George Kaiser and philanthropy...

[heironymouspasparagus]

The conversation went from "Bringing in new people with new ideas to create new companies" to "hiring for jobs at big, old established firms."

Having both are important. 

But, I think getting Tulsa to be seen as a modern thinking,  "entrepreneurial" city that is both welcoming to newcomers AND supportive of those entrepreneurs who are here, is important. 

And I do get the point that it often doesn't seem like we adequately and as visually/vocally support what is already here and going on.  Do think there are some positive signs on that front though.  A more vigorous "buy local/support local" push by the city would not only be great for those that are here but send a HUGE positive signal to those new entrepreneurs that we are wanting to attract from around the world, that Tulsa is a great, worthwhile place to be.  If when they get here they are going to be ignored like those who are already here are, that's not a good signal to send. If they think that when they get here the attention will instantly go off of them and instead be "getting in someone new", that again is also not a good signal to send. These young, entrepreneurial people aren't stupid. They can see how the people/businesses (downtown stores as a per instance) that are already here are being ignored and not promoted.

'Prodigal Son' syndrome.  Or a bird in the hand can be ignored while chasing after the one in the bush...?


I think there has been some movement toward developing local talent - 36 North is pretty cool.  And The Forge is making the right noises (but I am not familiar with them to comment on effectiveness).   FabLab looks interesting, but seems to be more kid oriented.

We are having things happen in the right direction, and I think this one probably is too...maybe?...progress is slow and halting.

[rebound]

"Tulsa Governor in this case won't help.  He has already said he was against the pay raises for teachers - the entry point from which all education flows.  And would like to rescind the raises."

Do you have an article or quote where Gov.-Elect Stitt says he wants to rescind the teacher pay raises. Everything I've seen says Gov.-Elect Stitt wants to increase teacher pay more. For example, this right-before-the-election article:

"Stitt has set a goal of making Oklahoma the highest paying for teachers out in the six-state region.

While he hasn't set a specific number, Stitt has promised to seek an education funding increase next year through a growth in the state's tax base and more efficient spending, but not through tax hikes."

https://newsok.com/article/5613609/candidates-differ-on-teacher-pay-in-first-year

And this just-after-the-election article:

"But [Stitt] has also vowed to increase spending in education and said he would seek another teacher pay raise during the first year of his administration."

https://newsok.com/article/5614226/kevin-stitt-wins-governors-race

And his campaign website itself:

"Raise teacher pay so that it matches the pay of teachers in our six-state footprint. With 95 percent of Oklahoma children attending public schools, we must ensure those on the front lines of teaching our children receive the support they need to succeed."

https://www.stittforgovernor.com/issues/

I don't know about rescinding, but Stitt is on record saying he would not have voted for the teacher pay raise that was recently passed.  He has said something to the effect that he didn't want to tie the raises to a volatile funding source like natural gas taxes, or similar.

If in fact he is serious about getting school funding and teacher salaries back on track, I'll give him time to prove out his position.   But, it's a lot easier to talk about wanting to increase spending (which is what it will take) than to actually do it.   The state will have to go get money somewhere, and that will mean (in some way, shape, or form...) raising taxes.   I am extremely doubtful that Stitt, or OK legislature in general, will do that.

[heironymouspasparagus]

"Tulsa Governor in this case won't help.  He has already said he was against the pay raises for teachers - the entry point from which all education flows.  And would like to rescind the raises."

Do you have an article or quote where Gov.-Elect Stitt says he wants to rescind the teacher pay raises. Everything I've seen says Gov.-Elect Stitt wants to increase teacher pay more. For example, this right-before-the-election article:

"Stitt has set a goal of making Oklahoma the highest paying for teachers out in the six-state region.

While he hasn't set a specific number, Stitt has promised to seek an education funding increase next year through a growth in the state's tax base and more efficient spending, but not through tax hikes."

https://newsok.com/article/5613609/candidates-differ-on-teacher-pay-in-first-year

And this just-after-the-election article:

"But [Stitt] has also vowed to increase spending in education and said he would seek another teacher pay raise during the first year of his administration."

https://newsok.com/article/5614226/kevin-stitt-wins-governors-race

And his campaign website itself:

"Raise teacher pay so that it matches the pay of teachers in our six-state footprint. With 95 percent of Oklahoma children attending public schools, we must ensure those on the front lines of teaching our children receive the support they need to succeed."

https://www.stittforgovernor.com/issues/

Yeah...same kind of lies Failin' has been mouthing for years now - about 'supporting' education and improving it.  By "cutting out waste"..."more accountability"...   These are the buzz words that mean more tax cuts for the richest, no real increases in education spending - even though we are literally the bottom of the barrel nationwide.  

"Too much money fails to reach the classrooms" - true - because of his buddies cuts to education over the last 8 years.  And the BS about "too many districts" or "too much administration" - well, there is plenty of documented evidence floating around here - referenced and cross referenced - that shows what a crock of carp that lie is.  

His campaign website says more pay, while campaigning he said he would not have signed the pay raise.  Which one do YOU think is the lie??  is the lie, do you suppose??

And from his campaign site - he wants to give $5,000 "bonuses" - one time - to new teachers, ostensibly to retain fresh out of school grads.  Even though he knows they can walk in the door at any state around us for $15,000 - 20,000 more.  (I would love to have some of what he is smoking for the weekends, but am truly afraid it would dumb me up to where I believed his BS....like almost 2/3 of OK voters did...!!)

https://newsok.com/article/5590288/three-gop-gubernatorial-candidates-say-they-wouldnt-have-signed-pay-raise-package

[heironymouspasparagus]

"Tulsa Governor in this case won't help.  He has already said he was against the pay raises for teachers - the entry point from which all education flows.  And would like to rescind the raises."

Do you have an article or quote where Gov.-Elect Stitt says he wants to rescind the teacher pay raises. Everything I've seen says Gov.-Elect Stitt wants to increase teacher pay more. For example, this right-before-the-election article:

"Stitt has set a goal of making Oklahoma the highest paying for teachers out in the six-state region.

While he hasn't set a specific number, Stitt has promised to seek an education funding increase next year through a growth in the state's tax base and more efficient spending, but not through tax hikes."

https://newsok.com/article/5613609/candidates-differ-on-teacher-pay-in-first-year

And this just-after-the-election article:

"But [Stitt] has also vowed to increase spending in education and said he would seek another teacher pay raise during the first year of his administration."

https://newsok.com/article/5614226/kevin-stitt-wins-governors-race

And his campaign website itself:

"Raise teacher pay so that it matches the pay of teachers in our six-state footprint. With 95 percent of Oklahoma children attending public schools, we must ensure those on the front lines of teaching our children receive the support they need to succeed."

https://www.stittforgovernor.com/issues/

And don't forget - this is still the business guy who was banned for life from doing business in GA.  And reprimanded for shady business dealings in several more states.  Until earlier this year when they finally found the "right" official to incentivize to make that go away.

[Dspike]

So, to be clear, he does not support rescinding the teacher pay raise. He says he wants to increase pay more but not through even higher tax rates. Whether that is feasible or likely is definitely debatable.

Didn't meant to derail the thread. But misinformation like saying he wants to rescind the teacher pay raises is harmful to our state policy debates.

[swake]

So, to be clear, he does not support rescinding the teacher pay raise. He says he wants to increase pay more but not through even higher tax rates. Whether that is feasible or likely is definitely debatable.

Didn't meant to derail the thread. But misinformation like saying he wants to rescind the teacher pay raises is harmful to our state policy debates.

Saying we could have given teacher raises without raising taxes is harmful to state policy debates. It's nonsense.

[Laramie]

Saying we could have given teacher raises without raising taxes is harmful to state policy debates. It's nonsense.

You need a solid source of revenue to maintain teacher salaries if Oklahoma wants to attract and maintain reputable veteran teachers and become a stepping stone to keep our young teacher graduates in-state as well as attract out-of-state graduates.

We could give bonus money to those teachers who pass the examines to  become national board certified teachers.

In the state's two largest school districts; reduce the number of steps to reach the top of the pay scale.

To those of you who plan to enter the teaching profession; join a union--OEA or AFT, you will need personal liability insurance as well as the resources these organization provide.

[rebound]

You need a solid source of revenue to maintain teacher salaries if Oklahoma wants to attract and maintain reputable veteran teachers and become a stepping stone to keep our young teacher graduates in-state.

I'm not sure what you mean by this?  What is a "solid source of revenue"?  The state only gets money through taxes of some form.  To get money, we tax.  OK is near or at the bottom of all states in terms of state budget per population.  Based on the attached Wiki link, we are dead last.   We cannot thrive while continuing to starve ourselves, and that will mean raising revenue (taxes) in some form.  There is no other option, other than continuing our inevitable slog to the bottom...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

If I'm reading your reply wrong, and you are in favor of increasing salaries and the overall budget, my apologies.  I am not sure what direction you are promoting.

[Laramie]

I'm not sure what you mean by this?  What is a "solid source of revenue"?  The state only gets money through taxes of some form.  To get money, we tax.  OK is near or at the bottom of all states in terms of state budget per population.  Based on the attached Wiki link, we are dead last.   We cannot thrive while continuing to starve ourselves, and that will mean raising revenue (taxes) in some form.  There is no other option, other than continuing our inevitable slog to the bottom...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

If I'm reading your reply wrong, and you are in favor of increasing salaries and the overall budget, my apologies.  I am not sure what direction you are promoting

Solid source of revenue:  one that is consistent & reliable and doesn't fluctuate to the point that districts have to make drastic teacher cuts or increase class sizes.

I've worked in the education profession for a number of years (Public school teacher, administrator & community college instructor); education has always been put on the back-burner.  The Energy sectors could pay more, we realize how important these companies are to the state--they need to be taxed according; also districts are not passing millage levies to support capital improvements for schools with the exception of vocational education.

[heironymouspasparagus]

So, to be clear, he does not support rescinding the teacher pay raise. He says he wants to increase pay more but not through even higher tax rates. Whether that is feasible or likely is definitely debatable.

Didn't meant to derail the thread. But misinformation like saying he wants to rescind the teacher pay raises is harmful to our state policy debates.

Yep.  He is saying he wants to increase pay.   Still said he would have voted against, which by definition means they would be making that much less.  In effect he would have 'rescinded' it before it even happened....

And you drift dangerously close to touching on something that is highly glossed over by these people who keep mouthing about no tax increases - the ones I commented about earlier - which absolutely include Failin' Stitt.  The egregious lies, distortions, and misrepresentations that somehow we are exceptional in waste and have no accountability.  (IF that were true, then the last 8 years of Republican control of both houses and Governor would be the absolute direct proximate cause of that.  And I am beginning to think that is more likely every day.)

swake and rebound are also both talking about it in this thread.  We only get money from taxes.  Period.  Nobody I know likes it, but that is the reality that the Republicans won't acknowledge due to their unlimited greed and lack of caring about the real condition of the state - as more than proven in the last 8 years of cuts for the richest and disregard of budget problems.  It is an attitude of "just so long as I get mine, I don't care what happens to anyone else..."   And I repeat, since you seem to have ignored this completely;  They show this in the ongoing set of lies and distortions about 'supporting' education and improving it.  By "cutting out waste"..."more accountability"...   These are the buzz words that mean more tax cuts for the richest, no real increases in education spending - even though we are literally the bottom of the barrel nationwide.  

Grown ups KNOW what it takes to provide the services needed to have a viable state (and Fed government while we are at it.)  Republicans know, but refuse to accept responsibility - as evidenced repeatedly by irresponsible tax cuts that have absolutely hurt us as a state on a wide front of topics.  Just one of the things outside interests look at when choosing not to come to Oklahoma - nothing Mr. Kaiser can offset the stupid sh$t we show the rest of the world!!  As good a guy as he is, even he doesn't have that much money!


And the whole time we hear the mouth-breather buzz word noises of;

- delivering strong leadership and vision
- apply performance metrics
- end politics as usual
- reduce and streamline the 400 agencies, boards, and commissions
- give the governor more accountability
- prioritize students and funding for the classroom  (which we already do, even with the cuts to budgets)
- expand the use of video technology (new computers all around when we can't even buy new books for the classroom)
- Recruit, train and retain great teachers (at 25-50% less pay than anywhere else they can go...but no increases in funding to pay for them)


You also made no comment on Stitt's shady business dealings.  The ends justifies the means to the extremist right....it can all be "fixed" with the proper application of lubricants (money)!

I submit that hiring a shady businessman who has made a living from shady business practices is much more harmful to our state policy and debates than any little points or comments I may make...no one pays any attention to me, so I will never be able to cause harm to Oklahoma, which I would never do anyway.  Stitt has the power and the apparent inclination to cause us massive hurt by just following in the tradition and footsteps of Mentor Failin'.

[Rattle Trap]

Public education is one of those necessary evils. It's an antiquated system not well suited for the modern world (from a financial sense). I am for the teacher raises and spending more on education as long as there are real results and it improves the state's reputation nationwide. All of these negative things you hear about education in Oklahoma are derived from one statistic, that we spend less per student than most states. This doesn't even necessarily say anything about the quality of our education, only that we spend less. Then you get some crazy liberal news outlets to jump on the story to try and paint a picture of "Republican stronghold of Oklahoma failing because of Republican policies and spending less than other states".

I graduated high school from Owasso. Within my graduating class, we had one of the highest amounts of national merit scholars for one school in the nation. We competed nationally (and successfully) in debate, band, choir, etc. ACT scores and college admission were well above national average. My point being that state spending per pupil doesn't really matter, at least not in a suburban setting. Rural is a different story since there is less property tax, but even then if you have a curriculum to go by and proper supplies then anyone could teach at a high school level.

Unfortunately there is a negative perception of Oklahoma due to our conservative leanings and if spending more on education will solve that (it won't) then so be it. Stitt said he's for giving teachers pay raises, but said the most recent one was the wrong way to go about it.

I don't pretend to know what the solution is. I just wish people would calm down and realize that more spending doesn't always mean better results.

[Conan71]

I'm not quite sure how a discussion over teacher salaries registers with George Kaiser and his philanthropy but I think this has strayed well enough off topic.

But as long as we are here in a time-honored tradition of our thread drift:

Great new taproom!

[rebound]

Public education is one of those necessary evils. It's an antiquated system not well suited for the modern world (from a financial sense). I am for the teacher raises and spending more on education as long as there are real results and it improves the state's reputation nationwide. All of these negative things you hear about education in Oklahoma are derived from one statistic, that we spend less per student than most states. This doesn't even necessarily say anything about the quality of our education, only that we spend less. Then you get some crazy liberal news outlets to jump on the story to try and paint a picture of "Republican stronghold of Oklahoma failing because of Republican policies and spending less than other states".

I graduated high school from Owasso. Within my graduating class, we had one of the highest amounts of national merit scholars for one school in the nation. We competed nationally (and successfully) in debate, band, choir, etc. ACT scores and college admission were well above national average. My point being that state spending per pupil doesn't really matter, at least not in a suburban setting. Rural is a different story since there is less property tax, but even then if you have a curriculum to go by and proper supplies then anyone could teach at a high school level.

Unfortunately there is a negative perception of Oklahoma due to our conservative leanings and if spending more on education will solve that (it won't) then so be it. Stitt said he's for giving teachers pay raises, but said the most recent one was the wrong way to go about it.

I don't pretend to know what the solution is. I just wish people would calm down and realize that more spending doesn't always mean better results.

There are so many points and topics to discuss in your comments, but I don't have time this morning to address them all.  So, I'll go to the first and the last, and then yeild to Conan's comment that this thread has drifted far enough off-topic...

"Public education is one of those necessary evils"
If you sincerely think this, I don't even think a discussion can be had.  Good public education is systemic to Democracy, and the very nature of our government requires an educated populace.  It is not an evil of any kind, but something that should be celebrated and supported.  Of course, there is also the practical argument that virturally every major first-world society/country has a good public education system, and we need to keep up to be cometitive, but that aspect is often lost in this state.

"I graduated high school from Owasso."
Adding this in as I go through as an aside.   Owasso is one of the best public school systems in the state.  When we moved back up to this area a decade or so ago, we moved to Owasso in large part because of the school system.  So, kudos to Owasso.  But understand that your experience is not normal for the state, and that Owasso is one of the most affluent public school systems in OK.   Do a quick search on standardized test scores, college preparation and performance, and related, and it is obvious that OK public schools overall are not preparing students adequately.

"spending doesn't always mean better results."
Agreed in principle, but with a caveat.   If OK were somewhere mid-pack in terms of state spending (and not specifically in Education, but across the board), then a balanced discussion could be had related to spending versus cutting.  But to perform at a high level in any activity, a certain amount of fuel is required, and in this case that fuel is money.  OK cannot be dead-last in spending (in anything) and expect high results.   As it is now, we are one of the lowest performing states in multiple categories, and we are lowest spending states in country.  This is not a coincidence.

Now, Conan, about that tap room... 

[carltonplace]

....and Conan wins for the TNF customary drift to Marshall's Beer!!!! Well done Conan.

[Laramie]

If there is anyway you can support teacher raises through a moderate tax increase on the corporate sector like the energy (oil & gas) lets explore those options first. If push comes to shove then look at a slight increase in property and/or a special 1/16 increase on state sales taxes dedicated to teacher salaries. Oklahoma will need to raise teacher salaries by $4,000  by 2020 to get us out of the bottom five rut.

We have to get this done.  The damage has already cost the state an exodus of many talented teachers to states like Texas & California.  We need a long-term plan to support those raises that doesn't require one segment of tax papers to shoulder the burden term.

2017 rankings prior to the teacher walkout:  https://www.app.com/story/news/investigations/data/analysis/2018/04/12/teacher-salary-2017/508703002/

     45. West Virginia, $44,470
     46. Mississippi, $44,364
     47. Arizona, $44,113
     48. North Carolina, $43,897
     49. South Dakota, $40,790
     50. Oklahoma, $40,201

*1970s Oklahoma ranked 44
*1980s Oklahoma ranked 45
*1990s Oklahoma ranked 47 (vaguely recall the 3 decade ranking from memory*).

Norman Transcript:  Mar 29, 2018:  "The massive tax package, which is expected to raise about $447 million in new revenue, will allow lawmakers to give classroom teachers an average $6,100 pay increase:  https://www.normantranscript.com/news/government/senate-narrowly-approves-teacher-raise-package/article_9403013b-4f74-5f48-8ad5-6f61e5e94934.html

Oklahoma's is still among the bottom 5 states with the worst in teacher pay @$46,301; several states in that bottom five have increase teacher salaries for 2018.