- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 66,431
- Reaction score
- 47,470
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
The Gov't brags about its' spending on Education, and a lot of money is spent. It is spent on buildings, sports complexes, etc., but not on merit based teacher pay increases. Therefore, communities get some really nice buildings that look good and that is IMAGERY, not substance, when you are discussing education. US students have regressed on a world wide scale due to Federal teaching guidelines of sound good, accomplish nothing platitudes and programs with no substance. In New York State, the schools don't like home schoolers because the Local School Districts get about $88/day for each student from State aid and they don't get that for the home schooled. That just gets lost. The Local School Districts don't want to acknowledge when home schooled are ready for college long before their institutionalized counterparts and fight to prevent issuing the paperwork necessary to enroll these students in College. If the home schooled are ready for College long before the Local School students, it makes the local School Districts look bad. Actually, it just puts a microscopic view on the fact that our educational system has some flaws and no one wants to fix them because they will lose their monetary windfalls. Online education is the future and it only requires that the online student be properly motivated and acknowledges it is the student's responsibility to do the schoolwork. It is not a teacher's responsibility to beat knowledge in to the student's head. Many parents think that is how school works and that schools are just convenient babysitters. There is never a "one size fits all," but in the USA personal responsibility for one's educational motivation is a lost agenda.
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.
Yeah, support requires proof. If you support it, you would pay.
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.
there is NOT ONE parent who is required to send their child to a private school instead of a public one
the parent chooses to pay twice
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.
They choose to pay once, they are forced to pay twice.
with their taxes, they have paid for their child's enrollment in public school
Yes, I am absolutely in favor of school choice. Choice is good.
None of course, consent does not exist within a state.
Fifteen years ago, the people behind the charter school movement had one message that they put forth to parents and the community: our school do a better job at educating students. Then several years went by and their kids took the test and guess what we found out over and over and over again? Not so much if at all do they do a better job than the public schools. Sure, you can cherry pick a few schools or students and paint that picture if you are intellectually dishonest. But pretty much over all the results were no different than public schools. In fact, some of the fast buck shysters that went into the charter business actually underperformed compared to public schools.
I distinctly remember in the Fall of 2010 going to a south eastern Michigan meeting for charter schools for newly elected members of the Michigan legislature or - like me - their chief of staff. Having been away from education for six years I was struck by all the literature and speakers for charter schools having had changed their message in the intervening years. It was no longer - we can do it better, Now they had a new message:
CHOICE IS GOOD.
So ask yourself, why were we promised one bill of goods and then the charter industry engaged in a blatant bait and switch and went to a different bill of goods?
Answer that honestly and it tells you a great deal about the political motivations behind the charter industry.
I'm not sure of your message here.
You seem to be objecting to the idea that choice is good and instead saying that lack of choice is good, which seems an absurd position to take.
My stance, and the stance taken by nearly all economists, is that when firms are required to compete with other firms for customers, quality rises and prices fall. I am in favor of affordable, quality education, so I want to see schools working hard to provide better education for a lower price.
I suppose all but vouchers to religious church rule schools. That should not be paid by tax dollars nor a basis for tax deference or avoidance.
Schools already do that. Communities compete against each other for residents based on the quality of their public school system.
Yes they do, which is a result of socialized schools. I would prefer a system that allowed multiple competing firms within the same community, rather than a single socialized firm.
I can't help but see public schools in the same way that I would look at public shoe dispensaries, public automobile dispensaries, and public grocery dispensaries.
Schools already do that. Communities compete against each other for residents based on the quality of their public school system.
I'm not sure of your message here.
You seem to be objecting to the idea that choice is good and instead saying that lack of choice is good, which seems an absurd position to take.
My stance, and the stance taken by nearly all economists, is that when firms are required to compete with other firms for customers, quality rises and prices fall. I am in favor of affordable, quality education, so I want to see schools working hard to provide better education for a lower price.
Choice is not inherently good or bad.
Its not the same thing at all. Education is more or less an infrastructure investment. Cars, shoes, and autos are consumer products.
Sure they do - everyone knows that is why folks move to the ghetto.
To vote with your feet is not free, it requires the income necessary to move to (or get transportation to) where these "best" schools are, otherwise you get to "choose" only what the public school bus drops you in front of.
Choice is not inherently good or bad. It is simply choice.
I agree, that is why I do think there is a role for vouchers in a failing inner city school district. However, I do not believe that we should be paying for the religious education of some fundamentalists kids simply because they don't want to send their kids to public school. If you are in a successful public school district and you want to send your kids to a private school or home school, then you should be able to do so, but do it on your own dime. For example, its perfectly appropriate for taxpayers to pay for airports. However it is not a good use of taxpayer money to pay for some guys private airstrip because he doesn't like waiting in line at the local airport.
I have a question. Clarification on your opinion, actually.Most definitely YES!!!!!! It is the ONLY way to get children out of their failing schools and for them to get an good education. It would also FORCE the teachers unions to stop siding against the community the teachers serve (the operating word there is "serve") as they are responsible to give a reasonable return on the communities investment. They side against ensuring their teachers are providing for the education of the children. Where tenure is used to ensure a teachers job, even if they don't do anything to provide for a proper learning atmosphere for the children to learn. They even protect pedophiles in some cases. This would all change if there was school choice and student left to go to better schools with the tax dollars following them to those schools. Competition is everything!