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.
Why? You pay the property tax that is deemed acceptable by the city or county you live in. Want a lower property tax, move to where the property tax is lower. Problem solved for you.
Because I am using my own funds for a service that the state should be providing...
And public schools suck, also I dont have kids, I am just anti government run schools.
According to liberals, yes. Liberals are all about oppression, and guess which racial/ethnic groups are the most negatively impacted? Jim Crow lives...
Why? You pay the property tax that is deemed acceptable by the city or county you live in.
Why are you so adamantly defending a system that FAILS to educate 2/3 of our country's public school students to even grade-level proficiency. Why do you so strongly believe in maintaining such a high level of ignorance?
Why are you so adamantly defending a system that FAILS to educate 2/3 of our country's public school students to even grade-level proficiency. Why do you so strongly believe in maintaining such a high level of ignorance?
I don't believe getting rid of public education is the answer. Education shouldn't be fore only those that can afford it. I do however think we need to get rid of standardized testing because that is a complete waste of time that accomplishes nothing.
I don't believe getting rid of public education is the answer. Education shouldn't be fore only those that can afford it.
But that's exactly what it is under our country's current public school system, and YOU advocate for it. Those who can afford it pay for private school or move to pricey exclusive neighborhoods. Those who don't have enough money to do either are trapped in abysmally performing public schools.
Quote:
I do however think we need to get rid of standardized testing because that is a complete waste of time that accomplishes nothing.
Of course you want to get rid of standardized testing, so that you and your oppressive ilk can hide how really bad our country's public schools are. By 8th grade, our country's public schools have educated only 1/3 of our country's students to grade-level proficiency:
But that's exactly what it is under our country's current public school system, and YOU advocate for it. Those who can afford it pay for private school or move to pricey exclusive neighborhoods. Those who don't have enough money to do either are trapped in abysmally performing public schools.
Of course you want to get rid of standardized testing, so that you and your oppressive ilk can hide how really bad our country's public schools are. By 8th grade, our country's public schools have educated only 1/3 of our country's students to grade-level proficiency:
Allow vouchers and that 1/3 will take their kids elsewhere and what are you left with ?
The same thing we have now, which the motivated will then be able to escape. Think about the COLLOSAL human potential waste that results from the closely-guarded by the left public education system we now have.
Quote:
The left are never going to be in favor of vouchers because they know what the public schools will turn into.
In many cases, they already are that. Why not allow those who have the motivation to do so, excel? Why drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator? What purpose does that serve?
You fix public schools by ending this self-esteem, new agey, math_is_too_hard nonsense, plus removing both the compulsory and school=daycare components.
When I went to public school, 10 unexcused absences or 20 excused absences in one school year meant repeating the entire year. 3 out-of-school suspensions or 5 in-school suspensions meant expulsion. Acting up in class got you detention, 3 detentions got you in-school suspension (all day study hall), so doing the math means 15 detentions got you expelled. In short, none of my teachers had to put up with hoodlums, miscreants, or troublemakers. And you either showed up and passed your classes, or you flunked/got expelled/went away. That was public school up through 1985 anyway.
We didn't have zero tolerance, but I can count on one hand the number of fights that happened in any given year. Fights were automatic out-of-school suspension, and who started it mattered. Only needed to start 3 fights to get expelled. And my school expelled or flunked maybe 5-6 people per year (out of total class sizes averaging around 300).
We also sorted kids by scores and abilities. We had the three basic groups of smart, average and lunkhead. That got figured out for most of us in 7th grade at the two middle schools. It didn't really change much for all of high school either. It wasn't official or anything, but you ended up being around the same people year after year....remarkably.
But people flunked and got held back. People got expelled. Attendance and behavior mattered. You weren't guaranteed a seat in that school if you didn't do your part, accept responsibility and put forth effort. Public school should go back to that, because that's how college and jobs both work. Nobody cares if you show up or not. If you blow off class in college, you flunk, waste your money, and the college could care less. If you blow off work, you're fired and your boss doesn't care. K-12 should be like that, for both the kids and the parents. If you want to be a goof, blow off school, disrupt class - shoo and begone because if you and/or your parents don't GAF, neither should anyone else.
Until the culture of what a school is even supposed to be changes, nothing related to funding/taxes/admin will mean bupkus to elevating the national education level. I can pay a teacher $500k per year, hire PhD professors from MIT and Berkeley, build the nicest infrastructure in the history fo civilization, but if the kid is not reqired to take any responsibility, nor are their parents, and they can behave any way they wish for 12 years and I just have to give them a diploma because they managed to survive to the age of 18....well then all that money, talent, energy, etc goes to waste. Tell a teenager all they have to do is not kill someone or blow up the building, and May of the year they turn 18 they get a free diploma...is it really surprising they don't learn a whole lot? Why should they? It doesn't really matter to anyone else in their lives, so why would it matter to them?
A school is a place to transfer knowledge. People who know more (teachers) transfer knowledge to those who know less (students). If knowledge transfer is not the point, then stop calling it school. If we have to have publicly funded daycare of children younger than 18, then call the places where they go to incubate until their 18th birthday something other than "school." Indoctrination centers, daycare, minimum security prison, whatever...but not school. Stop asking babysitters to be educators or vice versa, and penalizing them when full time daycare and indoctrination leaves them little time for the transferring of knowledge.
The entire culture of education is fooked in this country, and money won't fix culture.
Then since I am paying for it I get to pay a lower property tax...
No, just like my parents did gladly, you pay the same property tax with or w/o kids enrolled in public schools. Take responsibility for your own financial needs. If you do it enough, it might become habit-forming.
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.
