Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you propose education for every student be funded?
I've typed it at least a dozen times. Parents should pay schools directly for their child's education- whatever education they feel is best. Tuition free schools would be funded by donations.
I've typed it at least a dozen times. Parents should pay schools directly for their child's education- whatever education they feel is best. Tuition free schools would be funded by donations.
That will never work. There are many taxpayers that pay into the system right now who are not parents. They would not pay.
I will use my district as an example. Spending per pupil is around $9,300 per student. There are around 260,000 students in the district. There are around 1.8 million residents in the district and the average household size is 2.5. That means that there are approximately 720,000 housing units that are supporting the 260,000 students. Each housing unit pays around $3,400 in school taxes ON AVERAGE (my numbers are estimates) if you ignore the contribution made by businesses. If you take businesses into account each housing unit pays EVEN LESS than that.
How are parents going to pay over $9,000 PER STUDENT? Their taxes will only go down around $3,400 per year, yet with two children in school their school expenses will increase $18,000 per year. It is not a viable funding method and results in a much higher overall burden on middle class people than most people find acceptable.
Edited to add: There would be no tuition free schools.
That will never work. There are many taxpayers that pay into the system right now who are not parents. They would not pay.
I will use my district as an example. Spending per pupil is around $9,300 per student. There are around 260,000 students in the district. There are around 1.8 million residents in the district and the average household size is 2.5. That means that there are approximately 720,000 housing units that are supporting the 260,000 students. Each housing unit pays around $3,400 in school taxes ON AVERAGE (my numbers are estimates) if you ignore the contribution made by businesses. If you take businesses into account each housing unit pays EVEN LESS than that.
How are parents going to pay over $9,000 PER STUDENT? Their taxes will only go down around $3,400 per year, yet with two children in school their school expenses will increase $18,000 per year. It is not a viable funding method and results in a much higher overall burden on middle class people than most people find acceptable.
Edited to add: There would be no tuition free schools.
If it's not important to taxpayers to fund schools voluntarily, they certainly shouldn't be funded involuntarily, by coercion. This doesn't sound like the will of the people to me.
Once the free market sets in, the waste in government education spending will be drastically reduced. The market would set the price of education.
If it's not important to taxpayers to fund schools voluntarily, they certainly shouldn't be funded involuntarily, by coercion. This doesn't sound like the will of the people to me.
Once the free market sets in, the waste in government education spending will be drastically reduced. The market would set the price of education.
Do your theories extend to governmental services such as law enforcement, fire services, roads and bridges, natural resource conservation, etc. or just schools?
First of all, public education is not free. I'm not against providing every child an education. I'm against using taxes to fund education.
What you call "the whims of the public" I call parents being responsible for their children, and allowed to educate their child as they see fit.
Private schools are run like businesses, and the vast majority are non-profit.
Whether you like it or not, the constitution of every state, including the one you live in, requires the state to offer a free public education to everyone of a certain age. All this libertarian talk about making parents pay for schools and funding schools with voluntary contributions is simply an intellectual excercise, AT BEST.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
Spoken like someone who spends all day reading bad Ayn Rand novels.
The rest of us live in a real world where nothing works exactly the way its supposed to in theory. If the free enterprise system "always worked" as you claim it does we wouldn't have government at all. Are you able to comprehend that little fact? Because every need we have would find some solution through the "invisible hands" of capitalism that "always work for everyone's good".
What you don't seem to understand is that this system we have which has a public school system, taxes, etc. was voted into existence by a majority of people. If we don't like it, we can vote it away. No army will show up with guns when we go to the polling booth to stop us. That same majority voluntarily voted vouchers down by a vote of 2-1 in my state. Yes, believe it or not public schools funded by taxes are not only constitutional, but popular in some places.
We do abide by the will of the majority in this country unless something violates the Constitution. Public school systems definitely do not violate the Constitution. If you don't like that, you can always move to a third world country where the people aren't so concerned about civilization. The rest of us may complain about the quality of our public schools and some of the policies that they follow, but we basically favor the whole concept (including taxes).
Exactly! We've all heard of "it works in theory, but does it work in practice?" Unfettered capitalism does NOT work in practice. Business owners take advantage of their workers, their customers, anyone they can.
You cannot have a nation of uneducated. It's bad enough what we are currently producing but to hope that donations will cover K-12 is totally unrealistic.
If we continue to defund education and insist that it be funded by donations, we will end up like the third world countries that currently educate only the wealthy.
In most developing countries, public school is not free. The costs of books, uniforms, and teachers’ salaries are borne by the students’ families.
School fees and related costs are a common barrier to education. These charges are a greater burden for children from poor families, and disproportionately affect those who are racial and ethnic minorities, members of Indigenous communities and migrants.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
