On the Bright Side, at Least We're Getting Our Money's Worth Out of Washington's Public Schools...



So you favor an asset tax then?
@1 Absolutely. I don't know why you keep asking me that. You're really just talking about an intangible property tax, which would be totally constitutional.
Or we could throw out the Eyman trash and the completely moronic, stupid, idiotic, and deranged manner in which we vote for education funding, which is a backward and stupid quirk to only certain states where libertarian prions have given the local culture the equivalent of political mad cow disease over the years.

We're a representative democracy. Elect people to raise taxes on education funding to the level that the majority of the people like. If we decide they're getting out of hand we replace those officials. If this means 45% of the Washington population (read: red counties) are unhappy, they have recourse: convince more people to vote 'red' and you can have your way.

Welcome to how America is meant to be.

Ok, so then since we all agree, let's get together and push for the adoption of HB-2100 sponsored by Bob Hasegawa.

Why isn't this front page...I hear the same arguments over and over again, but when a real solution is proposed, HB2100 it gets buried...
I'm all for funding schools properly, but this is not a good road to go down. If you use the graduation percentage numbers from that new release


and you compare with the funding values in the pdf you provide, these are the plots you get for rank in funding vs. graduation percentage:

without names:

with names:

If you use, say, spearman's rank correlation coefficient to assess the significance of a correlation between rank in funding and graduation percentage, the correlation appears to be insignificant at this level. My eye wants to find a correlation in those plots, but the scatter and confounding factors are too many I think.
I think it is safe to say that the scatter decreases with increased funding, except for AK and DC.