• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support school choice?

Do you support school choice?

  • Total voters
    88
scatt said:
Yeah, support requires proof. If you support it, you would pay.
Click to expand...

yeah, you really need to look up the definition of that word. you are going further and further off the mark there.

perhaps you should substitute a word that actually would make a point instead of mangling the english language.
 
WCH said:
Agree and I believe the tax money should follow the child. No one should have to double pay.
Click to expand...

not one person in America HAS to double pay
not one
 
tacomancer said:
People who value modern society and functional societies support this tax system. If you want to call that stupid, go ahead.
Click to expand...

A great many of us who support modern, functional society, very much disagree with your support of a tax system that can only be destructive thereto.
 
justabubba said:
not one person in America HAS to double pay
not one
Click to expand...

Well, nobody except for every parent who sends their child to a private school, and has to pay tuition to that school as well as having to pay taxes to support the failing public schools that they aren't using.
 
scatt said:
Sounds good, just let them opt out of taxes paying for other kids.
Click to expand...

and i don't want America going to fight other peoples' wars. by your measure i should not need to pay a huge portion of my federal taxes going to that effort
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Obviously at some point you have to set a standard for what a failing school is. No school will have perfect results because some of the results depend on parents. However, I think its easy to see what a successful school district is. For example, here are the stats for the public school district our kids attend:

Average ACT Scores: 25.2
Average SAT Composite: 1,789

Proficient in Reading: 96%
Proficient in Math: 96%

In comparison, the average ACT Scores for Home Schooled kids is 22.6. The average SAT composite for home schooled kids is 1083. The point being that there are lots of public school districts with exemplary performance, so why should parents in those school districts get a taxpayer funded voucher to send their kids to a private school that doesn't even perform as well as the public school does?
Click to expand...

Again, you use "school district" averages instead of the actual single school that a given child must attend. Suppose that a particular parent wants a particular child to get better educated in music, art or possibly to learn a trade? Should that not be used to judge the effectiveness of a given educational opportunity? Most public K-12 schools assume that college prep is the #1 goal, yet many students (and their parents) know that is not their personal plan. I am amazed how few HS graduates can balance a checkbook, correctly frame a wall with a door and/or window in it or prepare a basic household budget.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Well, nobody except for every parent who sends their child to a private school, and has to pay tuition to that school as well as having to pay taxes to support the failing public schools that they aren't using.
Click to expand...

What if they are in a successful public school district? Do you think they should still get a voucher if they want to send their kids to private school?
 
Bob Blaylock said:
A great many of us who support modern, functional society, very much disagree with your support of a tax system that can only be destructive thereto.
Click to expand...

having a general basic foundation we can build on is the basis of a lot of our society. We need that foundation to be reliable so that we can build on it and achieve higher levels of technological sophistication.

I will go back to the example of roads. We have a good road system, as did rome. With roads come commerce and with better roads comes better commerce. With commerce comes wealth. I am sure we can all agree on this point at least. So how do you make sure you have decent and reliable roads? Roads that we can standardize the types of vehicles we can use and minimize things like maintenance issues and create more and more efficient vehicles and uses for these roads? By general taxation. If we paid use taxes for roads, tolls for example, than the quality of our roads would vary and be unreliable, causing 18 wheelers to need to be far more robust, less standardized and easy to maintain, and potentially cut off portions of our geography from receiving the goods they transport, reducing the wealth in those areas, causing them to be less able to maintain decent quality roads.

I can posit similar examples in electricity, education, health care, or a lot of different industries that underly modern society if you wish. You may consider it theft, if you do, then you do, but that is your morality, not mine. You may judge my morality harshly, but I don't care as I see my morality as helping to create systems that allow you to bitch about it on the internet, which was created by the very taxation system you hate.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Again, you use "school district" averages instead of the actual single school that a given child must attend. Suppose that a particular parent wants a particular child to get better educated in music, art or possibly to learn a trade? Should that not be used to judge the effectiveness of a given educational opportunity? Most public K-12 schools assume that college prep is the #1 goal, yet many students (and their parents) know that is not their personal plan. I am amazed how few HS graduates can balance a checkbook, correctly frame a wall with a door and/or window in it or prepare a basic household budget.
Click to expand...

I would agree that schools should do a better job preparing some kids for skilled vocations. However, private schools are certainly no better in that regard and are in most cases much worse. How many private schools out there have an AG program, or Shop? I can't think of a one. The vast majority of private schools are either college prep, or fundamentalist.
 
justabubba said:
and i don't want America going to fight other peoples' wars. by your measure i should not need to pay a huge portion of my federal taxes going to that effort
Click to expand...

Same. Sounds good.

tacomancer said:
you are going further and further off the mark there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, words do not prove support or show support.

SouthernDemocrat said:
In what nation on earth does a resident get to pick and choose which taxes they want to individually pay?
Click to expand...

In which state?
 
I oppose socialized schools for the very same reasons I would oppose socialized grocery stores or socialized auto manufacturing. Monopolies results in higher costs and poorer quality, for the simple reason that the socialized firm is in no danger of going out of business. When firms have to compete to offer the product that best fits customer needs, they have to innovate, cut costs, and improve quality, or risk losing out to other firms.
 
MaggieD said:
And for that reason (bolded above), parents should be allowed to voucher their kids to other schools that aren't broken.

It isn't difficult to improve public schools. Society just doesn't have the will to do so. And, when push comes to shove, unions aren't so interested in the students. Their interest in the students is only inasmuch as they relate to union jobs and job security.

Improving their image is even more difficult than improving public schools in general.
Click to expand...

and this is now the circumstance in my school district
students of those schools which have not met standard for the specified number of years are now eligible to relocate to another school within the district
however, there are no seats available to migrate to within the good schools
the student only has the option to relocate to another crappy school
 
scatt said:
Yeah, words do not prove support or show support.
Click to expand...

is english a second language for you? seriously, if you support something, you show favor for it. words can be used to show favor.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Who has the authority to decide how best to educate a child: Government, or that child's parents?
Click to expand...

Everyone has the choice to send their kids to private school if they choose to do so, or to home school if they want. However, education funding is finite, thus it should be judiciously allocated. So why should a parent get a voucher to send their kid to a religious private school instead of public school if they are in a district that has exemplary performance and the only reason that parent wants their kid to go to a religious private school is that parent does not like the fact that creationism is not taught in science class.

In failing inner city schools I think vouchers can have a role as well as Charter and Magnet Schools. However, there is no reason to pull money from a successful public school district just to subsidize the religious education of some fundies kids.
 
MaggieD said:
It's not "tax money." It's my money.
Click to expand...

it quits being yours when it is paid over as taxes
at that point, the only way you have a say in how those monies are spent are via your elected representatives
 
tacomancer said:
words can be used to show favor.
Click to expand...

Saying you support something does not mean you support something. If the force was removed, "support" would fall.
 
scatt said:
Saying you support something does not mean you support something. If the force was removed, "support" would fall.
Click to expand...

POlar_facepalm.jpg


This is like debating whether the sky is blue or green, obviously its blue and if you can't use a basic obvious definition, there is no point in continuing this.

Words are a proper form of support.
 
scatt said:
Saying you support something does not mean you support something. If the force was removed, "support" would fall.
Click to expand...

Once again, in what nation on earth can a resident pick and choose which taxes they want to individually pay?
 
Glad you agree with me that words are not actual support.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Once again, in what nation on earth can a resident pick and choose which taxes they want to individually pay?
Click to expand...

I can't remember the guys name, but there is some dude who comes on this forum about every two months who proposes a system where all taxation use is directly voted for. Which would be a disaster in practice, I wish I could remember his name.

He is one of those people who thinks philosophy is the greatest source of knowledge and truth, which of course is a ridiculous notion.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Why should a consumer have to pay twice, for a service that he receives once?
Click to expand...

because the consumer - by his own choice - opted to pay for what could have been received as a benefit of his taxes
 
scatt said:
You mean which state?
Click to expand...

I mean in what nation, what state, what society does this fantasy scenario where one gets to pick and choose which taxes they want to pay actually occur in? I can't think of anywhere on earth where this is the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom