Let's start a charter middle school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Yep. Except DCPS doesn't pay the same interest rate to some entity because it comes from bonds the city issues.

Just another reason why the way charters have to finance facilities puts them at a disadvantage.

And another example of republicans essentially privatizing education - siphoning public money to banks but making it *look* like its going to schools.

Oh my God, you have no idea what you are talking about. That's like saying your mortgage is money being "siphoned" to banks. You are paying back a loan, just like these schools are, and just like the DC government does when it issues bonds to finance DCPS improvements and then slowly pays the buyers back, plus interest.

If you don't like lending with interest, you can move to a nation governed by Sharia law. Then you will not have to deal with it.

Point is, it privatizes the financing of education investments. Sure Wall Street makes money off of municipals, but it makes more when there's more collateral (in this case physical properties and cashflows).

Literally - what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the Hillary Rodham Clinton School IS a truly great name for the endeavor.

Even if Trump wins. Maybe especially if trump wins.

Well then you couldn't call it GMO-free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Point is, it privatizes the financing of education investments. Sure Wall Street makes money off of municipals, but it makes more when there's more collateral (in this case physical properties and cashflows).

Literally - what?

I have no idea either. My experience is that once you see bogeyman, generalized phrases like "Wall Street", it's a person spouting talking points and not actually doing any analysis.

The cashflows are the same as the cashflows supporting bonds issued to pay for DCPS modernizations- taxes and fees collected by the District government. In the case of charters they happen to be funneled through a facilities fee payment to a charter and then out to the lender, but it's fundamentally the same thing.

And the collateral for the recent deals are leasehold interests in school buildings. Not exactly fantastic collateral.

There's a reason the rates for the DC government-backed by bonds are so low- because the debt is AAA rated and therefore very low risk. Charter loans are higher rates because they are higher risk- you are counting on the school continuing to operate and produce enough revenue to pay you back. It's a much worse bet than the DC government not collecting enough taxes. So the rate is higher. That's the foundation of lending and risk assessment. It's not some conspiracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So most people agree the middle school situation in DC is not ideal

Between all of the people on here I think we could start and maintain a new charter middle school

Who's with me..... and yes I'm being serious

People are teasing you but I think that SWW should be duplicated in every ward and those children should go to a dedicated middle and high school.....

[Anonymous]

Wait, what fundraiser has a pool?

Elitists ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait, what fundraiser has a pool?

Elitists ?

That was another reference to the show Togetherness. The stereotyped rich white woman trying to take over the proposed LA charter school in the show hosted a fundraiser at her swank home. Which included a pool as most swank homes in LA do. In the climactic scene the mild-mannered main character pushed this woman into her own pool as way to show her she wasn't going to let the school be taken over without a fight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So most people agree the middle school situation in DC is not ideal

Between all of the people on here I think we could start and maintain a new charter middle school

Who's with me..... and yes I'm being serious

People are teasing you but I think that SWW should be duplicated in every ward and those children should go to a dedicated middle and high school.....

SWW or SWS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is, it privatizes the financing of education investments. Sure Wall Street makes money off of municipals, but it makes more when there's more collateral (in this case physical properties and cashflows).

Literally - what?

I have no idea either. My experience is that once you see bogeyman, generalized phrases like "Wall Street", it's a person spouting talking points and not actually doing any analysis.

The cashflows are the same as the cashflows supporting bonds issued to pay for DCPS modernizations- taxes and fees collected by the District government. In the case of charters they happen to be funneled through a facilities fee payment to a charter and then out to the lender, but it's fundamentally the same thing.

And the collateral for the recent deals are leasehold interests in school buildings. Not exactly fantastic collateral.

There's a reason the rates for the DC government-backed by bonds are so low- because the debt is AAA rated and therefore very low risk. Charter loans are higher rates because they are higher risk- you are counting on the school continuing to operate and produce enough revenue to pay you back. It's a much worse bet than the DC government not collecting enough taxes. So the rate is higher. That's the foundation of lending and risk assessment. It's not some conspiracy.

Except OSSE guarantees every charter loan -- so the lenders would get paid back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is, it privatizes the financing of education investments. Sure Wall Street makes money off of municipals, but it makes more when there's more collateral (in this case physical properties and cashflows).

Literally - what?

I have no idea either. My experience is that once you see bogeyman, generalized phrases like "Wall Street", it's a person spouting talking points and not actually doing any analysis.

The cashflows are the same as the cashflows supporting bonds issued to pay for DCPS modernizations- taxes and fees collected by the District government. In the case of charters they happen to be funneled through a facilities fee payment to a charter and then out to the lender, but it's fundamentally the same thing.

And the collateral for the recent deals are leasehold interests in school buildings. Not exactly fantastic collateral.

There's a reason the rates for the DC government-backed by bonds are so low- because the debt is AAA rated and therefore very low risk. Charter loans are higher rates because they are higher risk- you are counting on the school continuing to operate and produce enough revenue to pay you back. It's a much worse bet than the DC government not collecting enough taxes. So the rate is higher. That's the foundation of lending and risk assessment. It's not some conspiracy.

Except OSSE guarantees every charter loan -- so the lenders would get paid back.

You need to stop. Seriously, you have no idea about the details of these programs. OSSE generally guarantees repayment of the first $1 million or so of the loan. It's significant, yes, and the reduced risk is part of what induces lenders to actually make loans. But if there is a total loss the lenders would still lose tens of millions on some deals. And OSSE charges an insurance fee for this, just like the federal government does when it insures your mortgage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Building Hope is technically a nonprofit but borrows money at 2% and then makes loans to charters for 7-9%.

Holy shit really?!

On average yes.

To be fair a new charter isn't a very good credit risk for a bank - as they have no lines of credit etc. And Building Hope has expertise and contacts which are helpful. But they have overhead and their own organization and offices and staff to support.

They also probably experience losses on some loans, so need to fund a loss reserve...

[Anonymous]

So you're privatizing profit on education. The more charter schools serving tiny populations, the more money the lenders make. In the end, especially since more money is made making the deal than paying the installments, it's just payday loan churn.

Anonymous wrote:
Wait, what fundraiser has a pool?

Elitists ?


That was another reference to the show Togetherness. The stereotyped rich white woman trying to take over the proposed LA charter school in the show hosted a fundraiser at her swank home. Which included a pool as most swank homes in LA do. In the climactic scene the mild-mannered main character pushed this woman into her own pool as way to show her she wasn't going to let the school be taken over without a fight.

Okay, I have to see that show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A charter middle school that has to accept any kids from any DC public school. My guess is that you don't have kids above 1st grade.

A charter middle school other that LATIN which will treat all students equally and have academic integrity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A charter middle school that has to accept any kids from any DC public school. My guess is that you don't have kids above 1st grade.

A charter middle school other that LATIN which will treat all students equally and have academic integrity.

CMI, IT, Cap City, EL Haynes, DCI, Washington Global .... ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up "Haricorts Verts" on DCUM to see how that turned out.

Otoh, look up Cap City and see how that turned out. Or Two Rivers. Or Yu Ying. Or Mundo Verde.

Oh, did they start out by someone suggesting on DCUM that it would be great to all get together to start a school?

I didn't think so.

No, you didn't think at all. It was a neighborhood listserv, actually. The founders didn't even know each other to begin with, so - it was quite a lot like DCUM except a smaller pool of readers/participants.

Keep being you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Yep. Except DCPS doesn't pay the same interest rate to some entity because it comes from bonds the city issues.

Just another reason why the way charters have to finance facilities puts them at a disadvantage.

And another example of republicans essentially privatizing education - siphoning public money to banks but making it *look* like its going to schools.

You are a nutcase.