3 ms·

http://irepp.stanford.edu/documents/GDF/SUMMARIES/Imazeki.pdf http://irepp.stanford.edu/documents/GDF/SUMMARIES/Imazeki.pd... Average cost of a California publ

by temphn 15y ago

http://irepp.stanford.edu/documents/GDF/SUMMARIES/Imazeki.pdf http://irepp.stanford.edu/documents/GDF/SUMMARIES/Imazeki.pd... Average cost of a California public school student per year: $8268 [with 90% between $6200-$11000]. http://paa2008.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=80351 http://paa2008.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=8035... Hispanic TFR 2.5-2.8. Roughly, the average number of children per woman over lifespan. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0690.pdf http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0690.p... Median Hispanic household income: $37912. For your median Hispanic household, during school age years with 3 kids we're talking about $24,900 per year in taxpayer expenditures, which is about 65% of their household income. This is likely significantly more than is paid in taxes by the household and is one line item; we have not yet included medical bills or the array of other costs borne by society. Business owners are currently fobbing off the costs of unskilled immigration (illegal and otherwise) on the rest of society; your cheap produce is not cheap.

JoeAltmaier 15y ago
Education should be regarded as an investment. It has to be paid for, but we have 'nationalized' school as a strategic measure, intended to optimize the next generation's opportunities. Regardless of who's children they are, the 'cost' of not educating them will, over their lifetimes, be much greater than $8268.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- jongraehl 15y ago
  Possibly true. However, given a surplus of people wishing to immigrate to the US, we should selfishly take all the immediate operating-profit applicants first before admitting any that require us to borrow money (feel-good or whole-world-utilitarian exceptions like asylum aside; credit them whatever value you think they're worth).
  - JoeAltmaier 15y ago
    Kids don't 'wish' to immigrate - they get dragged along. Furthermore, its not clear we in America are so poor we must operate on an immediate-profit bases, especially when considering human capital. You for instance. Should we eject you, probably a student by the sound of it, because you are not currently profitable? Now you argue that you're already an American, which is true but firmly on the "I've got mine" side of politics and not pretty.
    - temphn 15y ago
      America is in debt to the tune of trillions of dollars and in the worst economy since the Great Depression. When do you think we should start looking at the profit/loss implications?
      - JoeAltmaier 15y ago
        So, you advise looking ahead to the next quarter only, while torpedoing the chances of the next generation? What is it all for then?
- temphn 15y ago
  If it is an investment then we need to look at ROI and determine the point at which this investment becomes cash flow positive from a net tax expenditure standpoint. Chinese, Korean, Indian, Russian, Persian immigrants are throwing off cash in generation 1 -- wait and see is not required. But 2nd and 3rd generation Hispanic immigrants have not achieved significantly greater economic success than the 1st generation. If it is an investment then we do need to look at these bottom line metrics.
ewanmcteagle 15y ago
Your numbers have nothing to do with being Hispanic. Is making $40000/year so rare for families with 2 or 3 kids? First we socialize schools then we complain when the costs are not covered by those using the schools. This is a very common pattern.

by temphn 15y ago

JoeAltmaier 15y ago

Education should be regarded as an investment. It has to be paid for, but we have 'nationalized' school as a strategic measure, intended to optimize the next generation's opportunities. Regardless of who's children they are, the 'cost' of not educating them will, over their lifetimes, be much greater than $8268.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
jongraehl 15y ago
Possibly true. However, given a surplus of people wishing to immigrate to the US, we should selfishly take all the immediate operating-profit applicants first before admitting any that require us to borrow money (feel-good or whole-world-utilitarian exceptions like asylum aside; credit them whatever value you think they're worth).
- JoeAltmaier 15y ago
  Kids don't 'wish' to immigrate - they get dragged along. Furthermore, its not clear we in America are so poor we must operate on an immediate-profit bases, especially when considering human capital. You for instance. Should we eject you, probably a student by the sound of it, because you are not currently profitable? Now you argue that you're already an American, which is true but firmly on the "I've got mine" side of politics and not pretty.
  - temphn 15y ago
    America is in debt to the tune of trillions of dollars and in the worst economy since the Great Depression. When do you think we should start looking at the profit/loss implications?
    - JoeAltmaier 15y ago
      So, you advise looking ahead to the next quarter only, while torpedoing the chances of the next generation? What is it all for then?
temphn 15y ago
If it is an investment then we need to look at ROI and determine the point at which this investment becomes cash flow positive from a net tax expenditure standpoint. Chinese, Korean, Indian, Russian, Persian immigrants are throwing off cash in generation 1 -- wait and see is not required. But 2nd and 3rd generation Hispanic immigrants have not achieved significantly greater economic success than the 1st generation. If it is an investment then we do need to look at these bottom line metrics.

ewanmcteagle 15y ago

Your numbers have nothing to do with being Hispanic. Is making $40000/year so rare for families with 2 or 3 kids? First we socialize schools then we complain when the costs are not covered by those using the schools. This is a very common pattern.