5 ms·

I am feeling this way a lot lately. There is a bill to mandate a minimum wage specifically for school teachers at the federal level. Teachers need higher pay, b

I am feeling this way a lot lately. There is a bill to mandate a minimum wage specifically for school teachers at the federal level. Teachers need higher pay, but a federal mandate isn't the solution.

timthelion 3y ago
As far as I know, that's not actually a federal mandate though, it's a federal condition on the provision of funds. States can refuse the mandate and the money.
- Bran_son 3y ago
  I don't like such financial circumvention of constitutional limits on the federal government. Especially since those funds are extracted from the states in the first place. That said, this zoning bill seems constitutional, per https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35875405 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35875405
  - r00fus 3y ago
    > Especially since those funds are extracted from the states in the first place. Explain this. Feds aren't taking money from states, the federal income tax for example is in addition to state tax (if any). There is no federal sales tax.
    - Bran_son 3y ago
      The income that the feds tax is generated in the states. There is no meaningful distinction between a 15% federal and 15% state tax, and a 30% state tax that is then divided 50/50 between state and federal governments.
      - r00fus 3y ago
        Except that states aren't 100% competent enough to produce all the legal framework and military support that the USG provides. Some states are essentially military bases + federal contractors to the government itself - they provide nothing of local value. Any serious consideration of the sovereign state died in the civil war (Texas constiution included).
        Bran_son 3y ago
        > Except that states aren't 100% competent enough to produce all the legal framework and military support that the USG provides. So? That support is guaranteed to them by the constitution, and is the justification for federal taxes. Still taking the taxes, but discriminating how they distribute them based on constitutionally-protected state activity, is illegitimate and counter to the spirit (and I believe letter) of the constitution. It's like an employer withholding part of your wage because he doesn't like your conduct outside of work, despite your contract not placing any limits on that behavior. And when you complain, he replies with "well you couldn't earn this much money on your own". Or perhaps a better example is being denied Medicaid or police protection, because of some otherwise legal conduct.
- prottog 3y ago
  That's just a federal mandate with extra steps, like how the feds got the states to impose a 21-year minimum drinking age even though they didn't have the Constitutional authority to do so. When the federal government gets two-thirds of all tax revenue and use it as a cudgel to circumvent its prescribed limits, it's a mandate. "States can refuse the mandate and the money" is possible only when state and federal tax receipts are at similar levels.
ouid 3y ago
Teachers are paid, in large part, by the federal government. What's your complaint?
- polski-g 3y ago
  This is false. An incredibly small amount of teacher funding comes from the federal government: https://ed100.org/lessons/whopays https://ed100.org/lessons/whopays
  - sidewndr46 3y ago
    Even if it were true, it'd be an accounting trick. Outside of Columbia, there is no where the Federal government can tax to generate the revenue to pay said teachers. So the tax revenue would either come from the states directly or indirectly via inflation.
- ghaff 3y ago
  In the US, the majority of K-12 public education is funded by local property taxes with state taxes making up most of the balance.

timthelion 3y ago

As far as I know, that's not actually a federal mandate though, it's a federal condition on the provision of funds. States can refuse the mandate and the money.

Bran_son 3y ago
I don't like such financial circumvention of constitutional limits on the federal government. Especially since those funds are extracted from the states in the first place. That said, this zoning bill seems constitutional, per https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35875405 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35875405
- r00fus 3y ago
  > Especially since those funds are extracted from the states in the first place. Explain this. Feds aren't taking money from states, the federal income tax for example is in addition to state tax (if any). There is no federal sales tax.
  - Bran_son 3y ago
    The income that the feds tax is generated in the states. There is no meaningful distinction between a 15% federal and 15% state tax, and a 30% state tax that is then divided 50/50 between state and federal governments.
    - r00fus 3y ago
      Except that states aren't 100% competent enough to produce all the legal framework and military support that the USG provides. Some states are essentially military bases + federal contractors to the government itself - they provide nothing of local value. Any serious consideration of the sovereign state died in the civil war (Texas constiution included).
      - Bran_son 3y ago
        > Except that states aren't 100% competent enough to produce all the legal framework and military support that the USG provides. So? That support is guaranteed to them by the constitution, and is the justification for federal taxes. Still taking the taxes, but discriminating how they distribute them based on constitutionally-protected state activity, is illegitimate and counter to the spirit (and I believe letter) of the constitution. It's like an employer withholding part of your wage because he doesn't like your conduct outside of work, despite your contract not placing any limits on that behavior. And when you complain, he replies with "well you couldn't earn this much money on your own". Or perhaps a better example is being denied Medicaid or police protection, because of some otherwise legal conduct.
prottog 3y ago
That's just a federal mandate with extra steps, like how the feds got the states to impose a 21-year minimum drinking age even though they didn't have the Constitutional authority to do so. When the federal government gets two-thirds of all tax revenue and use it as a cudgel to circumvent its prescribed limits, it's a mandate. "States can refuse the mandate and the money" is possible only when state and federal tax receipts are at similar levels.

ouid 3y ago

Teachers are paid, in large part, by the federal government. What's your complaint?

polski-g 3y ago
This is false. An incredibly small amount of teacher funding comes from the federal government: https://ed100.org/lessons/whopays https://ed100.org/lessons/whopays
- sidewndr46 3y ago
  Even if it were true, it'd be an accounting trick. Outside of Columbia, there is no where the Federal government can tax to generate the revenue to pay said teachers. So the tax revenue would either come from the states directly or indirectly via inflation.
ghaff 3y ago
In the US, the majority of K-12 public education is funded by local property taxes with state taxes making up most of the balance.