Total separation from all levels of government. All education privatized.
Total separation except for cities.
Total separation except for counties.
Total separation except for cities and counties.
Total separation except for states.
Separation except for states and cities
Separation except for states and counties
Separation from federal government only.
To me the problem is the kids who don't want to be there and who disrupt the educations of those who do want to be there. Paying for butt-filled seats, whether the state pays for attendance or provides vouchers, only exacerbates the problem. It encourages the schools to chase the money at the expense of the education.
I say school should be state funded, but only the state level on down. No federal. Also, give a school a budget for the year, and they get that amount no matter what. Kick out the troublemakers, allowing the kids who want to learn the chance to actually learn.
If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.
That's a lot of dough and it's not going to come out of thin air.
Second of all, kicking kids out of school only encourages a group of troublemakers and an underclass to exist. If you want to decrease crime, drugs, and dependency, you make sure they are in that classroom.
"We all of us know down here that politics is a tough game. And I don't think there's any point in being Irish if you don't know that the world is going to break your heart eventually."-Daniel Patrick Moynihan, December 5, 1963
1) Assuming that public school funding is based on per pupil (it would be silly to fund a school with 100 students at the same level as a school with 2,000 students), then every student "kicked out" results in a loss of funding. That is a not an incentive to weed out trouble makers, simply to separate them into slower paced classes (as they now do by placing the better students into AP classes).
2) If funding is still based on a warm chair count, rather than actual educational improvement attained by the students, then why not just hire good baby sitters at a much lower cost than that required for good teachers?
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
Not only should the government be involved in schooling, we need, badly, to figure out how to improve those government funded schools. I would hope the obvious benefits of an educated society would be clear. It serves the economy, it serves the stability of the country, it serves the defense of the country, it is a solid benefit across the board. Some things are best done through private enterprise, but for some things government should take a solid role.
What we need is to improve out educational system. Note that improve does not necessarily mean expand, but to figure out how to do what we do, better. We know, from painful experience, that just throwing money at the problem does not work, so what we should be doing to my mind is looking at Finland, looking at South Korea, Looking at Japan, at Hong Kong and the Netherlands, and figuring out what they do that we can do, taking what will work for us from each, and incorporating it. This will probably in the end end up costing us more money, but the return on that investment in a more flexible economy and work force, more technological innovation, more skilled leaders more than makes up for that cost to my mind.
I would have said total separation, except that this turned into a libertarian cluster-**** and somehow, education being privatized became part of the equation. I absolutely do not want privatized education, I just want the government at all levels out of the religion business.
No separation whatsoever.
"I am not among those who fear the people. They and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1816 "[F]acts are before ideas." -- Mikhail Bakunin, 1882