Hi All. OK, here is Jawj's rebuttal. I suggested to her that we call them
"government" schools rather than "public" schools in the 3 spots they're
written--makes them sound as horrid as they actually are. Clocks in at 222
words.
The proponents of Proposition G make it sound like we’re against motherhood
and apple pie. They tell us, again without argument, that we need a new
20-year parcel tax to give San Francisco’s public school teachers an extra
2% pay raise so that they can afford to live in the City.
They don’t tell us that, because of the higher cost of living here, our
public school teachers are already paid more than any in the whole Bay area..
Or that *they are paid significantly more than teachers in our private and
religious schools, who never threaten to go on strike.* Or that parents
will sacrifice for private school or home schooling alternatives, so that *only
about 59% of our school age children are educated in public schools.*
Nor are they troubled by the inequities of a parcel tax. Only about a
third of San Franciscans pay it. It’s a perfectly regressive flat sum tax.
Parcel size and value are irrelevant.
But teachers like parcel tax measures because they pass easily whenever
they have “teacher” or “education” in the title. So why *not* ask for a
new 20- year parcel tax, *even when taxpayers still have a decade of
payments to go on the last such parcel tax*?
Fight teacher union manipulation. *VOTE NO ON G.*
Libertarian Party of San Francisco
www.lpsf.org
Thanks!
Aubrey