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.
You don't trust politicians, but you believe that they're the best suited to run our education system?
.... and exactly what does all of this have to do with whether or not you would be able to afford an education for your child, if schools were privatized?
Well.. considering that schools are primarily run on local levels, yes.. I do believe they are better suited..
Not understanding your last question.. if schools were privitized that means that there would be many who couldn't afford the tuition. Read the thread and you'll see all the arguments on the issue...
I don't trust corporations either! And.. as I've shown.. there is no difference in the performance between private and public schools.. so better to have it publicly funded and run just as it is now sothat all can afford an education. And, if you don't like the public schools, then by all means enroll your child in private schools and pay the tuition.
The topic of the thread that you started is, "If schools were privatizes would you be able to afford an education for your child?"
None of your points about corporate greed, political douche-baggery and golden parachutes are on topic.
My argument is, and will continue to be that the private sector could, without a shaddow of a doubt in my mind, educate our children in a more fiscally sound method. The more levels of government and/or adminstration that are involved, the less actual money makes it to the students.
The topic of the thread that you started is, "If schools were privatizes would you be able to afford an education for your child?"
None of your points about corporate greed, political douche-baggery and golden parachutes are on topic.
My argument is, and will continue to be that the private sector could, without a shaddow of a doubt in my mind, educate our children in a more fiscally sound method. The more levels of government and/or adminstration that are involved, the less actual money makes it to the students.
Well... the conversation just ended up leading to those points.
I don't have any faith in putting the hands of education into the hands of the greedy.. period. Many argue that schools could "compete" but how really could they, considering you are limited to the choices of private schools that would be in your surrounding areas. Private schools are also not required to be big enough to accomodate the entire population of school age children.. so then they can charge a lot so that they can make a nice profit. Spots in the school will go to the highest bidder, leaving those that are not as financial capable out in the cold.
We already have private schools, so parents have the choice to send their kids to one. And as I've shown throughout this thread with links to the studies, private schools have been proven to be no better in results than public schools.
The topic of the thread that you started is, "If schools were privatizes would you be able to afford an education for your child?"
None of your points about corporate greed, political douche-baggery and golden parachutes are on topic.
My argument is, and will continue to be that the private sector could, without a shaddow of a doubt in my mind, educate our children in a more fiscally sound method. The more levels of government and/or adminstration that are involved, the less actual money makes it to the students.
Making education totally privately-run would open the door to Corporations running our school systems. I don’t want to see Exxon, Wal-mart , or Booger King getting their hands in education!!!!!!
I think some private schools do a better job than public ones, but families should get the choice in the matter. Vouchers are ok, but don’t force all schools to go to the voucher system. Keep the current private schools open, and keep the public schools open as an option too.
But it looks like everybody getting taxed for education is 1 of the concerns here. I don’t mind being taxed if the funds are being put to good use, but I agree that the system is biased and slanted in favor of people with children. Singles and people that don’t have children are paying more then their share, that’s why I would rather see parents with children in school pay more taxes to keep the schools afloat. That’s the only fair thing I can see doing.
Making education totally privately-run would open the door to Corporations running our school systems. I don’t want to see Exxon, Wal-mart , or Booger King getting their hands in education!!!!!!
I think some private schools do a better job than public ones, but families should get the choice in the matter. Vouchers are ok, but don’t force all schools to go to the voucher system. Keep the current private schools open, and keep the public schools open as an option too.
But it looks like everybody getting taxed for education is 1 of the concerns here. I don’t mind being taxed if the funds are being put to good use, but I agree that the system is biased and slanted in favor of people with children. Singles and people that don’t have children are paying more then their share, that’s why I would rather see parents with children in school pay more taxes to keep the schools afloat. That’s the only fair thing I can see doing.
Makes sense.
But let me bring up one point a lot of people that don't have children don't think about...
A household with 2 adults and 2 children will consume 4x's the amount of goods and then some then the single individual. That means that we will most likely end up contributing 4x's more than the single household to the state sales tax.. which are used for a multitude of things .. including education. We are also contributing 4x's to the GDP of the nation. Every time we buy our children clothes (which is often... they grow like weeds) or a toy to entertain, or school supplies etc etc etc. And the portions that don't go to pay for school go to other things in the state that many of those without children are benefiting from.. like infrastructure, etc. So in the end we DO pay more in taxes and contribute more to things than the single person and they get to benefit from them.
Don't know about your area, but property taxes are also based on property values which can be tied into how big the home is. A home with 4 Bedrooms and 2 baths will certainly be taxed higher than say a 2 bedroom 1 bath home. A family would most likely (although not always) live in a home that is bigger and therefore taxed higher.. so we are contributing more into the school tax, then say the single person that owns a condo or small home. This is not always going to be true.. so it's not absolute.. BUT the sales tax one is.
So based on your rationale, those that pay the most taxes should have the most to say in this matter?.... Kind of like the way corporations pay the most taxes now and have politicians in their pockets...
As for helping the GDP... check to see how many of your tags say "Made in the USA" before you start reporting that you contribute 4 times as much to the GDP as a single person. The arguement could be made that lower income earners and larger families shop more based upon price point, which would lead to more purchases coming via China.
So based on your rationale, those that pay the most taxes should have the most to say in this matter?.... Kind of like the way corporations pay the most taxes now and have politicians in their pockets...
As for helping the GDP... check to see how many of your tags say "Made in the USA" before you start reporting that you contribute 4 times as much to the GDP as a single person. The arguement could be made that lower income earners and larger families shop more based upon price point, which would lead to more purchases coming via China.
Regarding your first paragraph. don't put words in my mouth. I never said that those who pay the most should have more of a say. I was simply arguing the point that childless people claim they are paying for others children and that we take take take. Yes.. they pay property taxes that go to schools that they don't use but then I as a consumer who pays more in sales tax through consumption for me and my kids, are paying into the system more than they are for things I may not use.
I am all for every child being educated. The government seems more interested in keeping all children in school than it does in educating children. The good thing about a private school is that they can discharge a child that is being disruptive and preventing others from learning. I really don't know what the answer is, but we need an answer soon. Our children are falling behind children in other countries because teachers are spending more time with discipline problems than they are in teaching.
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.
Finis
