Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Nevada6077

LDS cons

Recommended Posts

Saw the thread title and thought 'what +++++ing politician are we supposed to be deranged about now?'

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LDS cons? 

I saw the title and thought it was a thread about LDS people in prison. Then I thought it was a thread bashing the LDS for swindling people out of their money like TV preachers do. Then I thought it was a thread about the pro’s & cons of being LDS, except the OP didn’t want to talk about any of the pro’s. 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

Good point, if there's one USA based church that could do a cryptocurrency the LDS would be the one - The internal money making machine & economy could mean most of Utah could change to their own monetary system 

Cryptocurrency Its Happening GIF

Yes i heard trump wanted rubles to be coinage in the states but was talked out of it by rudy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/12/2021 at 1:56 PM, bsu_alum9 said:

A lot of it is urban vs. rural issues.  SLC is about 50% LDS, and went for Biden in 2020.  Most heavily LDS areas are in rural places that vote conservative. 

Wyoming, West Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Idaho, Arkansas, South Dakota, Kentucky, Alabama, and Tennessee are all more "red" than Utah. At least they were in 2020.

Probably comes down more to the quality of public education than anything.

When you detest paying taxes and you're wealthy, you pretty much don't care about that because you just send your kids to private schools. My sense is Utahans actually care a lot about the quality of public schools and although I might disagree considerably about some of their political and religious views, most I've spoken with even in small cities like St. George seemed a lot more intelligent and informed than the average local yokel southerner who somehow found his way to California or Nevada.

 132458e06ee1fcb534edd00148aebd13.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, 818SUDSFan said:

Probably comes down more to the quality of public education than anything.

When you detest paying taxes and you're wealthy, you pretty much don't care about that because you just send your kids to private schools. My sense is Utahans actually care a lot about the quality of public schools and although I might disagree considerably about some of their political and religious views, most I've spoken with even in small cities like St. George seemed a lot more intelligent and informed than the average local yokel southerner who somehow found his way to California or Nevada.

 132458e06ee1fcb534edd00148aebd13.jpeg

On the education issue - I've always used Utah vs Nevada in debating education funding..........both states are very close in overall population.........NV has two universities, one fledgling state college, and a few community college campuses ............Utah has 5 full universities, and a decent community college system 

Now one could point to NV's history of mining & casino's as those two dominant industries don't even require a high school diploma to work a lot of positions .........Utah also has some "Tech" because of their broader university system ...........and then there's taxes, NV relies predominantly on sales taxes, has no state income tax & few taxes on business, while Utah has most of those in place.

Also Utah has more decent sized cities spread around the state than NV does...........NV is basically Clark County which is the greater LV metro area and then there's the Reno/Sparks, Douglas County to Fallon triangle which is 90% of the states population and economic driver..........the rest of NV is mostly sparse ranching, little agriculture, boom bust mining & tiny communities frozen in a 1920 to 1880 era 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

On the education issue - I've always used Utah vs Nevada in debating education funding..........both states are very close in overall population.........NV has two universities, one fledgling state college, and a few community college campuses ............Utah has 5 full universities, and a decent community college system 

Now one could point to NV's history of mining & casino's as those two dominant industries don't even require a high school diploma to work a lot of positions .........Utah also has some "Tech" because of their broader university system ...........and then there's taxes, NV relies predominantly on sales taxes, has no state income tax & few taxes on business, while Utah has most of those in place.

Also Utah has more decent sized cities spread around the state than NV does...........NV is basically Clark County which is the greater LV metro area and then there's the Reno/Sparks, Douglas County to Fallon triangle which is 90% of the states population and economic driver..........the rest of NV is mostly sparse ranching, little agriculture, boom bust mining & tiny communities frozen in a 1920 to 1880 era 

Utah has an amazing university system for such a small state. 
Weber, Utah state, Utah valley, BYu, Utah, Utah Tech, southern Utah, and I’m probably missing a few. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, NevadaFan said:

Utah has an amazing university system for such a small state. 
Weber, Utah state, Utah valley, BYu, Utah, Utah Tech, southern Utah, and I’m probably missing a few. 

That's what I mean......for two states of similar population, Utah has 5 or 6 Public Universities & one large private U (not sure if Weber State is public or private) - if public, that's 6 to NV's UNR & UNLV 

Utah population in 2021 is estimated to be 3.34 million

Nevada population in 2021 is estimated to be 3.2 million

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 818SUDSFan said:

Probably comes down more to the quality of public education than anything.

When you detest paying taxes and you're wealthy, you pretty much don't care about that because you just send your kids to private schools. My sense is Utahans actually care a lot about the quality of public schools and although I might disagree considerably about some of their political and religious views, most I've spoken with even in small cities like St. George seemed a lot more intelligent and informed than the average local yokel southerner who somehow found his way to California or Nevada.

 132458e06ee1fcb534edd00148aebd13.jpeg

WTF?!

Or, rich people live in rich neighborhoods that have great public schools because, you know - they pay the highest property taxes. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, tailingpermit said:

WTF?!

Or, rich people live in rich neighborhoods that have great public schools because, you know - they pay the highest property taxes. 

I’m not sure how property tax works in Idaho but in nevada, property tax goes in a bowl and is dispersed by the county/school district. So no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NevadaFan said:

I’m not sure how property tax works in Idaho but in nevada, property tax goes in a bowl and is dispersed by the county/school district. So no. 

So, the richest neighborhoods in Nevada don’t have the best school districts?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LDS former conservative here, There is no simple answer to this question, and will require a detailed response. I have been wanting to respond to this since it was first posted but have been really busy with work, and I knew it would be a long post, so I haven't built up the motivation to do so until now. I imagine it is probably something similar for the other LDS folks on the board.

This is just based on my own research and experience, so take it for what it is worth.

If you look through the history of Mormonism, you'll find that there was quite a bit of progressivism compared to the rest of the country. For example, the early church was generally abolitionist- Joseph Smith even ran on an abolitionist platform. It was very pro-women's rights- the first woman to be a state congressperson in the country was in Utah (1896, Martha Hughes Cannon, who also had a MD from the University of Michigan), the church was encouraging women to get degrees and become doctors, scientists, etc., LDS women were very active in the Suffrage Movement (they argued that polygamy gave women more freedom because family responsibilities were shared among more people, allowing a wife to do more of whatever she wanted to). It was very community based, receiving praise from various socialist groups around the world, community ownership of business, welfare programs, etc..

But Mormonism at its core is about the individual and his/her place in the universe. Everyone has the freedom to choose for themselves, and attempts to remove that freedom is viewed as wrong. For example, while Mormons are very community oriented, it requires the willing participation of its members to make it work. No one is forced to help, no one is forced to serve in any position, the early communal efforts were all volunteer based. Socialism, especially Communism, as an economic construct is seen as evil because it removes people's freedom to choose whether or not to participate. Everyone is forced to take care of his neighbor, instead of being allowed to volunteer. Mormonism believes very strongly in the individual's responsibility to do everything they can to take care of themselves, and that to make someone else responsible for something that you have the means or time or expertise to do yourself is a sin. I'm not saying it is a sin to pay a plumber to come over and fix some pipes because you are too busy is a sin, or going to Burger King for a whopper when you could cook for yourself is a sin, or to put your kids in daycare because you have to go to work is a sin. What I am saying is that when you have the strength, time, or whatever to go and work, and you instead decide you don't want to work, and you get other people to provide for your needs, that is a sin. Mormons believe in the Grace of God, but we believe that God wants us to do our part first. There is a scripture in the Book of Mormon that says "...it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do." No one can earn or work their way to Heaven, it is only by God's grace. But he requires a willingness to keep His commandments. No one will be forced. Charity, which is the pure love of Christ, is showing tender compassion for the poor, afflicted, and distressed. It is the unforced giving of oneself for the sake of another- "Greater love hath no man than this, than a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13) Charity that comes under the threat of legal consequences is not charity.

American Mormons are generally very patriotic. The church taught that the Constitution was divinely inspired (that doesn't mean that God wrote it or dictated it, but that the men who developed it received inspiration for its development). Its not perfect (3/5ths of a person), but it was fundamentally about the freedom of the individual to choose for themselves.  The founding of the United States was apart of God's plan to bring freedom to his children. Even after being driven out of Illinois and out of the US, after having been denied assistance from the President and the government, the church continued to Celebrate the 4th of July on their journey across the plains and after they had settled in Utah. In the latter half of the 19th century, the Republican Party was vigorously anti-polygamy, so a majority of Mormons leaned Democrat. FDR was elected by Utahns in all 4 elections.

As the 20th century progressed, the church was looking for ways to build bridges and find common ground with other Christians. It had been under intense persecution since its founding, being accused of being anti-American and anti-Christian, and it wanted to find a way to win critics over. In 1951, Church President David O. McKay sent Ezra Taft Benson, a member of the Quorum of 12 Apostles (The church's 2nd highest governing body) to be apart of Eisenhower's cabinet. While he was there, as well as during an earlier humanitarian mission to Europe, Elder Benson became extremely anti-communist, and began to preach against it in basically every sermon. He became very involved with the John Birch Society, an anti-communist organization, and believed that the Democrats and the government were infiltrated by communists, including Eisenhower (he was rebuked by church leaders for this, as well as many of his other views). He was convinced that the Civil Rights movement/Equal Rights Amendment was a communist plot. He was infamous for teaching that it was impossible to be a Democrat and to be a good member of the church. His teachings were very influential in the church, and during the 60's and 70's, there was a gradual shift in political affiliation among members. The church had always been generally conservative, but it began to become exclusively conservative during this time.  When Ezra Taft Benson became president of the church in the 80's, a lot of people worried he would take the church further to the right. Instead, he toned down his right wing rhetoric and began teaching more about being Christ-like and following the scriptures. His counsellors, Gordon B. Hinckley and Thomas S. Monson, worked to moderate the church's stance to be more towards the center. But they weren't very successful.

By the time President Benson died, the vast majority of members were Republicans. It made a lot of sense- Republicans were anti-abortion, limited government, pro-religious freedom, etc.. There were things that didn't necessarily line up with the Republican Party, such as immigration- the church was pro-immigration, believing that every person is a child of God, and should be treated with respect. As members of the church became more and more Republican, they began to adopt a lot of the views and ideas of the rest of the party, such as anti-immigration, an aggressive military posture throughout the world, trickle-down economics, anti-environmentalism, anti-welfare, etc. During the last decade, however, the church as an organization began to shift more towards the center, becoming more involved in civil rights groups such as the NAACP, softening its views on homosexuality (not necessarily gay marriage, but homosexuality in general, although the church says members can support gay marriage if they want), speaking out against anti-immigration and nationalism. Members of the church have, in my view, become so ingrained with the Republican platform that for a lot of people, the platform of the party has replaced their religious beliefs. So many members do these mental gymnastics to force their religious beliefs with what ever the Republican Party believes. There is a split forming between the members of the church and the leadership of the church- the leaders are preaching tolerance, moderation, compassion, compromise, while a lot of members are becoming more entrenched in the Republican party. During the last church conference, President Dallin H. Oaks, a former state supreme court judge, came out and condemned the January 6th Insurrection, and said that there is nothing wrong with voting for a Democrat, and in fact it is better to vote for someone from a different party than your own if your own candidate is not a good one. 

I left the Republican Party in 2012, when I realized that I was spending so much effort trying to fit my beliefs into whatever the Party was saying. I would listen to Rush and Hannity and Beck all the time, eating up whatever they said. I realized that it really was all about owning the libs, not about fiscal responsibility or protecting our country, or whatever. I realized that I didn't believe that all these immigrants trying to come in to the country are stealing jobs or whatever. Around 2012, the church came out with a statement saying that illegal immigrants were still human beings who deserve mercy and charity, and I realized that the Republican Party was saying the opposite thing. I started to re-evaluate my political views and realized that while I agree with a lot of what the Republican Party says it stands for, such as fiscal responsibility, there were a lot of things I agreed with Democrats on, such as the environment, and social justice. I know I'm not the only one in the church who has left the Republican Party over these things, I have spoken with many of my friends who say they consider themselves independent now. But there are still a lot of people who are stuck in the tribalism mindset that they double down on all of the conspiracies and whatever else Trump has said. I don't know what is going to happen, but I think you will see a lot of people leave the church in the next few years, because it is not conservative enough for them. Trumpism has become their new religion.

 

There is so much more to this, such as the whole black lives matter movement, science and evolution, or how members from the south influenced early church thinking, that I wish I could explain but my brain is pretty tired from writing this essay. Feel free to engage me on it.

"BYU is like a 4-year-long church dance with 20,000 chaperones all waiting for you to forget to shave one morning so they can throw you out." -GeoAg

l.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, NevadaFan said:

I’m not sure how property tax works in Idaho but in nevada, property tax goes in a bowl and is dispersed by the county/school district. So no. 

NV schools districts are based on counties, not various cities or township designations, so the funding should be more equitable over a wider area...........where some states have city, county or other districts broken down to smaller sizes, and that's where you get the richer & poorer school districts .

There's a push by some in Clark County to break up CCSD into smaller units or even break out the cities as their own districts ..........so Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, Boulder City & Mesquite could all form their own districts.........they haven't made their funding plan public yet, but this move will create some financial woes for some districts & could cause increases in local property taxes to cover the costs that now are shared countywide 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Naggsty Butler said:

LDS former conservative here, There is no simple answer to this question, and will require a detailed response. I have been wanting to respond to this since it was first posted but have been really busy with work, and I knew it would be a long post, so I haven't built up the motivation to do so until now. I imagine it is probably something similar for the other LDS folks on the board.

This is just based on my own research and experience, so take it for what it is worth.

If you look through the history of Mormonism, you'll find that there was quite a bit of progressivism compared to the rest of the country. For example, the early church was generally abolitionist- Joseph Smith even ran on an abolitionist platform. It was very pro-women's rights- the first woman to be a state congressperson in the country was in Utah (1896, Martha Hughes Cannon, who also had a MD from the University of Michigan), the church was encouraging women to get degrees and become doctors, scientists, etc., LDS women were very active in the Suffrage Movement (they argued that polygamy gave women more freedom because family responsibilities were shared among more people, allowing a wife to do more of whatever she wanted to). It was very community based, receiving praise from various socialist groups around the world, community ownership of business, welfare programs, etc..

But Mormonism at its core is about the individual and his/her place in the universe. Everyone has the freedom to choose for themselves, and attempts to remove that freedom is viewed as wrong. For example, while Mormons are very community oriented, it requires the willing participation of its members to make it work. No one is forced to help, no one is forced to serve in any position, the early communal efforts were all volunteer based. Socialism, especially Communism, as an economic construct is seen as evil because it removes people's freedom to choose whether or not to participate. Everyone is forced to take care of his neighbor, instead of being allowed to volunteer. Mormonism believes very strongly in the individual's responsibility to do everything they can to take care of themselves, and that to make someone else responsible for something that you have the means or time or expertise to do yourself is a sin. I'm not saying it is a sin to pay a plumber to come over and fix some pipes because you are too busy is a sin, or going to Burger King for a whopper when you could cook for yourself is a sin, or to put your kids in daycare because you have to go to work is a sin. What I am saying is that when you have the strength, time, or whatever to go and work, and you instead decide you don't want to work, and you get other people to provide for your needs, that is a sin. Mormons believe in the Grace of God, but we believe that God wants us to do our part first. There is a scripture in the Book of Mormon that says "...it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do." No one can earn or work their way to Heaven, it is only by God's grace. But he requires a willingness to keep His commandments. No one will be forced. Charity, which is the pure love of Christ, is showing tender compassion for the poor, afflicted, and distressed. It is the unforced giving of oneself for the sake of another- "Greater love hath no man than this, than a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13) Charity that comes under the threat of legal consequences is not charity.

American Mormons are generally very patriotic. The church taught that the Constitution was divinely inspired (that doesn't mean that God wrote it or dictated it, but that the men who developed it received inspiration for its development). Its not perfect (3/5ths of a person), but it was fundamentally about the freedom of the individual to choose for themselves.  The founding of the United States was apart of God's plan to bring freedom to his children. Even after being driven out of Illinois and out of the US, after having been denied assistance from the President and the government, the church continued to Celebrate the 4th of July on their journey across the plains and after they had settled in Utah. In the latter half of the 19th century, the Republican Party was vigorously anti-polygamy, so a majority of Mormons leaned Democrat. FDR was elected by Utahns in all 4 elections.

As the 20th century progressed, the church was looking for ways to build bridges and find common ground with other Christians. It had been under intense persecution since its founding, being accused of being anti-American and anti-Christian, and it wanted to find a way to win critics over. In 1951, Church President David O. McKay sent Ezra Taft Benson, a member of the Quorum of 12 Apostles (The church's 2nd highest governing body) to be apart of Eisenhower's cabinet. While he was there, as well as during an earlier humanitarian mission to Europe, Elder Benson became extremely anti-communist, and began to preach against it in basically every sermon. He became very involved with the John Birch Society, an anti-communist organization, and believed that the Democrats and the government were infiltrated by communists, including Eisenhower (he was rebuked by church leaders for this, as well as many of his other views). He was convinced that the Civil Rights movement/Equal Rights Amendment was a communist plot. He was infamous for teaching that it was impossible to be a Democrat and to be a good member of the church. His teachings were very influential in the church, and during the 60's and 70's, there was a gradual shift in political affiliation among members. The church had always been generally conservative, but it began to become exclusively conservative during this time.  When Ezra Taft Benson became president of the church in the 80's, a lot of people worried he would take the church further to the right. Instead, he toned down his right wing rhetoric and began teaching more about being Christ-like and following the scriptures. His counsellors, Gordon B. Hinckley and Thomas S. Monson, worked to moderate the church's stance to be more towards the center. But they weren't very successful.

By the time President Benson died, the vast majority of members were Republicans. It made a lot of sense- Republicans were anti-abortion, limited government, pro-religious freedom, etc.. There were things that didn't necessarily line up with the Republican Party, such as immigration- the church was pro-immigration, believing that every person is a child of God, and should be treated with respect. As members of the church became more and more Republican, they began to adopt a lot of the views and ideas of the rest of the party, such as anti-immigration, an aggressive military posture throughout the world, trickle-down economics, anti-environmentalism, anti-welfare, etc. During the last decade, however, the church as an organization began to shift more towards the center, becoming more involved in civil rights groups such as the NAACP, softening its views on homosexuality (not necessarily gay marriage, but homosexuality in general, although the church says members can support gay marriage if they want), speaking out against anti-immigration and nationalism. Members of the church have, in my view, become so ingrained with the Republican platform that for a lot of people, the platform of the party has replaced their religious beliefs. So many members do these mental gymnastics to force their religious beliefs with what ever the Republican Party believes. There is a split forming between the members of the church and the leadership of the church- the leaders are preaching tolerance, moderation, compassion, compromise, while a lot of members are becoming more entrenched in the Republican party. During the last church conference, President Dallin H. Oaks, a former state supreme court judge, came out and condemned the January 6th Insurrection, and said that there is nothing wrong with voting for a Democrat, and in fact it is better to vote for someone from a different party than your own if your own candidate is not a good one. 

I left the Republican Party in 2012, when I realized that I was spending so much effort trying to fit my beliefs into whatever the Party was saying. I would listen to Rush and Hannity and Beck all the time, eating up whatever they said. I realized that it really was all about owning the libs, not about fiscal responsibility or protecting our country, or whatever. I realized that I didn't believe that all these immigrants trying to come in to the country are stealing jobs or whatever. Around 2012, the church came out with a statement saying that illegal immigrants were still human beings who deserve mercy and charity, and I realized that the Republican Party was saying the opposite thing. I started to re-evaluate my political views and realized that while I agree with a lot of what the Republican Party says it stands for, such as fiscal responsibility, there were a lot of things I agreed with Democrats on, such as the environment, and social justice. I know I'm not the only one in the church who has left the Republican Party over these things, I have spoken with many of my friends who say they consider themselves independent now. But there are still a lot of people who are stuck in the tribalism mindset that they double down on all of the conspiracies and whatever else Trump has said. I don't know what is going to happen, but I think you will see a lot of people leave the church in the next few years, because it is not conservative enough for them. Trumpism has become their new religion.

 

There is so much more to this, such as the whole black lives matter movement or how members from the south influenced early church thinking, that I wish I could explain but my brain is pretty tired from writing this essay. Feel free to engage me on it.

Good write - I will say that ( and this is just reality) the Mormons have been persecuted since day one...........from their forming they have had to be on the move from east to west until Brigham said "screw it we are done" & moved on west to Utah to basically form their own country (Deseret) and at that time there were few states west of the Mississippi ........and of course when the "manifest destiny" of the US western expansion started to close in on the Mormon enclave in Deseret things got tense. 

That is probably where the LDS being anti-USA probably came from 

The move to "republican" probably came from the Reagan era when evangelicals (Moral Majority, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, etc) got their clutches on the republican party basically turning it from what it was to a theologically driven party that focused on abortion & "family values" so seeing the LDS follow suit isn't surprising .........looking back at elections from pre-1980's Utah & Idaho both went to democrat Lyndon Johnson, whose policy agenda was well known ..........this was the era where the southern states flipped from democrat to republican where they remain today, just because of Johnson & Democrats backing civil rights & the old south couldn't tolerate that 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tailingpermit said:

So, the richest neighborhoods in Nevada don’t have the best school districts?

He's saying in Nevada they are funded more equally.  Idaho's are not as equal in terms of funding per student especially when talking about facilities.  A lot more locally funded and have to pass with 2/3 vote for a bond increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

Good write - I will say that ( and this is just reality) the Mormons have been persecuted since day one...........from their forming they have had to be on the move from east to west until Brigham said "screw it we are done" & moved on west to Utah to basically form their own country (Deseret) and at that time there were few states west of the Mississippi ........and of course when the "manifest destiny" of the US western expansion started to close in on the Mormon enclave in Deseret things got tense. 

That is probably where the LDS being anti-USA probably came from 

The move to "republican" probably came from the Reagan era when evangelicals (Moral Majority, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, etc) got their clutches on the republican party basically turning it from what it was to a theologically driven party that focused on abortion & "family values" so seeing the LDS follow suit isn't surprising .........looking back at elections from pre-1980's Utah & Idaho both went to democrat Lyndon Johnson, whose policy agenda was well known ..........this was the era where the southern states flipped from democrat to republican where they remain today, just because of Johnson & Democrats backing civil rights & the old south couldn't tolerate that 

You started to see a lot of Mormons sound like evangelicals with regards to politics, adopting stances that the church didn't necessarily have, but believing that it did because the Republican Party was the right party and of course it would line up with their beliefs. A lot of people are starting to realize that the things they have believed for a really long time were really just things that the Republican Party taught and the church teaches something completely different.

"BYU is like a 4-year-long church dance with 20,000 chaperones all waiting for you to forget to shave one morning so they can throw you out." -GeoAg

l.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

He's saying in Nevada they are funded more equally.  Idaho's are not as equal in terms of funding per student especially when talking about facilities.  A lot more locally funded and have to pass with 2/3 vote for a bond increase.

Not sure how it is in Florida, but in Illinois the best public schools are in the richest neighborhoods.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tailingpermit said:

So, the richest neighborhoods in Nevada don’t have the best school districts?

Not public schools - all are funded county wide 

Private schools are in upscale areas 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

On the education issue - I've always used Utah vs Nevada in debating education funding..........both states are very close in overall population.........NV has two universities, one fledgling state college, and a few community college campuses ............Utah has 5 full universities, and a decent community college system 

Now one could point to NV's history of mining & casino's as those two dominant industries don't even require a high school diploma to work a lot of positions .........Utah also has some "Tech" because of their broader university system ...........and then there's taxes, NV relies predominantly on sales taxes, has no state income tax & few taxes on business, while Utah has most of those in place.

Also Utah has more decent sized cities spread around the state than NV does...........NV is basically Clark County which is the greater LV metro area and then there's the Reno/Sparks, Douglas County to Fallon triangle which is 90% of the states population and economic driver..........the rest of NV is mostly sparse ranching, little agriculture, boom bust mining & tiny communities frozen in a 1920 to 1880 era 

Which is good because most of the hicks from the Deep South who move to Nevada for work don't have one.

132458e06ee1fcb534edd00148aebd13.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tailingpermit said:

So, the richest neighborhoods in Nevada don’t have the best school districts?

It’s more complicated than that. The poorest neighborhoods probably get more money in Northern Nevada from the state/county but they are also dealing with English as a second language learners, kids whose parents work and can’t help as much, etc. And some schools have booster clubs or organizations that help raise money to pay for things the district won’t fund. I’ve been on boards of booster clubs at McQueen HS and we raised tens of thousands of dollars for sports programs. Plus, let’s be honest. The best teachers generally wanna teach academically achieving students. Those who can take the summer classes or get tutors… there are fewer of those kids on average in poor schools. Reno High has a high achieving faculty and great principal. It’s in a great neighborhood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn’t answer your question. Yes. The best neighborhoods in Reno have the best schools. But there are a ton of reasons why as I pointed out. And sadly, I empathize with this situation but unlike others who lean left, I don’t think these problems can be solved by school districts. Unfortunately they teach to the mean and try to fit everyone in a bucket. It’s way more complicated than that as I’m sure most would agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...