alt.education

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 08:47:02 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

>
>"Don Homuth" < > wrote in message
>news:iu6te35svs1cahl8a9ipvarsnuocfl6h2p@ ...
>> On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 08:22:19 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Don Homuth" < > wrote in message
>>>news:hp5te3lbhor6bkc6nlmankeqkcprsn9grk@ ...
>>>> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:15:45 -0400, "Don"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Was reading an article the other day in my FL hometown newspaper online
>>>>>that
>>>>>for every $1000 increase in a homes cost, 871 people in the county
>>>>>cannot
>>>>>qualify for the loan.
>>>>
>>>> Not everyone can afford to purchase a house, clearly, else there would
>>>> be no market for apartments and rentals.
>>>>
>>>> But...it's also the case that the True Cost of new construction does
>>>> not incur the true costs of what other citizens must pay to accomodate
>>>> it. Including, but hardly limited to schools required to deal with
>>>> the kids from the families that move in.
>>>
>>>At least not families with four, five, six kids.
>>>
>>>As opposed to families with zero kids.
>>
>> A meaningless discussion, since all citizens bear the cost of public
>> schools, and reasonably so.
>
>Right on the first part, wrong on the second.

Nope -- quite correct. In the same sort of way that roads (though
those are physical) benefit more than just the folks who drive on
them.