millennium Scholarship;
There are no requirements for citizenship
Nance,
In response to your 1st paragraph: odog mentioned "do-nothing professors." This is a myth. It is impossible for any tenured or tenure-track prof to not work like hell and expect to keep their job. Frequently this means 60 hour weeks. 80 hours during crunch times. It is almost never 45. You must be kidding.
In response to your 2nd paragraph: What you describe is very implausible. How about this: Harrah's puts average everyday Nevada Joe's resume in the circular file because he is underqualified because the NSHE university he went to was a joke. They hire above-average Oregon Jim (OJ) instead. OJ comes, works for a while, gets laid off, takes his earnings and leaves. That is already happening. Please look up "false dichotomy."
odog: "Effective July 1, 2008, the Legislature requires that an applicant for a millennium
scholarship is required to execute an affidavit declaring eligibility for the scholarship. The
affidavit must include a declaration that the applicant is a citizen of the United States or has lawful immigration status, or that the applicant has filed an application to legalize his immigration status or will file an application to legalize his immigration status as soon as he is eligible to do so. That language has been included in the Acknowledgement of Award form and must be initialed by the 2008 high school graduating class and every class thereafter."
Dramatics...a 16% cut is not suicide.
1) The state funding represents ONLY half of the total budget. In reality you're cutting 16% of about 50%
2) Colleges in Nevada have a lot of fat they can trim. Maybe they could get back to the basics.
3). Nevada needs spending limits not a restructured tax code. We ramped up spending in 2007 to a level that nearly tripled per capita income growth. Come on! The Universities committed themselves (and every other agency in the state) to spending that wouldn’t exist if the economy ever slowed.
4) The cuts that have been going through have not brought the state to the brink of destruction. We won’t be any worse off than in 2002 which was the lowest point in per capita revenue in the last 14 or so years.
5) Our colleges actually make our states economy poorer so cutting funding won't make the economy worse. Spending on higher education is negatively correlated with lower growth rates in income per capita. The relationship is significant.
6) Fact: Tenured professors ARE lazy. Myth: Tenure protects professors free speech. In reality, tenure allows them to be exempt from the competition from the hard-working non-tenured professors.
7) The government does not drive the economy. The private sector does.
Alex, professor salaries are NOT set by the free market.
It is set by a cartel arrangement between the Universities.
1) Requirement that you earn a Ph.D. requires 6+ years of additional study. This is to lower the supply of available instructors. Many years ago one only needed a Bachelors degree to teach at a University.
2) Tenure, protects existing professors from competition. Again attempting to limit supply.
3) At many Universities there is a union for the professors. I do not know about Nevada. There also unions for instructors and adjunct faculty and in rare instances for grad students. They are all pitted against one another.
The fact that there is still an abundance of Ph.Ds in the market despite these attempts to limit supply shows the extent to which Universities lie to young people to tell them how much of a difference a college degree will make.
Today we have hordes of PhD's who offer little real world value with their degrees working in jobs that don't even require a PhD to begin with.
As I was walking past one of the chemistry lab classrooms at UNLV the other day I noticed a hand written sign taped to the door that read "Lab Personal Only". I can only hope the TA or student who wrote and posted this sign is not headed toward a career in medicine here in Nevada.
KDR81,
University rules require that you have one degree above the level of those you propose to teach. In other words, in order to teach bachelor's level courses you need a master's degree. In order to teach graduate courses you need a doctoral degree. Many people teaching undergraduate courses at UNLV have only a master's degree (grad students, lecturers, and adjuncts, for instance). There are plenty of people with bachelor's degrees teaching at CCSN. Without adhering to these standards a university can't get accredited.
This is an example of how those of you arguing in favor of cutting spending on higher education talk circles around yourselves. You say get back to basics, let people with only bachelor's degrees teach, but raise academic standards at the same time. You criticize UNLV for not providing the kind of education you think it should, and your solution is to deprive the University of even more resources. What utter garbage.
Faculty at UNLV are not unionized, either by the AAUP or any other organization. Not one single instructor at UNLV, on any level, is covered by a collective bargaining agreement.
No community can prosper without access to decent higher education. Not everyone can park cars and schlep baggage. Some people have to run the operations and design the buildings.
You anti-tax people (NANCE, Neiman,et.al) can never see the forest for the trees. You are blinded by the notion you pay too much. It makes you ignorant of facts. Taxes are NECCESSARY. Education is NECCESSARY. Government and it's entities are NECCESSARY for society. People paid wages through your taxes WORK HARD doing largely thankless work. Get the he## over it.
We have a "spending problem" in this state. We do not spend enough on the basics for health, education, roads or just about anything. We are 46-51st in just about every major category. The only way to remedy this is to raise revenue, i.e. taxes. Oooh, I said the big bad T word. How can anyone say we don't pay enough in this state - we don't even have an income tax! Please see the below link for the FACTS...
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/sh...
And Odog, before you reply with your random Google search to try and prove me wrong, keep in mind that this is STATE spending per capita, not including local and federal spending or tax figures...
Another great illustration of our "spending problem" from the conservative rag the RJ. Federal largess for Nevada is low because the state does not commit as many dollars to the various programs and services that are eligible for federal matching grants, among other reasons...
http://www.lvrj.com/news/18101759.html
Anti-tax crusaders, show me the facts - they will not support your opinions...
This is not a anti or pro tax debate that typically takes place when the revenues are already increasing based on a positive economy.
Even at the national level Obama and the DEMs have determined that raising tax rates in a depression is a job killer. Look at next door in CA.
With bank failing and casinos looking for investors, now is not the time to increase tax rates.
When time are stable and good then the State can look for a broader base.
Until then we have to to more with less, like any small business or family.
Correct letter by the Gov.
I've live in Nevada since 1961. We have the largest gaming revenues in the nation. They make more money than General Motors. They suffer the lowest tax! You complain about high income for Professors. The problem is greedy people like Steve Wynn. How many million does he make? More than he can spend in a lifetime. Bill Bennet died worth many millions only to give it to his spoiled daughter! Its time we looked out for OUR children! Look at your phone book. With over 170 full page ads that promote prostitution, I believe they are making millionS on untaxed income. The hotels use the same girls for thier high rollers. TheY don't make prostitution legal because then all these evil people would have to pay tax. LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE. Ever wonder why you seldom hear about entertainers getting arrested in Las Vegas? The hotels don't want the stars bothered. What goes on in Vegas stays in Vegas. the hotels aren't hurting, they are just making 13% less in thier billions! It is time to raise the gaming tax!
I would like to thank those of you who want professors to work eight hours a day, five days a week. That would cut my workload about in half. I can say the same for many of my colleagues--yes, many. And I know I speak for them when I say how much we appreciate your trying to reduce our work hours.
The tax in the next session that Democrats seem to want to raise taxes on is non-gaming.
They do not want to challenge gaming.
Even now, they are hiding under the rocks and are not saying that they want to raise taxes on non-gaming.
Today, the Democratic Senate leader said he want to increase spending.
Beware, if you work for a non-gaming company then next year you might be out of work.
KDR81: This is in response to your first post.
1) 16% of 50% is 8% of 100% and that will rise. Cutting 10% of, say, UNLV's budget would mean several buildings closed, several departments cut, 100% of the students in those depts stranded, hundreds of faculty and staff laid off, all of whom earn decent, not excessive, salaries which they spend here in Nevada. It would mean increased class sizes, reduced academic quality & competitiveness, increased tuition. This is all self-reinforcing.
2) There is very little fat left after the recent cuts that have already occurred. Yes we could easily "get back to basics" and turn, say, UNLV into a community college. The question is, do we want NSHE to be exclusively "the basics?" Why should any talented student go to Nevada Basics U when they can go to practically any other state in the country and receive a better education than they could get here for less money, and spend their above-average earnings in that state, not here?
3) It's a good thing the state made the commitment it did, because NSHE funding was a joke before that. Now, there is a chance that Nevada may actually emerge from this recession with some actual high-caliber intellectual talent on hand to help kickstart things. Maybe some of our current graduates will decide to stay and found some businesses which might actually employ some people, for example. People can't live on credit cards and HELOCs forever. At some point they will need to get real non-service-sector jobs which perform real productive activities, because tourism and Panda Express won't always be here.
4) There is a lag time between changes to higher ed funding and their effects on the economy.
5) False. They do not make our state poorer. The opposite. Per capita income is meaningless. Look at median income.
6) Nonsense. Tenure is not a license to be lazy. Any tenured professor who decides to be lazy soon finds his/her butt on the street.
KDR81, this is in response to your 2nd post. Professor salaries are absolutely set by the free market. That public universities receive partial public funding is irrelevant. Any university is free to hire incompetent BScis to teach cellular biology. That would be a joke of course, and that university would quickly become a laughingstock etc. But free market doesn't mean free labor.
1) Many years ago a bachelors degree was a privilege that was not awarded to just anyone who could walk and chew gum at the same time. The bar is now lower. It is now increasingly helpful to have a bachelor's to have any chance at getting past In-N-Out swing shift manager. Sorry.
2) Tenure is awarded only AFTER professors have demonstrated their academic worth and expertise. Tenured professors have some additional protection vs. non-tenured but this does not amount to a free job for life. On the contrary the work level does not really decline. These are extremely competitive positions and for the most part, non-Ph.Ds could not qualify for them anyway.
3) In Nevada, i.e. here, there are no such unions.
4) A college degree or Ph.D. is of course what you make of it.
No teacher unions in Nevada.......WOW.....where did they go.....I swore they just tried to pass some petition....they left the state??????
The budget was cut left and right but only the holy grail of COLA raise was left intake.
Student books...not important....COLA raise very important...
Nance, there are no unions in NSHE. We are talking about funding for NSHE in this thread.
Did you know that CCSD has a contract with the providers of school desk that requires a percentage of desk to be replaces regardless of condition? I was at an open house once and noticed desks that had stickers which said remove on them and found out these perfectly good desk had to be removed and replaced with new ones! What a scam! Remember our current Govenor said Education would be number one on his list for improvement and help. I was at Bally's when he said this to about 500 teachers!
RAISE THE GAMING TAX!
John F.
1) Having a PhD doesn't actually mean you're qualified to teach others. There is no evidence to suggest that students learn more from PhD's than from BAs.
2) Research Universities aren't about teaching, they are about funding professors to get grants to help fund the university. Often, research projects have little positive impact for the local community when comparing the money spent on research to what the money could have been invested in within the private market.
3) Higher ed spending is negativly correlated with economic growth indicators. So no, every community does not need a well funded University to thrive. That is a myth.
Truth from reason, how about these apples:
Our economic and tax issue: http://npri.org/blog/pictures-are-worth-...
Nevada's gov. keeps health insurance artificallyl more expensive: http://npri.org/blog/health-insurance-is...
Does spending more increase student achievement: http://npri.org/blog/does-more-spending-...
What would happen if education spending increased: http://npri.org/blog/what-if-we-increase...
Nevada actually ranks #1 in one category for education. DEBT! http://npri.org/blog/nevada-is-no-1-in-t...
REAL EDUCATION PER PUPIL SPENDING RANKINGS...this includes capital outlays and debt payment. http://npri.org/blog/moving-on-up
More spending on education is negativly correlated with improving achievement for poor students... BUT ED REFORM IS NOT: http://npri.org/blog/courage-to-reform
There are some facts. MORE SPENDING on government is a waste of money. You are taking away the economies ability to make life better, to reduce poverty, and to increase our standards of living.
SPending more money on education DOES NOT produce results and it DOES NOT improve the economy. PERIOD.
ALex,
The rules and agreements between Universities and accredidation officials, the fact that there is tenure, and at many universities Unions, suggest that wages for university professors ARE NOT set by the free market.
There are no ifs ands or buts about it.
And Alex there is a lot of fat I bet that can be cut from the University. There are tons of useless classes that can be canned. Yes, close some departments. Reduce the number of students in degree areas that are of little use to society like Anthropology, Sociology, Pyschology, even Politial Science, History, Women's Studies, African American Studies.
You are robbing students and lieing to them telling them that these degrees will not only make them better citizens but more wealthy.
Universities take from the poor and give to the rich. They take from those who don't have academic skills after telling them they do, and subsidize all those with academic skills.
You probably work for the Universities so there is no way you want to feel that way about that. I won't convince you, but that is just the fact.
Nance, please inform yourself, unless you like the idea of sounding like an ignorant all the time. The average Joe needs an education. The only education the average Joe could --possibly one day--afford is public education. So let's save public education in NV by funding it properly. The NSHE is underfunded, especially in comparison to other states--- did you get this? This is not rocket science. Professors make what they make because that's what it costs to bring qualified people to UNLV, UNR, or anywhere.
The reason Rogers et al. can say that there is no room to make cuts is because there are NO REAL MARKET FORCES helping them make decisions. They get money by sticking a gun to taxpayers heads.
They seem to believe tax money is their divine right. As such they have no incentive to spend the money wisely. They have no incentive to invest the money where it will produce the greatest returns. And they have NO INCENTIVE to actually teach students. Any student who graduates and learned something in the process was an accident.
Look, HP can cut 20% of its labor force (labor usually makes up about half of anyone's budget) in a hard time, to try and make ends meet, and UNLV complains about what amounts to a 2% cut then complains even more with an 8% cut in PROMISED "revenue" not ACTUAL "revenue."
If you can't make an 8% budget cut you are lazy and ineffective.
Morgen the average public K-12 school costs over $9000 excluding capital costs, debt payments, and teacher pensions.
The average private K-12 school costs about $7000 excluding religious subsidies and grants.
The only reason why public universities are cheaper (For now) than private universities is because public universities have more competition with one another than K-12 public schools.
In reality, eliminating public education (or reducing it significantly) may not only result in better education opportunities but lower the price as well.
The idea that a private education is ONLY for the rich is a MYTH.
KDR: "The only reason why public universities are cheaper (For now) than private universities is because public universities have more competition with one another than K-12 public schools." This is not true. A public university has the objective of being most accessible to the citizens of the community and also there is a lot of political pressure against tuition increases. Eliminate public education in this country and you will get rid of some of the best universities we have. Private doesn't mean "better".
Alex,
The regression analysis on higher ed spending and economic growth, found here: http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/Common...
suggests that the correlation between higher ed spending and economic growth is weak and insignificant.
However growth in GSP is a positive and significant relationship with higher levels of higher ed spending.
The same results are found with K-12 spending.
In otherwords people, growing economies grow budgets for higher education. Higher education DOES NOT grow state economies.
I should also add, as NPRI did in one of ther blogs, that wealthier states will spend more money on education whether or not it produces results.
BTW, Richard Vedder of Ohio University and someone at the Heritage Foundation have also examined these claims.
KDR: And again talking about education as a product, subject to the MARKET FORCES. I agree that in times of economic woes EVERYONE is going to be affected. However, they are the MARKET FORCES the conservatives so strongly believe in--the laisez faire, the give-it-to-the-private-sector, let-the-market-rule kind of philosphy that has put us in this near economic collapse we are in right now. Look at Wall Street. Did that happen because of too much regulation from the government? Or is it because the Republican-dominated congress voted for deregulating many things in Wall Street? Going back to education: yes, students are not learning much, you know why? First, they come out oh high school totally unprepared for college. Then, the university needs to provide remedial classes to make up for what the students didn't learn in high school. What else can they do? Fail most of them? They will eventually drop out of school. Retention rates are important for a school, it affects, among other things its ranking in, for example, the US News and World Report list. There's also, a lot of political pressure, inside and outside, about showing a good retention rate. Solution? water down all requirements. Where should we start in order to come up with a REAL solution. IMPROVE K-12 PUBLIC education. To accomplish this, step No. 1: pay teachers more. You will get better quality. Ask around, how much a CCSD teachers makes. And how much they work. You can't measure the workload of a teacher by the number of hours spent inside the classroom. The hours spent outside outnumber, by far, the hours spent teaching. KDR. I would say, if you have absolutely no idea how education works, then refrain from commenting. Educational institutions ARE NOT like any other business.
Morgen, most conservatives believe in market forces they can manipulate not lassiez-fare free markets.
Our economic collapse resulted largely from moral hazards created by government bailouts. We privatized profits and socialized losses. That is not fair for taxpayers and its not free markets.
Yes education in Nevada needs fixing. If we don't we'll suffer real problems...NPRI wrote about that last week I think: http://npri.org/publications/no-magic-be...
Spending more on public education won't change anything. Real education reform will.
1) If you want to pay teachers more only do so if there it is the result of merit pay. Do away with pay by years of service. Reduce requirements on teacher certification and ease restrictions on alternative certification (this can bring in real practisioners of subjects into education).
2) You are hung up on PUBLIC education. Who cares if it is public or private (unless you don't care about students and only care about your own bank account). The job of education is to educate students, NOT PAY TEACHERS or CREATE JOBS, or SAVE PUBLIC EDUCATION. Education is about education, public or private.
3) Yes, education is like every other business. The fact that education is typically immune from market forces (especially at k-12 level) means it won't function like a real business but it will be highly innefective and wasteful of scarce resources.
4) I do know how education works. I used to be a teacher.
Good for the governor. The schools have to live within their means just like we all do.
Dave,
Comments like yours drive me nuts. Just what are thier means? So what happens when we can't get teachers to live here like a couple of years age when CCSD was short 600 teachers? There is only one solution to all our public funding needs. I'll give you a hint. Gaming in Nevada earns the highest profits in the world. The hotels have paid for thier property years ago. In fact Circus Circus Corp. never borrowed money to build until they built the Luxor. Yet these companies suffer the lowest gaming tax in the world. While its true they have had revenue drop of some 13% as of late, that is not much of a loss when you are making billions. These greedy people running this state like Wynn and Lanni will cut employee hours to save money but never cut thier own millions in income. Do you think thier kids are worried about a good education?
JGeremia,
You are making the assumption that spending more on education produces results. This isn't true.
Spending more on education does not produce better quality education.
Nevada needs serious education reform.
If you want more teachers cut the certification requirements (stastically it is a usless determination for qualified teachers).
If you want better paid teachers then advocate real merit pay.
But whatever you choose remember, EDUCATION IS NOT ABOUT EMPLOYING ADULTS!
Education is not about employing adults? You mean both my girls could have gotten the smae kind of employment without an education? They both got several scholarships and some was paid by the tobacco companies. These tobacco companies lost big lawsuits and still remained in business. Do you think gaming would dry up if we taxed closer to the national average?
Education is not about employing teachers...teachers are adults, those being educated (at least K-12) are children.
The job of educations is not to create a job industry for teachers themselves. This, however, is exactly what they've done.
The tax companies didn't lose their lawsuite they worked out a deal with government to pay a tax that would also be required to be paid by smaller tobacco companies. In other words, Big Tobacco got in bed with Big Government. Big Tobacco pays Big Government. Big Government slaps a regressive tax on Big Tobacco's little competition.
BTW, consumers of tobacco leaves pay a 350% tariff, allowing domestic tobacco companies to compete (or make massive profits).
If we taxed gaming more there would be less jobs in Gaming, less growth in gaming and more growth in government jobs. Government jobs almost never produce wealth for society so it will be a loss for Nevada's economy.
Nevada's government should start learning to do more with less. NOt less with more...which has been our trend for the last 50 years.
BTW, if we do raise taxes here is the deal Gaming will work out:
1) A slight increase in the gaming tax or room tax to pay for education.
2) To agree to this the gaming industry will get the state to tax other corporations with some corporate income tax. Probably with an exemption for gaming.
A corporate income tax will harm non-gaming corporate growth in Nevada. This means gaming doesn't have to worry about competition from non-gaming corporations for capital and labor.
This allows gaming to retain their current position of market power within Nevada. Nevada's economy fails to diversify and we will continue to hear clamors from the left to diversify the economy by spending more on education and taxing businesses even more.
As far as the tobbaco companies it wasn't a tax.
Our state millenium scholarships are paid out of a fund they paid the state. Gibbons used that money to set up the scholarships. The hotels can't function without the employees. A higher tax won't hurt the hotels business anymore than it does in other states that pay more. Most of the hotels spend a big portion on building new casinos outside of Vegas like Macau. Maybe they will just have to keep the money in Nevada. Most jobs in hotels are low skill and no education needed. Guess if they needed College Grads they would give scholarships more often but as it is they don't need very many Graduates.
Technically it is a tax. And Tobacco companies not sued are also required to pay it (also showing that it is a tax).
Higher taxes do hurt companies, period.
If a company has less money it has less money to pay investors, expand, hire new employees, pay employees better, or lower prices to try and capture more market share (or just to compete).
That means higher corporate taxes are paid for by fewer jobs, lower pay, higher prices, and lower returns on investments.
And the whole point about keeping money in Nevada is fallacious at best. Don't worry about where the money is located. It is just green pieces of paper.
Think of it this way. If someone buys a Honda, American dollars are sent to Japan. In your worst case scenario those dollars stay in Japan. But that means someone got a car for a green piece of paper.
That money HAS to come back to the US in one way or another in order for it to have any value internationally.
Yes, casino jobs are low skilled. Higher taxes won't turn them into high skilled jobs. Higher taxes will put some low-skilled people out of work. If we take those taxes and spend it on education we won't see student improvement. All we do is put poor people out of work and hire teachers and PhDs.
You literally take from the poor and give to the rich.
You have to drink a lot of kool-aid if you think that tobacco companies are paying the money for lawsuit settlement out their own pockets.
When the average Joe goes to buy a pack of cig's then it is avergage Joe that is paying the money toward the settlement.
KDR81,
Allow me to reply to your pap as succinctly as possible. I'm not even going to comment on your NPRI, Goldwater Institute etc. spam. That leaves not a lot left.
1) "You bet" there is a lot of fat that can be cut. That's nice. Add it to one of the million other bets made in this town every day and roll the dice.
2) Nevada taxpayers are free to fund public education or not. The 144 year-old Nevada State Constitution happens to have a little tidbit in it that would certainly appear at first blush to mandate SOME public system of higher education at SOME level. However, voters are free to amend the constitution to eliminate this, and there is a process in place for doing so. If a small group of extremists such as yourself were to decide that this is unfair, and decide that they are not willing to abide by said Constitution, they would be free to leave the state. But they should be reminded that it's "worse" (i.e. the education system is better) almost everywhere else except maybe Mississippi, and they are comparatively extremely lucky to pay as little as they do for what they get.
3) Students are free to go to college or not. NSHE is free to hire whoever they want to teach whatever. Students are free to decide whether they want to take said class taught by said prof or not. Accreditation committees are conversely free to grant accreditation to NSHE or not. NSHE is free to continue along with or without accreditation. Employers are free to care whether a degree is accredited or not. As an avid NPRI reader, you must know what "coercion" is. Show it to me. Show me where it is happening.
4) The goal of a public university is to take from the public as little as possible in order to benefit the public as much as possible, economically and socially. That is its reason for being. The public university requires public support, by definition. If universities had the effect you describe of leeching off the public teat, providing lesser benefit than what was put into them, you would find that the NPRI junk you cited would be mainstream and not fringe. In non-fringeworld, Public higher education is a time-tested source of incalculable public benefit that has been recognized by generations of people around the world as one of the most fool-proof sources of social and economic well-being there is. It has been embraced by all developed non-libertarian-extremist peoples in every region on earth.
Good enough for me. I have absolutely no reason to be anything BUT proud of our university system for all the sometimes-unappreciated good I KNOW it is doing, even in the face of an abnormally large population of libertarian fanatics.
I can't tell you 'I was a teacher'. I can tell you both my daughters are. Its not unusual for them to go home at 5 or 6 pm. Most teachers chose this profession to make a difference, to have a positive impact on the world. My kids knew the choice would not include big salaries. Our average cop makes $56 an hour after probation, which is well above what my daughter makes after 4 years of college. We need to get our priorities straight. If we had better roll models (teachers), I believe it would take a big bite out of crime. Most cops would enjoy the gun carring glory regardless of the pay. I applaud the teachers. The cops in Vegas, with what goes on in Vegas (174 full page ads promoting prostitution in the phone book, highest auto theft in the nation, highest DUI in the nation, highest high school drop out rate in the nation) I despise. How many cops work for kids on thier free time? I've volunteered at school, Pop Warner, American Soccer Ass.,and Girl Scouts. Never came across a cop helping unless they were being paid. Came across many teachers though!
Alex,
Feel free to call me an extremist once you show an OUNCE of evidence that suggests
1) Spending more on education will produce results.
2) Spending more on education will increase economic productivity or growth.
Until then you're the ideologue swinging by nothing more than rhetoric.
About being free to go to college, yes they are. And people were free to buy homes they couldnt actually afford. The problem was, with government help, the companies offering mortgages were able to offer creative financing to get people to buy.
With college, we make it artificially cheaper and convince students to go to school when some would be better off not attending. As it stands today, college is merely a wealth transfer from poor to rich.
If the colleges job was to take as little from the public as possible then it would actually do so. Not complain about budget cuts during a downturned economy.
Please don't come back until you've returned from the Ivory tower with something we call FACTS in the real world.
Jg,
Yes, many teachers go into the business because they want to make a difference. However there aren't strong incentives for teachers to do much more than rely on their strong sense of moral worth.
School choice, ed reform, and merit pay offer market incentives that will ADD to their belief that they are out to do good.
If you arent going to support school choice, serious ed reform and merit pay then I suggest donating your own money to helping those teachers, because spending more on our current system does not produce results.
We've already tripled per pupil spending on K-12 education (inflation adjusted) since 1960. How much more is needed?
Alex,
I've decided you aren't likely an academic, not with such fallacious reasoning as you've provided.
If being mainstream was a sign of being right...
Oh dear, use your imagination to see where such thoughts might lead you.
You are a populist with no facts of your own.
On licensing as a cartel arrangement: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_...
Found it today.
KDR, I am not going to waste my time compiling a lit review for you for the same reason I would not waste my time trying to convince a colorblind person that grass is green. In the end life is too short. If you want to use my own laziness as "proof" of your "facts" then I guess you are rightest person on earth.
Please don't equate government-subsidized higher ed with government-subsidized housing. The former actually provides a net benefit. And unlike a bad mortgage, you can't jingle-mail your diploma even in a chapter 7 bankruptcy.
Of course many students in college right now are in over their heads. I guess I just don't feel like it's up to me to tell them where they should be.
KDR, please show me the same conclusions from a non-flaming-libertarian source. The problem is that when it comes from Cato I feel like I know exactly what it will say before I've even seen it. It's the same basic reason I don't read e.g. workers rights articles from Socialist International.
Alexant,
You make since. KDR has his mind made up, and made his mind up way before he had all the facts. At 59 I have learned not to get in a pissing contest with people like KDR. The best example I can come up with is his argument for not raising gaming taxes. KDR thinks the hotels would lay off workers, and this would obviously hurt their business. In fact if you read KDR post you will see he never agrees with any points others make that wish to disagree with KDR. KDR makes statement like education is not about employing adults. Then he tries to weasle out of that silly statement. Next he says, "We've already tripled per pupil spending on K-12 education (inflation adjusted) since 1960. How much more is needed?" So KDR tries to argue that this is enough in 49 years. Fact is everything has gone up far more than triple in 47 years. A pack of smokes cost a quarter back in 1960. Almost every state in the union spends more per pupil than we do. Lets face it KDR couldn't see a valid comment if it hit him between the eyes!
Gents, the difference between myself and you both is that I've reached my conclusions by waying the evidence. You obviously havent.
There is no flame war, just logical consistancy. There is no ideological bias slanting evidence just facts.
Simple things like "Nevada has tripled its per pupil spending since 1960" comes from the US Census!...and it is inflation adjusted.
Come on you guys will have to do better than that. Maybe build a lit review if you have to (if you can). Or take the facts and way them.
btw way, for anyone who happens to make it back to this page.
Tripling per pupil spending (adjusting for inflation) means that you are comparing two different years with the same dollar year values.
1960 spending in 2008 dollars and 2008 spending in 2008 dollars for example.
Comparing real 1960 spending to 2008 spending would be an unadjusted figure and that would be a 2,300 percent increase.
btw way, for anyone who happens to make it back to this page.
Tripling per pupil spending (adjusting for inflation) means that you are comparing two different years with the same dollar year values.
1960 spending in 2008 dollars and 2008 spending in 2008 dollars for example.
Comparing real 1960 spending to 2008 spending would be an unadjusted figure and that would be a 2,300 percent increase.
Yes, we should of course mention the non-inflation-adjusted differences because they are much larger and more impressive sounding.
Seriously, kid, I have nothing to gain here. I am not going to play the game. It's up to you whether you want to view any given issue as an opportunity to gain knowledge, or to "win." Choosing the latter, you will only be hurting yourself.
Alexant,
That is very well said. KDR just wants to win. Truth is of no use to him or logic. I too feel that I am spinning my wheels with him. For some reason I am picturing an 80 year old man set in his ways with nothing better to do than sit in front of the computer and argue. The bottom line is we spend less per pupil than just about anyone outside maybe Mississippi and that is horrible.
Typical left wingers (and yes some right wingers do it too), you both rely on personal attacks rather than looking at the facts.
When facts are right in your face you dismiss them like some neo-postmodernist feminist constructivist.
And Alex, lest you forget, JG was assuming the TRIPLE or 200+% figure was non-inflation adjusted. I was pointing out that it was inflation adjusted and the non-inflation adjusted figure would be over 2000%
How do you like them apples? Per Pupil Spending HAS TRIPLED since 1960? Seriously guys what do you have to say about that?
Facts are ugly things, but you can't keep ignoring them.
This is the last time I will respond to KDR. We have most of the richest men in history in Nevada. Adelson is the third richest, Wynn is worth over 1 billion. We spend less per pupil than any of the states except maybe Mississippi.
I know and so does everyone else except for maybe KDR that the hotels are under-taxed and can afford to help. I think KDR knows the truth, but winning an argument is more important to KDR. I'm through with KDR.