Washblog

thanks for posting on this

Will they act on the advice of our state's top economists and begin to repair the damage of a devastating local economy? Or will they make it worse by acting out of their usual political expedience?

Is that it? (And picking on Latin teachers, sheesh.)

Now if this was a dilemma, the alternative would be that the only people who could run for public office would be those who could bankroll their own campaigns or run Really Good bakesales.

It's not a dilemma, is it?

"Collection Of Evidence": so, what you're doing is teaching kids how to collect the evidence to prove that they've learned (and earned) the diploma?

Don't schools lose money when kids don't graduate?

Unbelievable! Even if Mr. Carlyle doesn't prevail on the legislature, don't the schools see their own bacon in the fire?

Soccer moms can't take it and won't stand for it, I guess. Is that it? Pay for remedial classes so your kid can pass the WASL (while you do whatever you do). If you can't... and don't.. you're not doing your part to help "public" education?

I.. I.. just... whew! Self-interest seems to have gone in a direction I don't comprehend, here.

As for the predictions of our state's economist - I've seen his work and I'm not sanguine. He was wildly off the mark in '07 and '08 in his private sector jobs.

Of course so were almost all economists, but I just don't think that the crisis has been in place long enough for the kinds of models most of these guys use to respond yet.

I'm not saying that the sky is falling. The crisis at America's large banks seems to be in hand for the first time in a year or so. We've just got to keep that first, big, deflationary wave from swamping the boats of the states and counties.

First, not everyone on that list is an economist. A bit of research would have shown you that.

Second, I don't really consider an adjunct professor at a community college to be a powerhous of economic thought. The Washington State Budget & Policy Center rounded up a bunch of peole on the state payroll to come out and say...drumroll please...they don't want state budget cuts. Who'd a thunk it?

Third, the appeal to "economic theory" is vacuous. What economic theory? They're trying to paint a picture of consensus where none exists.

This letter is an ideologically driven polemic, and nothing more. Lawmakers should give this no more weight than any other letter signed by 30 people randomly chosen from the phone book.

There are those who believe that the best way for the state to meet this wave of unemployment is create, admittedly, a bit more unemployment. They hope, however, that economic benefit from gains in government efficiency and lower taxes will offset these additional job losses and that the loss of services will not appreciably damage the economy.

Then there are those who believe that the wave of unemployment is sufficiently large to warrant structural changes to the state's finances. They know (I hope) that higher taxes have an economic cost and that improvements in government efficiency are, if anything, more important now than ever. But they feel that the economic danger from adding unemployment and reducing services is unacceptably large.

Then there are the people who don't want to pay.