Hold parents accountable for performance of kids
To the editor:
In our desperate attempts to improve student performance in the Clark County School District, legislators, district administrators and community members have targeted teachers as the primary stakeholders. But holding only teachers responsible for neglectful parenting is a short-sighted approach. A high school teacher, for example, sees a child an average of one hour per day in a class with 30 to 40 students, so blaming the teacher for poor student performance is unrealistic and unfair.
A more balanced approach would include the development of a system that begins to hold parents accountable for their children’s relative success in school. Parents should be expected to do their part – attend parent/teacher conferences and oversee their kids’ attendance, academic performance and disciplinary records. Punishment for failure in any of these areas should include small fines or even community service. If a parent can’t pay or is unwilling to perform the latter, he or she may opt to enroll in a parenting class instead.
Of course, a comprehensive formula must include not only disincentives for failure but also rewards for success, such as local tax rebates and college tuition assistance for parents of good students.
As hard-working taxpayers, we have earned the right to expect a high-quality education for the children of the district. To fear parental responsibility as a taboo, or to focus on teachers alone due to political expediency, cheats us of that right and our children of the opportunity to realize their fullest potential.
Don Lucente
Las Vegas
Friendly Mongols
To the editor:
Amid all of the anxiety-ridden media coverage preceding the Mongols Motorcycle Club’s national meeting in Boulder City last weekend, I would like to extend some well-deserved kudos to the people who helped with the success of this highly anticipated weekend event.
My husband and I live at the Boulder Inn and Suites, where the Mongols gathered. The Inn’s general manager, Justin Caruso, and his entire staff worked endlessly to provide a positive experience for everybody. Lawyer Stephen Stubbs was on hand throughout the weekend and was a 24-hour liaison between the club and the community. Extra law enforcement kept the peace, and with all the lost revenue due to the road construction in Boulder City, I’m sure the local businesses benefited from the money spent by the club.
The Mongols were a friendly, polite, clean and orderly group.
The fears and anxiety proved to be unnecessary. Looks like the business gamble taken by Boulder Inn management paid off. A good time was had by all.
Cheryl Yuhasz-Christian
Boulder City
Numbers game
To the editor:
In response to Carol Rose’s Saturday letter on Social Security, here’s a case study for Ms. Rose to ponder:
Over 40 years, I’ve paid $74,156 into Social Security. With funds they could have otherwise paid directly to me, my employers have matched that for a total of $148,312. At age 66, my full benefits of $1,965 a month begin.
Forty years of personal contributions will be returned to me in just over three years. Total contributions made on my behalf will be returned in just more than six years. Those figures don’t account for inflation. Had I stuck a 1972 dollar in my mattress, it would be worth 19 cents today. In other words, adjusted for increases in the Consumer Price Index, I’ve paid in far less than today’s value of $74,156 would suggest.
Today’s life expectancy from birth is almost 79 years, but once someone reaches 65 he can expect to live nearly another 20 years. I’m proud to say I’m in good health, exercise regularly and could very well live into my 90s. Should I be fortunate enough to collect benefits for 25 years, I will receive $589,500. This estimate is low due to future cost-of-living increases.
Due to the current structure of Social Security, my contributions are gone, paid to my parents and their contemporaries. My benefits will be paid from the contributions of future generations. In 1950, 16.5 workers paid payroll taxes for every person receiving benefits. Today about three workers pay in for every beneficiary – and the ratio will worsen as the baby boomers continue to retire. Today’s workers will pay more in taxes and work longer to support those who came before them.
Whether a system that would allow me to invest my funds in my own account and bequeath them to my heirs would be better is another argument.
I have one thing to say to future generations: Thank you for your sacrifice.
Brad Stried
Gwinn, Mich.
Starve the beast
To the editor:
In Steve Sebelius’ June 17 column, he made a valid argument for a library tax increase in the city of Henderson. But I respectfully disagree with his conclusions.
When considering a vote on tax increases, whether by the Legislature or by referendum, one must ask two questions:
1. Do public employee unions still exist in the community, with bloated pay and benefits?
2. Does the community still pay “prevailing wages” for all public works projects?
If the answer is yes to these two questions, then a “no” vote on tax increases is the logical response. Why? Because communities across the state are wasting tax dollars as long as public employee unions and prevailing wages continue. The Henderson libraries may be a worthy cause, and the political leaders have the ability to reallocate funds to support good programs. Instead, they choose to waste tax dollars on unions and then go to the taxpayers, hat in hand, for a sympathy vote for more taxes.
The only way to stop this madness is to starve the beast.
Mike Mathews
Las Vegas
