<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Violating the Denominator Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jaypgreene.com/2008/12/02/violating-the-denominator-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jaypgreene.com/2008/12/02/violating-the-denominator-law/</link>
	<description>With Help From Some Friends</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 17:37:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: pm</title>
		<link>http://jaypgreene.com/2008/12/02/violating-the-denominator-law/#comment-2874</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:54:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaypgreene.wordpress.com/?p=1803#comment-2874</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sure, the denominator law matters.  But it seems you&#039;ve chosen the wrong one in your comment, although I think you chose the correct one in your blog post when you explained Santa Monica spending.  That&#039;s the 2.4% figure.   Given foundation contributions are constant relative to some other data point over time, it leads one to believe the trend is linear. I&#039;d still like to see more than two data points, I guess I&#039;ll have to search the web to find those.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure, the denominator law matters.  But it seems you&#8217;ve chosen the wrong one in your comment, although I think you chose the correct one in your blog post when you explained Santa Monica spending.  That&#8217;s the 2.4% figure.   Given foundation contributions are constant relative to some other data point over time, it leads one to believe the trend is linear. I&#8217;d still like to see more than two data points, I guess I&#8217;ll have to search the web to find those.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay P. Greene</title>
		<link>http://jaypgreene.com/2008/12/02/violating-the-denominator-law/#comment-2873</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jay P. Greene]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaypgreene.wordpress.com/?p=1803#comment-2873</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m glad you raised the question of trends, pm, because it also shows how important obeying the Denominator Law is.  It&#039;s true that private giving, according to Brunner and Imazeki&#039;s report rose from $123 million to $238 million in CA between between 1992 and 2001.  But it is also the case that total revenue for public schools in CA increased from $28 billion to $52.2 billion during the same period.

If we follow the Denominator Law and divide $123 million in private giving in 1992 by the $28 billion in total revenue in the same year, we find that private giving constituted .4% of the total in 1992 -- exactly the same as its share in 2001.  In other words, there is no rising trend in private giving relative to total school revenue.

Be sure to add the denominator.  It&#039;s not just a good idea.  It&#039;s the law. : )]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m glad you raised the question of trends, pm, because it also shows how important obeying the Denominator Law is.  It&#8217;s true that private giving, according to Brunner and Imazeki&#8217;s report rose from $123 million to $238 million in CA between between 1992 and 2001.  But it is also the case that total revenue for public schools in CA increased from $28 billion to $52.2 billion during the same period.</p>
<p>If we follow the Denominator Law and divide $123 million in private giving in 1992 by the $28 billion in total revenue in the same year, we find that private giving constituted .4% of the total in 1992 &#8212; exactly the same as its share in 2001.  In other words, there is no rising trend in private giving relative to total school revenue.</p>
<p>Be sure to add the denominator.  It&#8217;s not just a good idea.  It&#8217;s the law. : )</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pm</title>
		<link>http://jaypgreene.com/2008/12/02/violating-the-denominator-law/#comment-2871</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:23:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaypgreene.wordpress.com/?p=1803#comment-2871</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Seems to me that knowing the trends would be a lot more interesting than knowing the current state of affairs.  Have foundation donations peaked?  Are they just starting to accelerate?  From the data reported I can&#039;t tell if the doubling in donations between 1992 and 2001 occurred in the first two years, last two years, or steadily throughout.  If an accelerating trend can be combined with some changes in the law, then maybe there is a de-facto voucher system on the horizon.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems to me that knowing the trends would be a lot more interesting than knowing the current state of affairs.  Have foundation donations peaked?  Are they just starting to accelerate?  From the data reported I can&#8217;t tell if the doubling in donations between 1992 and 2001 occurred in the first two years, last two years, or steadily throughout.  If an accelerating trend can be combined with some changes in the law, then maybe there is a de-facto voucher system on the horizon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Collin Hitt</title>
		<link>http://jaypgreene.com/2008/12/02/violating-the-denominator-law/#comment-2864</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Collin Hitt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 15:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaypgreene.wordpress.com/?p=1803#comment-2864</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I guess those wealthy benefactors should have never given at all:  things in CA would be more equal, Jay Greene wouldn&#039;t have had to spend his time writing the post above, and Sean Corcoran would have saved a little face.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess those wealthy benefactors should have never given at all:  things in CA would be more equal, Jay Greene wouldn&#8217;t have had to spend his time writing the post above, and Sean Corcoran would have saved a little face.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

