Allysia Finley doesn't tell whole truth about LAUSD spending binge (WSJ)
Like everyone else, we urge you to wash your hands and engage in social distancing.
Unlike everyone else, we urge you to also help with this smart plan to get more tests, ventilators, and PPE. Everyone can do that plan right now, at home, in just 15 minutes.
If enough people help with the plan we can save lives. Take time out now and help get more desperately-needed supplies.
Many fiscal conservatives live in a fantasy world where we can have massive immigration combined with low spending, despite there being absolutely no evidence of that ever happening and despite there being countless examples of how massive immigration leads to increased spending. The way many of those people get around this massive flaw in their policy proposals is to simply ignore immigration's impact. We saw that recently in the case of Bell, California where fiscal conservatives ignored immigration's impact on the situation there.
Another recent example comes from Allysia Finley of the massive immigration-supporting Wall Street Journal. She offers "Broke - and Building the Most Expensive School in U.S. History" (link) about a $578 million school that the Los Angeles Unified School District is building. She doesn't tell her readers that without massive immigration - specifically illegal immigration - building so many new schools wouldn't be necessary.
According to the LAUSD, 74.2% of their 600,000+ students are Hispanic (PDF link). No one seems to know how many of them are illegal aliens or the children of illegal aliens, but it must be a fair number of the total.
And, without massive Hispanic illegal immigration, those pushing projects like this - such as Antonio Villaraigosa - would have less political power. Massive immigration - something that the Wall Street Journal supports - has given more power to the free-spending far-left. Not only does the WSJ not have a solution, but they don't even acknowledge the problem (note: one of their contributors came close earlier this year).
Instead of facing up to the reality that the policies they support lead to the massive spending they oppose, they offer their readers a fantasy that simply by the WSJ calling attention to one of the symptoms that will lead to a solution.