Mr. Menapace’s letter, “A great country needs great school systems,” (Feb. 26), reminded me of what I have been grumbling about for years: the way we fund education. In the U.S., the majority of education funding is derived from local property taxes, with some help from sales and other taxes. The problem is that if your town is paying for its schools with property taxes, the pool of participants is relatively small, so the cost is high. This often pits retirees on fixed incomes against younger families with children. It should not be that way, after all, we all agree on the importance of education, especially in a global economy where we are competing with countries that fund education through federal taxes, a much larger pool.

Property taxes in France, for instance, pay for municipal services only, and are a fraction of what they are here. The result is that people are not driven out of their home by rising property values, the way we see gentrification happen here. Imagine if you created your own health insurance company with your neighbors. Premiums would be stratospheric.

Funding education through state taxes, for instance, would more equitably distribute school funding to poorer towns.

Micky Williston

Pawcatuck