My boss's wife teaches in rural PA.  The same is true for rural white schools there. Very much so. They can't afford squat.

You can imagine similar in the city.

Quick search finds this:

http://www.ascd.org/publicatio...the-United-States.aspx

My daughter taught for a while in Pine Hills and can certainly confirm a huge funding gap there...


-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Our findings suggest that spending differences between the inner city schools and suburban schools in our review do exist, but these differences for the most part depend upon the metropolitan area. In some metropolitan areas, inner city schools spent more per pupil whereas in others suburban schools spent more per pupil. Spending differences, regardless of metropolitan area for the most part, seemed to be the result of differences in salaries and student to teacher and staff ratios. However, the very heavy concentration of poverty in inner city schools may place them at a spending disadvantage, even when spending is equal. In addition, the suburban schools, as well as the high-performing inner city schools we visited, generally had more experienced teachers, lower enrollments, more library books per child, and more parental in-school volunteer activities than the other inner city schools in this study. These factors are important to consider in improving the performance of inner city schools.

From a GAO report.  Okay, it is a complex issue.

Then there is this.

Can of worms is now open.

There's never a teacher anywhere in this country who has ever said that they are getting too much money. They get plenty of money. They squander it on stupid stuff. That is shown by the fact that we spend more per student than almost every other country in the world. Yet, we don't get the results. Does that tell you something? It does not, of course, inform progs, who stupidly demand more of the same failed policies. The rest of us, however, see the problem, and it ain't lack of money. Progs want bad schools. If they actually educated people, who would vote for their politicians? It is no coincidence that progs win the vote primarily in areas with horrible schools.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

There is some hope;

Some of the oldest of Generation Z voted in the 2016 elections. And the question is, will this be yet another group of youth with an entitled and emotion-based approach to life? Or will it be a generation guided by effective role models and adult leaders?

Based on early unscientific data, these first-time voters, raised during times of recession and personal debt, are more fiscally conservative than their Millennial elders.

A survey of 50,000 high school students aged 14 to 18 years old was shocking: Donald Trump won among participants by 46% to Hillary Clinton's 31%. A majority identified as Republicans in this Presidential Pulse Study's entire polling audience.

Further, those casting their ballots for the first time acknowledged the economy as the most important issue followed by education, gun rights and health care. Fifty-six percent declared the country is headed in the wrong direction. That's a stark departure from the "progressive" mantra that Barack Obama was great and the answer was more of the same through Hillary.

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

Ha.

They won't even be in the same ballpark with the Tea Baggers.

Edit: Tampa Paul convinces me again with his superb discourse!