More Californians leave the state for other states than migrate in from other states. But until covid restrictions it was growing anyway due to immigration from outside the US. That immigration is picking up again.
Even before the pandemic, California had more residents moving out than in: Between 2010 and 2019, census data showed an average of around 100,000 more departures than arrivals.
But thanks to large numbers of immigrants, California sustained consistent growth during that time period. Florida was the only state that received more immigrants during that decade.
The pandemic exodus quadrupled California’s existing out-migration patterns. Meanwhile, Trump-era immigration policies combined with Covid restrictions slammed the brakes on immigration, erasing the previous population gains the state saw each year.
Again, he is noticing only the white Californians moving to whiter areas like Idaho and the white parts of Texas. I know several myself, and yeah, racists, so good riddance. CA certainly needs to step up efforts to count the illegals.
Problem here is that CA’s are not leaving because of taxes or socialism. It’s simply too expensive to live here (housing and utilities), and the more affordable places in CA have too many not-white middle-class (and higher) folks, or they’re too far from the beach (which is a main reason some people are here). Accepting a shittier place to live in the USA is part of the compromise to save more money in retirement. Simple financial logic. And racism.
I have a friend who recently retired from California to Florida. Mostly, he did it because he could buy twice as much house for half as much money, and he’s not working any more. And he wanted to live someplace warm. And maybe he has a sister there or something.
I wouldn’t move to Florida for any number of reasons (let’s start with mildew, though) but i can see the appeal if you like always-too-warm weather.
I think a lot varies by state. I’m most familiar with Ohio and Washington as those are the two states where I actually was a certificated teacher. (Don’t ask why “certificated” rather than “certified”.)
In Ohio most funding is local… and better off areas tend to have better schools. In Washington most funding is state… and better off areas tend to have better schools.
A massive problem with the state model in Washington when I was teaching there was that the state provided the same per-pupil funding statewide. Well everything is a crap-ton more expensive in the heart of downtown Seattle than it is in, say, Yakima. Yet Yakima was getting the same per-pupil funding as Seattle. I heard that they might have finally changed this after I left. Things were really coming to a head with Seattle Public Schools as the buildings were falling apart and no one was willing to work there for the wages they paid. They could make almost as much money in Yakima and have a much higher standard of living.
But in both Washington and Ohio the nicer public school districts paid less than the crappy public school districts. And the private schools paid less than the nicer public school districts. Because they didn’t need to. (I taught in an extremely wealthy district and made less than I would have in Seattle Public Schools, but I really didn’t want to teach in Seattle Public Schools.)
There are enough teachers that would accept lower pay in exchange for better working conditions that there was no need to pay them the same or more while still attracting quality teachers.
I certainly agree that all teachers, especially the ones in STEM fields, are underpaid though. In college I looked at schools in Luxembourg. Teachers in Luxembourg make more money than doctors in Luxembourg. It’s the field that the best and brightest strive for. And they have the best public schools in the world. Shocker.
I’m not sure that we need to immediately quintuple teacher pay to put the field on par with Luxembourg. But an across-the-board increase would be great if we weren’t sacrificing other things (like class size) to accomplish it.
That said, in the United States for similar funding and crappy level of teacher pay, there’s still big differences in school quality that cannot be explained solely (or even partially in most cases) by teacher pay. My experience is that it’s an inverse relationship between quality and pay. Not that we should pay teachers less… just that neither school district budget nor teacher salary chart are really the primary causal factors explaining the district-to-district disparities in the US.
Many of those successful schools may have the additional resources they need to serve their student body. However, those resources probably aren’t provided by regular funding. PTOs in wealthy areas often raise significant amounts of money for additional staff, materials, even buildings. That’s on top of the volunteer hours put in by parents.
I’m sure there are incredibly rare exceptions like Gnome’s where a small, wealthy system actually funds things well and pays above market rates. And even then, the debate team was funded by donations, not taxes.
I’ve also done both. Yes, actuarial exams are tougher than the Praxis. But the day-to-day work? Teaching is much harder, oftentimes draining, and significantly less financially rewarding.
And to Lucy’s point that “some under qualified people are accepted because they can’t fill the ranks,” wouldn’t it be great if teaching salaries were high enough that we could raise the bar a bit?
Also, I’m going to be honest, if teaching paid as much as actuarial work, I’d probably have been a teacher. And I’d probably have out-competed some people who are currently working as teachers, because it’s something I’m pretty good at, and i had pretty good credentials.
I agree with this. The version of the NTE that Ohio required for certification for grades 7-12 mathematics back when I got certified was no joke. There was Abstract Algebra on there. I’m not sure I could pass it if I took it today. It was no problem when I took it in college with like one week to go in my Abstract Algebra class, but I’m sure I’ve forgotten stuff since then.
That said, the actuarial exams are certainly harder. And there were a bunch of versions of the test for math teachers that states could choose from and I believe that Ohio happened to choose one of the harder versions.
(The general knowledge exam and the professional knowledge exam were both a complete joke. The general knowledge exam was like 4th grade level material… maybe 5th grade if you weren’t in the advanced track in elementary school. And the professional knowledge stuff was very very obvious too. But the exam specific to junior high / high school math was actually a real challenge.)
coworkers district - she was on the PTO fundraising committee for a thing that raised enough for paying for 2 full time staff members (and their benefits) above the usual district funding.
my district (not as well off) the PTO raised money to pay for buses to make field trips more affordable.
Not so much an expectation, but clarifying they said that as not mocking another person for such an attitude, but that it was seemingly said and taken as true. So maybe not just folks trying to get to a whiter place. You can make your own judgement about whether that person is racist.
I think that’s true in general. My husband taught at a private school for a couple of years because he wasn’t certified to teach in the public schools.
I think another element with teachers is that we are still “coasting” off cultural norms that encouraged women to be teachers, even when they could have had other jobs that pay more (which were bad for individual women but good for the quality of our teachers.)
I think there are still cultural forces that encourage women to be the primary caregiver, and this probably pushes them to be teachers too. But it’s getting less and less, particularly as women are coming to be much better educated than men are on average.
I wonder if it will push the salaries of teachers up.
Honest question because I’m no teacher. Never was.
I get the impression that private schools are not obligated to accept all students. Maybe based on religion, maybe something else. It also seems they are not required to accept special needs pupils - like deaf, emotionally disabled, etc.
Should the quid pro quo for accepting vouchers be open to all, just like public schools?
i don’t think that a private school can refuse a student based in the student’s religion. they can require that all students who attend school also attend religious services, and so require that students practice a religion in that sense.
Similarly, a private school may not offer all kinds of accommodations. Then a student who needs those accommodations would not succeed, and might be expelled for bad grades. this is not the same as refusing students because they have special needs.
That doesn’t answer your question about whether, in exchange for vouchers, these schools would have to be open to everybody.
But making them open to everybody would require a lot more than just changing admission rules.
In Indiana we have school choice. Religious schools are not eligible. For private school options we have a couple of charter schools nearby and a couple of Montessori schools nearby. Students can also go out of district to their choice of public school as long as transportation is provided and the school has space. We take my kids to a different public school that is very low rated on great schools. Why? Because it’s the neighborhood our church is in and we know everyone at the school, it’s actually closer to our house, and the school they’re supposed to go to has 2300 students and the school they do go to has 350 students. I have 0 complaints about the education they received from this “low” rated school. I’m fact it being small has allowed them to both play whatever sports they want and get attention they might not have gotten somewhere else. It’s not low rated because the teachers are no good and kids can’t learn there, it’s low rated because a large proportion of the students don’t want to learn there.