• 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!

Separation of Education and State

Separation of Education and state

  • Total separation except for cities.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total separation except for counties.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total separation except for states.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Separation except for states and cities

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Separation except for states and counties

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    23

ronpaulvoter

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
627
Reaction score
111
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
How do you feel about a separation of education and all levels of government. Would you prefer...

1. A total separation.

2. A partial separation.

3. A guaranteed state-provided education for everybody.

4. Something else (specify).
 
A libertarian fantasy that's akin to Communists pontificating on how to properly implement Marx.
 
How do you feel about a separation of education and all levels of government. Would you prefer...

1. A total separation.

2. A partial separation.

3. A guaranteed state-provided education for everybody.

4. Something else (specify).

I would prefer no socialized schooling, whether city, county, state, or federal, since providing such schooling is dependent upon the initiation of aggression.
 
Last edited:
How do you feel about a separation of education and all levels of government. Would you prefer...

1. A total separation.

2. A partial separation.

3. A guaranteed state-provided education for everybody.

4. Something else (specify).

The government should provide vouchers for those schools which offer Catholic religious education. Insofar as this cannot be done due to secularist laws, it should provide vouchers for all schools.
 
I see that the posters in this thread like the idea of living in a country full of uneducated people. If not a democratic government to ensure the quality and funding of education for all, then who?
 
I see that the posters in this thread like the idea of living in a country full of uneducated people. If not a democratic government to ensure the quality and funding of education for all, then who?

Have no idea how you got that out of my post.

And while the state should fund it, they've done an absolutely lousy job at ensuring quality.
 
Have no idea how you got that out of my post.

And while the state should fund it, they've done an absolutely lousy job at ensuring quality.

Bold: This is part of the problem as I see it. It is also indicative of a larger problem in today's parental society.

IMO ALL schools should be funded via federal and state taxes. I feel this because of a couple of reasons. 1st: Educating society at large ALWAYS leads to a better society. Provided that education is available to all equally. 2: Children ARE the future of not only this country but the entire world. Its plain D Stupid to not provide them an education.

Now, back to the bold, it should not be up to the federal government to provide quality schooling. It should be the local people and in particular the PARENTS that ensure that their children get a quality education. The government should provide the outline. IE: Math, science, english, and basic history and learning place. They should also have a selection of books for each subject that communities can select from. Each subject having at least 200 books to select from, all written by private accredited authors and universities. None written by the government and all of them validated by accredited journals/institutions. Preferably by at least 10 separate such journals/institutions. Everything else should be up to the parents and community to make sure their local school has what is needed. IE: The government should not be allowed to dictate every single thing in any and all given subject/s. If this was done it would prevent indoctrination by the government.
 
Bold: This is part of the problem as I see it. It is also indicative of a larger problem in today's parental society.

IMO ALL schools should be funded via federal and state taxes. I feel this because of a couple of reasons. 1st: Educating society at large ALWAYS leads to a better society. Provided that education is available to all equally. 2: Children ARE the future of not only this country but the entire world. Its plain D Stupid to not provide them an education.

Now, back to the bold, it should not be up to the federal government to provide quality schooling. It should be the local people and in particular the PARENTS that ensure that their children get a quality education. The government should provide the outline. IE: Math, science, english, and basic history and learning place. They should also have a selection of books for each subject that communities can select from. Each subject having at least 200 books to select from, all written by private accredited authors and universities. None written by the government and all of them validated by accredited journals/institutions. Preferably by at least 10 separate such journals/institutions. Everything else should be up to the parents and community to make sure their local school has what is needed. IE: The government should not be allowed to dictate every single thing in any and all given subject/s. If this was done it would prevent indoctrination by the government.

I think vouchers would be better than giving the schools money directly.
 
I think vouchers would be better than giving the schools money directly.

Depending on the voucher program vouchers only last for so long and then the parent has to start paying directly. The other problem is that such a voucher program assumes that there is a min/max amount to educate children. Plain fact of the matter is that each child differs in their ability and learning ability. Some may cost more, some may cost less.

That said, I think I have a better solution than either vouchers OR giving money to schools directly. Instead require that each school have a group that is elected and is totally made up of parents who have children in the school that they are representing. No one else may be a part of this council. If the school needs money they have to request it from this "council". This council also requisitions money from the government for general upkeep and for any supplies needed. (teachers no longer have to pay for supplies). There's a bit more to this but I've got to go...dinner is almost ready and it smells GOOOOOOOOOD!
 
Depending on the voucher program vouchers only last for so long and then the parent has to start paying directly. The other problem is that such a voucher program assumes that there is a min/max amount to educate children. Plain fact of the matter is that each child differs in their ability and learning ability. Some may cost more, some may cost less.

That said, I think I have a better solution than either vouchers OR giving money to schools directly. Instead require that each school have a group that is elected and is totally made up of parents who have children in the school that they are representing. No one else may be a part of this council. If the school needs money they have to request it from this "council". This council also requisitions money from the government for general upkeep and for any supplies needed. (teachers no longer have to pay for supplies). There's a bit more to this but I've got to go...dinner is almost ready and it smells GOOOOOOOOOD!

Then have the vouchers cover everything. Problem solved, and schools that do poorly go the way of the dodo bird.
 
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.
 
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.

States have a difficulty meeting the fiscal needs of students as it is, truth be told. Furthermore, much (certainly not all) of the internal development you get comes from federal grants. There's no way around it, but the states are inadequate to raise the kind of dollars needed unless you want a lot higher taxes (and at the local and state level small government conservatives keep firing away about them taxes, make no mistake).

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.
 
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.

Some serious problems exist in your "ideal" education funding model:

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?
 
You left out the tyranny and slavery buzzwords.

I don't know those.

I just prefer no socialized schooling, whether city, county, state, or federal, since providing such schooling is dependent upon the initiation of aggression.
 
Some serious problems exist in your "ideal" education funding model:

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?
You're so far off from what I said that I don't know where to start.
 
Why would total separation of all governments make schools privatized?

How do you feel about a separation of education and all levels of government. Would you prefer...

1. A total separation.

2. A partial separation.

3. A guaranteed state-provided education for everybody.

4. Something else (specify).
 
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.
 
Our system of public education was once shielded from too much federal interference. It was local operating under state guidelines and regs. Once we allowed the feds to stick their noses in everything went to hell.
 
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.

What's the difference?
 
I see that the posters in this thread like the idea of living in a country full of uneducated people. If not a democratic government to ensure the quality and funding of education for all, then who?

Actually it's federal government involvement that is dumbing down America's public schools. They have become indoctrination centers rather then education institutions.
 
What's the difference?

Because privatizing education has nothing whatsoever to do with separation of church and state, maybe?
 
Actually it's federal government involvement that is dumbing down America's public schools. They have become indoctrination centers rather then education institutions.

As opposed to private religious schools, which are indoctrination centers rather than education institutions?
 
Back
Top Bottom