Baton Rouge Wealthy Want Their Own Town So Their Kids Won't Have To Attend School With Poor Kids

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=BLOOM&date=20140206&id=17328094

 

 

"In East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, middle-class and wealthy neighborhoods want an educational divorce from a neighboring community where four out of 10 families live in poverty.

Saying they want local control, they’re trying to leave the 42,000-pupil public-education system. They envision their own district funded by property taxes from their higher-value homes, which would take money from schools in poorer parts of state-capital Baton Rouge, home of Louisiana State University. They even want their own city."

 

 

And so it goes. The rich continue their class warfare against the poor. Blatant bigotry and hatred.

To leave a comment, please sign in with
or or

Comments (12)

  1. rebel62

    If the religious can have their own schools or teach their children at home, I guess the rich can have their own schools too. As a matter of fact, you could say, all Ivey league schools are for the rich as the poor can not afford them.

    February 07, 2014
    1. deaconjim

      Yes, but for grades K-12, the rich have the option of private school. In Baton Rouge, they’re attempting to use the public school system to sanction their segregation. Sorta like taxpayer funded private school for them.

      February 07, 2014
  2. rebel62

    I did not come from a rich family and I went to private school. Many countries would kill to have a public school system like we have. Are you saying, the rich should not be able to send their children to private school? I think many who send their children to private school do not intentionally want to segregate children. My parents for example thought private school had better teachers and that is all they were interested. They should not have to feel guilty because someone else is incapable of doing the same. We do not all have the same skills to earn a living.

    these who are fortunate should not be guilted into sending their children to a school they think is not good enough for their children. If they want to spend extra money to educate their children and pay more school tax let them. After all not only will they be paying school taxes for their children, they will still be paying taxes for the public school system the poor children attend, just like everywhere else in the entire united states. I went to private school and my parents had to pay for it and they had to pay school taxes for public schools too.

    It sounds like someone is throwing the race or class card to be politically correct. If anything it should show how their parents are advancing their local community, not segregating it. This issue is like forced bussing, where they used to force the middle class children to go to schools in neighborhood were they were resented for being middle class. While sending the poor to middle class schools were they were resented for being poor. Why do we play games with our children to look politically correct? The forced bussing act, did not work, it was a failure and the children suffered for it. It is like saying the rich should not buy a new car because their neighbor can not afford one. This is just my opinion and I am not trying to argue so please do not get offended, thank you.

    February 07, 2014
    1. deaconjim

      Oh no, quite the contrary. I have no problem with them sending their kids to private schools. I don’t necessarily think this issue has anything to do with race either. I’m only speculating from what I read, but it seems these parents want to create a new city or town so they can have their own school district, which would exclude the children from poor families, whose education they no longer wish to subsidize. It says in the article, the amount of tax dollars being spent per child would be higher in the new school district, which would lower the amount being spent per child in the current school district. They seem to want the benefit of private schooling without having to pay both the higher tuition and tax dollars. Maybe I’m being a bit cynical, I don’t know.

      February 07, 2014
      1. rebel62

        Even if they did create a new town or city with their own schools, they can not get away without paying public school taxes. Everyone has to pay no matter what, even if you are single with no children in school, you pay. As far as not paying as much that could be true, but it is true of anyone sending their child to private school, they pay less for public school taxes. Again, this is still a normal situation. It seems as if the article is trying to start an issue that is not really an issue, this scenario happens all over the country all the time and is nothing new.


        I used to live in a really bad area when I first started school. My mother was terrified to send us to public school as we were one of the few white families in the area. The closest school was the public school Martin Luther King. Seeing how I used to get beat up as a young child because I was a white child and apparently responsible for all evil and racism in the world. My mother thought it would be stupid to send me to the local public school, Martin Luther King.


        I was sent to private school, after that I only got beat up on the way to school or from school but at least I was ok while in school and could actually learn something. In public school there was also the issue of the skill of the teachers, usually in many inter city schools the teachers are either starting out and desperate for a job or they are at the end of their careers or not up to standard to work anywhere else. I am not saying there is not any good teachers but, the writing is on the wall, most good teachers are smart enough to teach were they are appreciated. In Martin Luther King, a teacher was raped in a closet, I would say my mother made the right decision to send us to private school.


        The person that is responsible for the article, must be a politically correct left wing democrat extremist. They should send their children to that school, even if there is no violence, the issue of the standard of learning is always there. I think the child should come first not a politically correct agenda. If the parents want to start a new school district and take “some not all” of their money with them so be it. After all they could just move out and take all there money with them, like my parents eventually did.

        February 07, 2014
        1. deaconjim

          Sorry to hear about you getting beaten up. I’m glad a switch to private school helped alleviate that somewhat.

          February 08, 2014
          1. rebel62

            I don’t think it was the switch to private school solely that stopped the violence, I think it was the location of the school, it was out of the city. Its like the real-estate saying “location, location, location” the savages could not get at me any longer.

            February 08, 2014
  3. hickoryposcery

    That is terrible. These people are giving the middle-class and wealthy classes everywhere a bad name. Most of the middle-wealthy class people I have met have been very nice and generously donate to good causes. Why do they think having their own private school or even city will solve anything?

    http://www.pinewood.edu

    September 05, 2014
  4. GoldenPig2012

    Yes. After my initial outrage, I thought, “Let ’em have it. And let ’em pay for every dang thing TO have it”. EVERYTHING.

    February 09, 2014
    1. GoldenPig2012

      When it isn’t just a matter of paying a tuition of some sort to separate their children from the poor and frightening, well, they just might have second thoughts.

      February 10, 2014