Conservatives and public schools (premium, New York, separation, community)

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by shorebaby

From your own link.

"Public schools have also relied heavily on local property taxes to meet the vast majority of school expenses. American schools have thus tended to reflect the educational values and financial capabilities of the communities in which they are located."

Call it whatever you like the bottom line is it is a charge for schooling.

You are not charged by the school, to attend public schools. You do not pay tuition.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by camping!

The term 'socialism' is getting thrown around in the health care debate -- nowhere else that I am aware of.


But forget the second half of my post in regards to health care then ..... the rest still stands and is relevent. Conservatives are not heartless ba*tards that want children to remain ignorant. Conservatives understand the value of public services such as schools and really have no problem with paying for it when it works. It is the concept of throwing good money after bad that sets us off - not the concept of educating children.

"Socialism" talk is rife on this entire forum. A lot of people don't want to believe that a police force, a fire department, public roads, and other tax supported projects are really "socialism".

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by PurpleLove08

For all you conservatives who are screaming about Socialism, do your children attend public schools?

Here's the most socialist thing that you are gonna find in the US
Every single person that rides it, rides it for free and is paid by the govt. with our taxes.

[shorebaby]

Originally Posted by Katiana

You are not charged by the school, to attend public schools. You do not pay tuition.

OK I'll take on last run at this if you can't get it you can't get it, I have tried my best.

What does private school tuition pay for, school building, teachers, books etc.

What do property taxes (in some states other taxes) pay for school building, teachers, boooks etc.

Can you go to a private school if you don't pay tuition? No.

Can you go to a public school in a municipalitiy where you do not pay taxes (either directly or through rent (rent which is subsidized by government or paid directly)? No

See a pattern?

[Greatday]

Here in Arizona, there have been some SEVERE budget cutbacks for all the public schools. I mean SEVERE. There have been significant job layoffs - both licensed and non licensed staff.

Several districts / schools lost librarians - and to overcome the problem, students are being charged "tuition" to go to a public school - and the money being raised is to offset the cost of their librarian.

Another thing to remember - students / parents are not getting all the required materials for free - materials such as books have to be paid for -

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

No. Always the Catholic school system. The fact that I have to pay for "public education" that we never use is irritating. I would much rather use the money for additional scholarships to the catholic schools so that at least the money would be well spent and other kids would get a good education as well. I already provide several scholarships for that purpose.

I dislike the Catholic denomination for reasons I'd rather not discuss ... but otherwise, many kudos to you for your viewpoints on public school. We as taxpayers are burdened with subsidizing a failed public system which many of us don't even use. It would benefit all of us (even those with school aged children) to have the entire public system turned over to the private sector. The quality of education is superior, discipline standards are usually stricter, and parents would rightfully pay for the cost of tuition out of their own financial resources instead of picking everyone else's pocket!

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

The really sad thing is that public schools are crap compared to the alternatives, which are cheaper.

Catholic schools perform 25% better on standardized tests while the cost of education is 33% less.

Home schooled students perform 75% better than public school kids on standardized tests, yet cost only $500-$700 per year! Quite a bargain.

Take home message-

Public schools produce an inferior product at a much higher cost. If they were a buisness, they would go broke. But thankfully, due to the teacher's union, public schools cost more and more and the test scores go down further and further. I wonder if the dems set it up that way to keep the poor in thier place?

Excellent points!!!

Originally Posted by I Like Taxes

Conservatives don't mind paying taxes to public schools. That is a community's responsibility, not the federal government's.

Sorry, but you're incorrect. First of all, I'm a conservative Libertarian, and I DESPISE having to pay taxes to support public schools that are inferior in many aspects. One of those aspects brings me to your second point about schools being a community's responsibiliy. Technically, you are correct ... however, many other taxes besides local property & sales taxes are directed toward education. The Department of Education is supported by our tax money, and the public schools in my city & yours are basically satellites of that federal department ... and that's because federal money is granted to local public schools whether or not you realize it.

Originally Posted by Frankie117

As mentioned by another poster, the purpose of the public education system is to offer free K-12 schooling to everyone. It is unlikely that ESL, special education, or impoverished students would be educated without a public system in place..

Well, but it's not free. Somebody is paying the cost for that so called free education, and that would be the taxpayers on a local, state, and federal level. Forcing the entire public to subsidize schools is socialism. It wouldn't be as bad if only the parents with school aged kids would pay the taxes to support local public schools. Still, the private system is better all the way around.

Originally Posted by MiamiRob

wow well i pay for public education too through property taxes and the irony is that I don't have any children!
Do I complain? No, because public schools serve the greater good of society.

Test scores and graduation rates are lower in public schools than in private schools. Kids are more involved in drugs, alcohol, violence, etc. in public schools than in private schools. Many private schools require uniforms, and adhere to stricter learning/disciplinary guidelines. The cost of operating public schools is out of control, and more money keeps pouring into the system while the administrators constantly claim to be short on funds. With all that in mind, private schools serve a better purpose to society than public schools could ever hope to!

Originally Posted by Katiana

Every state constitution that I am familiar with guarantees a free, public education to its residents. That was my point. I am hardly naive. I do not need a little lecture from anyone about paying my property taxes. It's just entertaining to me that some conservatives do this mental gymnastics to make that particular social program OK for them to use. Perfect 10!

OK, but if you want to talk about Constitutions, please locate where it says in the United States Constitution about education being free ... or better yet, where does it say that education is a right??? While we're on the subject of free schools and rights vs. privileges, point to where it states in the U.S. Constitution about procreation being a right. Good luck!

Originally Posted by Chatteress

Conservatives have every right to utilize a program that their property taxes have funded. Not every conservative is against the public schools and there are many conservatives, while they disagree with the concept of public schools, they cannot afford other educational options for their children.

Then if they can't afford to pay for education (or for other essential goods & services) out of their own pockets, they shouldn't be having kids. Again, please point to where free education and procreation are Constitutional rights. They aren't! Furthermore, these people who breed children without having the financial capability to pay for every aspect of raising a family on their own ARE NOT true conservatives. They are hypocrites!!!

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by Katiana

I don't live in New Jersey, can't tell you how to do anything there. You have made a choice however, to pay the taxes and the private school tuition. Take your arguments about choice over to the education forum if you want.

I've enjoyed this thread. It's entertaining to see the cons jump to support their own use of public schools, trying to justify it by saying they pay taxes.

So the "cons" should just pay their taxes like good citizens and then pay for a private education for their children? It's OK for liberals to utilize the services paid for by the tax dollars but NOT the conservatives? Taxes are paid for by both conservatives and liberals alike so we all have a RIGHT to use those services if we need to.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by Chatteress

So the "cons" should just pay their taxes like good citizens and then pay for a private education for their children? It's OK for liberals to utilize the services paid for by the tax dollars but NOT the conservatives? Taxes are paid for by both conservatives and liberals alike so we all have a RIGHT to use those services if we need to.

Once and for all, please learn the difference between a right and a privilege. Education is not a right, nor is health care. Utilizing such free services on the backs of taxpayers is not a right ... however, it IS socialism.

I reluctantly pay taxes to support may things I don't agree with, including public education. However, that still doesn't give me a "right" to use those services. Take roads for example. I pay taxes for maintaining the streets & freeway systems, including building new ones ... but that doesn't give me the right to use the roads any way I choose.

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by camping!

I went to a state university and paid out the .... well, lets just say it wasn't 'free'

Ditto for this conservative.

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by camping!

I see what you are saying, and in large part I do agree with you.

However, lets change your last sentence to more accurately reflect what a person can expect from any and all types of government run programs --- you get what you pay for.

Some public school districts are excellent. They hire motivated teachers and have top of the line resources. And they almost always are smack in the middle of an affluent neighborhood that not only pays substantial amounts of property tax but are usually willing to pony up in cases of bond issues. Other public schools are in poverty stricken neighborhoods where the property values and parental involvement are low and as a result those schools have many, many problems.

Just how do you think a universal health care system would be any different? Perhaps those lucky ba*tards who live near the Mayo Clinic will get fantastic care while those who live near St. Crackpipe will get substantially less. Perhaps you will pay more then you are paying now to an insurance company as a way to level the playing field - perhaps you will get less benefits also as a way to level the playing field.

The only fact that we know is that whatever the federal government touches becomes a quagmire of beurocracies, uneven results and rapidly expanding debt. Watch out - there is no such thing as a free lunch, you know.....

Exactly!