Are public schools socialism?

[sawyerloggingon]

I can't find anywhere in the constitution where it says the government has the responsibility or the right to educate our children. In the first place it is a huge tax burden,on average 27 cents of every tax dollar goes to K-12 public education. Talk about a huge, expensive, bloated, inefficient, corrupt bureaucracy, SHEEESH! Secondly our kids are not learning very well in these gov run schools , "Johnny can't read". I could go on all day but I'll sum it up by saying our schools have become more about liberal indoctrination than public education and IMO we need drastic changes such as a voucher system to insure we have an educated society. Our current system is broken and the more money we throw at it the worse it gets.

"To get control of a budget, you need to know how much you make, how much you spend, and what you’re spending it on. We know that K – 12 education is the biggest single cost to state and local governments, eating up close to a third of their revenues. And yet most citizens and politicians have little or no idea how much we are spending on education at a per-pupil level.American taxpayers spend around $600 billion a year on K-12 public education. A sobering 27 cents of every tax dollar collected at the state or local level is consumed by the government-run K – 12 education system, compared to only 8 cents for Medicaid.
In Virginia, 29 cents out of every state or local tax dollar collected is spent on public K-12 education. In the seven years between 2002 and 2009, per-pupil spending in Virginia increased 44 percent, according to state data. When we account for inflation, it’s increased a 21 percent.
And these figures leave out a large but completely unknown amount of capital expenses and debt payments that cities and counties spend on behalf of public schools but which never make it onto the school district books or into the state’s accounting.
Education spending is the single most serious burden on state and local budgets. And since runaway education spending is a major cause of our state and local budget problems, it’s the best place to look for serious savings as this fiscal crisis continues to unfold."


The Real Cost of Public Education | Cato Institute


DAMNIT, I forgot to push the create a poll button, CRAP! :doh

 

[pinqy]

I can't find anywhere in the constitution where it says the government has the responsibility or the right to educate our children.

Because it's a State, not Federal issue.

 

[Gardener]

In my experience, those most critical of public education tend to be those who benefitted from it the least.

 

[AreteCourage]

Public schools have a problem. The problem isn't whether it is socialism or not..that is a bit trivial. The problem is that public schools institutionalize kids much like prisons institutionalize inmates.

We have a bureaucracy that makes teachers teach to a standardized test which does nothing to promote creativity or critical thinking. Students usually go through the same mundane schedule day in and day out. When they get to school around 7:30am to when they leave at around 3:00pm....it rarely changes. Same with prisons from those times....the same mundane schedule.

We need to change that because institutionalizing students is wrong. Schools should promote creativity and critical thinking. They should have schedules vary from week to week. Would that put a strain on the administrators? Sure, but we shouldn't worry about them...adapt. We worry about the kids in the schools, not the administrators who can handle themselves.

Got to get off standardized testing...it is stifling education.

 

[Snake Oil]

Schools, roads, fire departments, EMS, police services, bridges. Basically everything that conservatives use is paid for by a single payer socialist system. That's why I can't figure out why they hate the idea of single payer healthcare so much. The only thing I can figure out is that conservatives are either hypocrites or retards.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Because it's a State, not Federal issue.

EXACTLY, it should be a state issue and the feds should get the hell out of the equation. Each state should handle education the way it See's fit and DC should not say a word.

 

[MaggieD]

In my experience, those most critical of public education tend to be those who benefitted from it the least.

Yeah, well, that's sort of the problem, isn't it? The great schools that turn out honors students. What do they have to criticize?

When a poor inner-city kid gets to the 10th grade and can barely read? He certainly benefited the least. He should be complaining.

So though you meant your comment to be insulting? You accidentally hit the nail on the head.

 

[Gardener]

Yeah, well, that's sort of the problem, isn't it? The great schools that turn out honors students. What do they have to criticize?

When a poor inner-city kid gets to the 10th grade and can barely read? He certainly benefited the least. He should be complaining.

So though you meant your comment to be insulting? You accidentally hit the nail on the head.

You are making quite an assumption here when you consider the school entirely responsible for the educational outcome of the student while holding the student responsible for nothing.

 

[MadLib]

I think you did this already.

Public education isn't socialism because it doesn't put the means of production or distribution entirely in the hands of the workers or government. There are still private schools, so it is a free-market system - no matter how much control Washington exerts over state schools.

You can talk about the right that DC has to regulate state schools, and that is a fair point of disagreement, but the fact that the federal government controls some aspects of state schools does not make it socialism.

 

[JayDubya]

I can't find anywhere in the constitution where it says the government has the responsibility or the right to educate our children.

That is because it does not. All federal spending on education is unconstitutional.


State constitutions include that power / authority, however. I would concur that it is needless socialism; a robust voucher system would eliminate much of the problem with the status quo, however.

 

[Henrin]

I think you did this already.

Public education isn't socialism because it doesn't put the means of production or distribution entirely in the hands of the workers or government. There are still private schools, so it is a free-market system - no matter how much control Washington exerts over state schools.

With the public education system the private sector educational system is warped and interests changed. Sorry, but that is not a free market.

 

[MadLib]

With the public education system the private sector educational system is warped and interests changed. Sorry, but that is not a free market.

It's roughly free-market, there is a governmental corporation involved but the private schools can still compete. It's not socialism.

Deja vu

 

[Henrin]

It's roughly free-market, there is a governmental corporation involved but the private schools can still compete. It's not socialism.

Deja vu

There is no roughly about it. Government will always be the leader of the pack and will always be calling all the shots inside and outside the market of education. To call a market where competition can not exist ever and where the government is involved is shear nonsense.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

The only thing more annoying than the right's claims that any new government-run institution or service is socialism is the snarky response from the left that every single government service currently provided is socialism. That's not what socialism. Socialism has to do with the overall economic and social structure of a society. It has very little to do with individual things like schools, roads, or healthcare.

 

[Helix]

i don't care if the right thinks public education is socialism or not. a kid is not a widget, and developing our national intellectual resources should be a priority.

 

[MaggieD]

You are making quite an assumption here when you consider the school entirely responsible for the educational outcome of the student while holding the student responsible for nothing.

I don't care who's responsible for it. Whole generations of children aren't being educated. Can't read. Can't put an intelligent sentence together on paper. Can't even speak close to proper English. And we wonder why our welfare rolls ever-increase. We should be thinking outside every box on Planet Earth. Instead, as is the definition of insanity, we keep doing the same things over and over again and expecting a different result. And that is a failure of the system.

 

[pinqy]

EXACTLY, it should be a state issue and the feds should get the hell out of the equation. Each state should handle education the way it See's fit and DC should not say a word.

DC doesn't...unless you're talking about the No Child Left Behind Act, which applies to public schools receiving Federal funding, which makes it a DC issue, though the testing etc are on a by-state basis.

 

[Henrin]

i don't care if the right thinks public education is socialism or not. a kid is not a widget, and developing our national intellectual resources should be a priority.

Why is education different than anything else? Are the people involved not trying to buy a service from others in the market? Why should the government be involved in people trying to better themselves? Why should they be the party that is the deliver of this personal service of betterment?

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Just take a cruise through this site to get a taste of how deep the tentacles of the Federal gov reach into education. Each state should decide how they educate their kids, how much to spend on it AND the books they will use to teach them not to mention the teachers they hire and FIRE and if those teachers have to be in the union. The cost of educating our kids could go way down and the quality of their education could go way up if the feds would stay out of the equation.

U.S. Department of Education

 

[Paschendale]

At this point, the word "socialism" has little meaning in American politics. It's pretty much used to describe anything the federal government does that benefits someone other than the speaker. Military keeps me safe? Not socialism. Government subsidy of farmers keeps my food cheap? Not socialism. Government road service keeps the interstates going for me to use? Not socialism. Government provides healthcare for someone else? Socialism. Government educates someone else's children? Socialism. Government protects other people from abuses on the job? Socialism. And then the best one: Government provides disaster relief for my state? Not socialism. Government provides disaster relief for a state I don't live in? Socialism.

And it's only ever the federal government. State governments are apparently immune to socialism, merely by virtue of being physically more proximate than Washington DC is.

It's a pretty nonsensical discussion to have in the first place. It also ignores the very simple truth that a truly socialist system would be an improvement over the mess we have right now in almost every way.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

i don't care if the right thinks public education is socialism or not. a kid is not a widget, and developing our national intellectual resources should be a priority.

No, but education is a service. One that, needs to vary from kid to kid, and the current model, while it does have some advantages compared to other countries, greatly discourages that.

 

[Helix]

Why is education different than anything else? Are the people involved not trying to buy a service from others in the market? Why should the government be involved in people trying to better themselves? Why should they be the party that is the deliver of this personal service of betterment?

an educated population is in the national interest. we have to innovate our way through national problems, and we need a large pool of educated individuals to tap into. personally, i'd prefer to see everyone have a right to go to college, as well.

the view that education is just a student buying a service is short sighted. we all benefit when a citizen is properly educated, and we suffer when many aren't. our public education system is far from perfect, but gutting it won't fix it.

 

[rocket88]

EXACTLY, it should be a state issue and the feds should get the hell out of the equation. Each state should handle education the way it See's fit and DC should not say a word.

So you're OK with the States being socialist?

 

[American]

Public schools have a problem. The problem isn't whether it is socialism or not..that is a bit trivial. The problem is that public schools institutionalize kids much like prisons institutionalize inmates.

We have a bureaucracy that makes teachers teach to a standardized test which does nothing to promote creativity or critical thinking. Students usually go through the same mundane schedule day in and day out. When they get to school around 7:30am to when they leave at around 3:00pm....it rarely changes. Same with prisons from those times....the same mundane schedule.

We need to change that because institutionalizing students is wrong. Schools should promote creativity and critical thinking. They should have schedules vary from week to week. Would that put a strain on the administrators? Sure, but we shouldn't worry about them...adapt. We worry about the kids in the schools, not the administrators who can handle themselves.

Got to get off standardized testing...it is stifling education.

What your asking is impossible in a bloated system such as public education. It is inevitable that any huge public bureaucracy like this, institutionalization will happen. No large scale institution can customize education for each student, it would cost a gazillion dollars.

 

[rocket88]

At this point, the word "socialism" has little meaning in American politics. It's pretty much used to describe anything the federal government does that benefits someone other than the speaker. Military keeps me safe? Not socialism. Government subsidy of farmers keeps my food cheap? Not socialism. Government road service keeps the interstates going for me to use? Not socialism. Government provides healthcare for someone else? Socialism. Government educates someone else's children? Socialism. Government protects other people from abuses on the job? Socialism. And then the best one: Government provides disaster relief for my state? Not socialism. Government provides disaster relief for a state I don't live in? Socialism.

And it's only ever the federal government. State governments are apparently immune to socialism, merely by virtue of being physically more proximate than Washington DC is.

It's a pretty nonsensical discussion to have in the first place. It also ignores the very simple truth that a truly socialist system would be an improvement over the mess we have right now in almost every way.

Kind of like "Nazi." It just means, "Politician I don't like or agree with." Because that's the same thing as genocide....