OnPoint: Spending "Cap" is Fiscal Anorexia
184 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
HenryB, in reply to
State schools still `stream' i.e. put cherries, oranges and apples into different boxes: a daughter of mine is about to take on next year a class of Year 9s with a reading age of 6. That said, streaming does mean that these children still engage, in a larger context, with those who are not streamed. This is also true of private schools - but the problem with the latter is the larger context only provides the cherry-picked children, other than other cherries, children with one common denominator - wealth. From the POV of the cherry this is not really a problem but it sure as heck is a great engine for reproducing all the inequalities that we so rail against.
-
HenryB, in reply to
Much like the endgame for ‘national standards’ is now on the table as directing funding according to league tables to the better-off schools out of the same fixed budget.
Exactly.... and when I heard this I could hardly believe it. I thought all the (self-serving) rhetoric around `national standards' was to identify the children who were having problems so that more resources could be directed towards them, not less.
-
merc, in reply to
Sadly, not how our Govt.(tm) now works.
-
Sacha, in reply to
the (self-serving) rhetoric
It was as you say presented that way. And not fisked with any force.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Independent schools are publicly funded to quite a large degree
And we're hearing the "why should we pay twice" line trotted out again by the wealthy who want your taxes to help send Jemima and Jeremy to an elite school of their choice.
-
merc, in reply to
I'm going to our daughter's graduation ball tonight and I'm not screaming ;-)
-
Angus Robertson, in reply to
First, eating less when times are lean is intuitive but wrong. The whole point of countercyclical fiscal management is that you *save* when times are good, so that you're able to spend when times are bad. The government should act as a counterbalance to the rest of the economy by doing the opposite thing.
Back in 2008 when this all kicked off the USA and EU went into stimulus mode and we joined them (big tax cuts and roads for everyone). But that time is over and we are either in the midst of pulling out of the crisis (the stimulus worked and we don't need any more) or we aren't (the stimulus didn't work). Either way we don't need more stimulus.
If as you seem to be suggesting the stimulus didn't work, we can't "counterbalance" a developed world economic slowdown that has proven to be beyond the scope of the combined stimulus packages of the USA, Japan and Europe by ourselves. NZ cannot act alone here and hope to be effective, because we are too small. We can only act in concert with the rest of the developed world.
If OTOH the stimulus did work we are in a slow recovery mode. A fragile recovery vulnerable to increased inflation or costs of overseas borrowings, anything other than an austere approach risks "counterbalancing" the recovery.
-
Okay, I can accept that the problem with cherry-picking is that a) schools will be judged for outcomes without taking into account the different input (though I think that's solvable); and b) (related) that existing inequalities would be reflected in the likelihood of being identified as a cherry.
Otherwise, I reject the arguments that it's somehow character-building for cherries to have to stay in the company of whoever social and physical geography have thrown together .Seems like an issue of personal vs social benefit though I'm not sure that "marginalised" is the right word. Overlooked? Getting less of the teachy sunlight than a cherry feels they deserve, perhaps?
No Sacha, I meant marginalised. Not by the teachers, but by their peers. Cherries aren't always terribly keen on being caught in the "teachy sunlight", as they know it makes the marginalisation worse, not better.
Nor is it simply a question of personal benefit vs social benefit. If there were a special academy for outstanding rugby players, or musicians, where they schooled together when they weren't in training/practicing their instrument, I don't think anyone would blink an eye, or complain about it being publically funded, but when it's outstanding academics/intellectual curiosity/whatever you want to call it, people purse their lips and get all uncomfortable.
I get that there would be a problem with identifying who should be there, but I don't think it's insurmountable.
I have for many years been involved in an organisation that provides scholarships to a group of peace and sustainability-focussed international boarding schools (if you've got an over-committed, over-achieving 16 year old who wants to finish high school overseas, pm me!). One year I phoned about 40 secondary principals to ask whether they'd be nominating anyone. Among the predictable range of levels of enthusiasm, one principal said "no, we don't go in for that sort of thing at this school, we're more focussed on sport". If I were a cherry in that school, I'd very much appreciate the chance to be cherry-picked out of there.
I'm not saying I think charter schools are a good idea, but I don't think there's automatically anything wrong with publically funding selective schools, so long as the selection is managed so as to eliminate, as much as possible, advantage from existing inequalities. Though as far as I've read, that's not what charter schools are intended to be anyway.
-
Sacha, in reply to
it's somehow character-building for cherries to have to stay in the company of whoever
Certainly not what I was getting at. Seems more likely it may be better for the others academically. Socially, I'd like to see some research about the effects on either group.
when it's outstanding academics/intellectual curiosity/whatever you want to call it, people purse their lips and get all uncomfortable
I thought our NZ state school system already has programmes where 'gifted' children get extra attention together, alongside their regular classes with everyone else?
-
Sacha, in reply to
the USA and EU went into stimulus mode and we joined them (big tax cuts and roads for everyone)
Our government didn't do anything like their stimulus programmes, not even those top-skewed personal tax cuts or the bailout of South Canterbury Finance. Building highways benefits very few, and increasingly that's overseas-owned construction and supply companies.
we can't "counterbalance" a developed world economic slowdown
However, we could choose to invest our limited state funds in things more likely to create sustainable local jobs and export revenues rather than more of the laissez faire fairytale that English, Joyce, Key and chums still believe in.
-
merc, in reply to
But wait! See the market works! Just not for you and me,
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch-earthquake-2011/6112265/Record-property-prices-outside-city -
Angus, it isn't like there's a on/off switch, where the stimulus works or doesn't. Unquestionably the stimuli have worked, in that they have rescued jobs and helped the economy. Unquestionably, they didn't go far enough, and the current austerity mania is not helping.
-
merc, in reply to
My bosses rescued my job because they stuck by all of us right throughout. The Govt. helped a little with the GST rise, we make an accounting app.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
railing against the machine...
Sound familiar?
PPPs are good for us all
they will supply a stable future
your eyelids are heavy
when I click my fingers
you will carry on regardless... -
merc, in reply to
Meantime someone be shipping gold without paying tax, so we really are the Switzerland of the Pacific,
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/6114653/Mystery-over-huge-gold-imports
Things are rarely as they appear, perception is now 9/10's of the law ;-) -
Rob Stowell, in reply to
Jeepers. What's the bet they're shipping gold here 'cos when it goes up, up, up and away in value (y'know, like after the Euro tanks) there's (gasp! how could that be!) NO zero ZILCH capital gains tax.
Cunning beggars? -
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Smells like GST fraud. One hopes that Customs have sighted and maybe assayed those coins.
-
merc, in reply to
NO zero ZILCH capital gains tax.
It's our Winter made Summer by this glorious son of Key... -
Angus Robertson, in reply to
A stimulus is a massive desperate gamble. If it works yippee, but we don't do it again and again in the expectation that it will always work, because it won't. Right now no one elsewhere in the developed world is prepared to take that gamble, we should probably pay attention to that sort of thing.
-
A stimulus is a massive desperate gamble. If it works yippee, but we don’t do it again and again in the expectation that it will always work, because it won’t. Right now no one elsewhere in the developed world is prepared to take that gamble, we should probably pay attention to that sort of thing.
With one small statement you wipe out a generation or two of economic wisdom? Not so fast, young master! You are exceeding your fledgling powers!*
Here’s another way of looking at it: if the stimulus involves (as it should) thoughtful spending on things that will provide a good, long-term benefit (education, primary health, children’s health, public transport, broadband internet maybe?) whatever happens to the global economy, how can we lose?
(If, on the other hand, it involves more cheap loans to bankers, great highways to nowhere, and tax breaks for the already affluent- then you’re not only pretty much guaranteed to lose, you could also give the whole stimulus idea a bad name. Not that anyone would want to do that :))
*unless you are a well qualified and experienced economist. In which case, I respectfully disagree with your analysis :) -
Except Australia, which didn't gamble, but rather followed economic orthodoxy and is now enjoying a very creditable economic performance.
Seriously angus, how is a stimulus like a gamble? Where is the risk? As far as I can tell you don't actually understand how counter cyclic spending works.
-
merc, in reply to
I can smell the uranium on their
very creditable economic performance.
That and a certain new navy base.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/world/asia/obama-and-gillard-expand-us-australia-military-ties.html?pagewanted=all -
Richard Grevers, in reply to
First it's necessary to define 'cherry' - the brightest kids aren't always the easiest to teach, and extension work consumes just as many resources as remedial work. Back in the 70's I was streamed into a top class at intermediate school. Such was the range of social maladjustments that we were quite a dysfunctional class. Even more so after our teacher was tragically killed in an accident and the replacement teacher seemed to resent our collective intelligence and was a ruthless bully. Separating bright/gifted/Asperger's spectrum children damages their social development.
The "most profitable" group for a charter school would be the average to above average kids who are relatively undemanding - say the third quartile.
-
Richard Grevers, in reply to
pm me!
Is there a PM faclity here? I can't see it! Don't want a scholarship, just wanted to extend my reply with things I'd rather not post publically under my own name.
-
Greg Dawson, in reply to
(the stimulus didn’t work). Either way we don’t need more stimulus.
The core problem I see with the argument is that you seem to only be open to one possible form of stimulus - tax cuts and pork.
You're using the failure of a specific stimulus program to say that all stimulus programs will fail.
Sensible investments in long term growth strategies (with proven histories of success, unlike say "trickle down") haven't really been tried.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.