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.
Privating education won't solve the problem. People who have alot of money may be able to pay to send their children to a private school, although there are many parents who would be unable to pay the tuition to make their children have a private education.
Please understand that both education and procreation are not Constitutional rights. Those who can't afford every aspect of a child's upbringing on their own means (including education) really have no business having children until they are fully able to financially. Furthermore, there is no reason why schools can't all be privatized and compete with each other for better results like other businesses do. Anything that can be done by the private sector with better results should not be run by the government, nor subsidized by taxpayers. I attended both private and public schools in my lifetime, and the quality of education in the private sector greatly outranks that in the public system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
Even if the school makes tuition be relative to a person's salary, there are many people that live paycheck to paycheck, so even if tuition can be lower or higher based on the parents' income, parents who's income is based on the next paycheck wouldn't have the money to spare for paying tuition.
Well, guess what? Most people already live paycheck to paycheck, even those with no children. Why do so many people who live so close to their financial limits keep having children in the first place?! It should not be the obligation of taxpayers to pay for other people's offspring. However, if you wish to keep the school system public, my alternative suggestion would be to have only the people with kids in the public system pay the taxes ... much like a user fee. Those who don't have children in public school could opt out, or contribute to the system on a voluntary basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
Also, public school remains neutral on matters of issues like religion, although private school tends to advocate a single religious view and the students are required to abide by that religious view, although there are a multitude of religions that people follow. Making children's education be bettered can be changed by bettering the way way public schools give students an education(ie newer textbooks etc.)
Not true at all. First of all, most public schools are NOT neutral on religion. Most forbid any kind of prayer or religious congregation on school property. I'm not very religious myself, but I respect the rights of people to exercise their faith ... especially since that IS a Constitutional right! Also, not all private institutions are religious oriented. I went to a highly secular private school in my youth that never mandated adhering to a specific relgious view, and never required attending church services of any kind.
Your viewpoint on this aspect of public vs. private is pretty narrow ... which tells me you have never attended private schools, and/or never did any research on the plethora of highly accredited private institutions there are all across the nation (including those likely in your area).
Not true at all. First of all, most public schools are NOT neutral on religion. Most forbid any kind of prayer or religious congregation on school property.
You have a serious misconception here.
I've been teaching in large urban public high schools for the past 15 years. Each of them has had multiple Christian student groups active on campus. These groups' meetings are openly announced on flyers posted in the hallways and in the daily announcements. They have pages devoted to them in the shools' yearbooks.
The schools may not sponsor or fund these groups. They are not in any way discouraged, though.
And I can assure you that there are plenty of prayers said in schools across the country on a daily basis. Most of them are probably immediately preceding algebra tests.
Again, the schools cannot lead these prayers. But students are absolutley free to pray privately at any time.
The standard is that religious activities are private. Public schools cannot endorse or foster religious proceedings.
Valley Native - Given your stated position on showing financial responsibility (please define - income, savings, investments) before having children, I suppose you are willing provide for unlimited contraception and/or abortion for the people that are not financially capable of supporting children. In essence you would require a license from the government, or a private pregnancy patrol, for a woman to become pregnant. Or would you require all 12 yr old males have a vasectomy that would only be reversed when they posted bond? Maybe you would have everyone injected with a drug that suppressed libido until they proved financially able to support the children resulting from having sex?
Do you have any idea how intrusive a government is required to implement your basic idea? If said government is going to intrude on child making why don’t they also take care of the obesity, drinking, and halitosis problems while they are at it.
In your passionate unwillingness to support anyone else’s children you are illustrating a really advanced case of narcissism and selfishness. Personally I object to having to share the atmosphere with egotistical cheapskates like you.
Valley Native - Given your stated position on showing financial responsibility (please define - income, savings, investments) before having children, I suppose you are willing provide for unlimited contraception and/or abortion for the people that are not financially capable of supporting children. In essence you would require a license from the government, or a private pregnancy patrol, for a woman to become pregnant. Or would you require all 12 yr old males have a vasectomy that would only be reversed when they posted bond? Maybe you would have everyone injected with a drug that suppressed libido until they proved financially able to support the children resulting from having sex?
I would mandate none of the above items be mandated, legislated, or controlled because that would involve more government interference, which is certainly not needed. This country is in dire need of LESS government in our lives ... not more. Being that I'm pro choice, I have no problem with people who use contraception, or even have abortions (as long as they're not subsidized by our tax money). Lower income people who take precautions to avoid pregnancies is certainly more responsible than bringing a litter of children in the world that they can't afford!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
Do you have any idea how intrusive a government is required to implement your basic idea? If said government is going to intrude on child making why don’t they also take care of the obesity, drinking, and halitosis problems while they are at it.
My idea of privatizing schools would involve LESS intrusive government because people would no longer be forceably taxed for a public system that is burdensome, and severely bloated with wasteful expenditures ... not to mention a system that passes kids along and gives them a dipolma for merely showing up. Frankly, I don't care if somebody decides to have children ... but those who make that choice should NOT be expecting a free ride such as tax credits, subsidized health care, and free public schools. After all, these "entitlements" aren't entirely free because SOMEBODY is paying for them. Procreation should be like anything else in life: if you want it, you pay for it entirely on your own means. If you can't afford it, DON'T HAVE IT!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
In your passionate unwillingness to support anyone else’s children you are illustrating a really advanced case of narcissism and selfishness.
The breeders who expect the public to subsidize their reproductive habits are the true narcissistic & selfish ones. At least I've taken the responsibility to not have children, so why should I be forced to pay for the irresponsible ones who keep popping out babies they can't raise & support on their own terms???
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
Personally I object to having to share the atmosphere with egotistical cheapskates like you.
Well, I personally object to have to share the atmosphere with socialists and bleeding heart do gooders like you, so I guess we're even as far as that goes.
()
Actually I agree with GregW. I'm single with no kids but I would make every effort to support education in my town because I know that an educated populace positively benefits the whole community. While I think many (NOT all) public schools have problems--and there is a lot of waste--we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater...I can see it...a whole bunch of illiterate hoodlums without a lot to do. Talk about a recipe for disaster.
And if believing that everyone should have the chance to be educated--so that they can be exposed to a wider world, and can have better opportunities in life--makes me a socialist, then so be it. I call it common sense. (Though I'm far from socialist)
I'm proud of my public schools, where my classmates went on to Yale and Harvard, or have had very successful careers otherwise...that is worth my tax money--and it was fine with everyone else in my town too because we were all smart enough to know that when the schools are good, everyone benefits.
What if, in almost any large metro area, in a "poor" area, parents were offered vouchers that would allow them to send their children to private schools (even those run by certain religious groups), what their response would be?
Would they accept the voucher and opt to send their children to a locale where they think their kids would get a better education?
Or, would they keep in their local public schools and assume their kids are being well educated?
Actually I agree with GregW. I'm single with no kids but I would make every effort to support education in my town because I know that an educated populace positively benefits the whole community.
Then under the concept of privatization, you would be perfectly free to contribute to education on your own terms. I also support an educated populace ... but I don't believe that taxpayers should be required to subsidize other people's kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81
While I think many (NOT all) public schools have problems--and there is a lot of waste--we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater...I can see it...a whole bunch of illiterate hoodlums without a lot to do. Talk about a recipe for disaster.
We already have a bunch of illiterate hoodlums under the current system. They're the ones who are often passed along in the public system, and become disasters when they get out in the real world. Other times, the same troublemakers flunk out or drop out ... so they end up as hoodlums with not a lot do anyway. So what's the difference???
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81
And if believing that everyone should have the chance to be educated--so that they can be exposed to a wider world, and can have better opportunities in life--makes me a socialist, then so be it. I call it common sense. (Though I'm far from socialist)
More power to you. You're entitled to those socialist beliefs the same as I'm entitled to my capitalist beliefs. That's what makes the USA a great (and diverse) country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81
I'm proud of my public schools, where my classmates went on to Yale and Harvard, or have had very successful careers otherwise...that is worth my tax money--and it was fine with everyone else in my town too because we were all smart enough to know that when the schools are good, everyone benefits.
There is data to show that people who attended private school are more likely to be college graduates than those who went through the public schools. Therefore, if the system was privatized, you would likely have a lot more attendees of prestegiuos universities, and those with successful careers.
Incidentally, in case anybody is concerned that wealthy parents would be the only ones who could afford private schools, consider the fact that I came from a family that was barely qualified to be considered middle class. However, they were wise enough to make sacrifices to where they could afford private school for us. If more parents would quit spending frivolously on things like Ipods, computers, big screen TVs, SUVs, etc., they could afford the cost of tuition for private schools. It's all about taking responsibility for your own finances. If they can't afford it, they're not entitled to have it!
Originally posted by Valley Native
Then under the concept of privatization, you would be perfectly free to contribute to education on your own terms. I also support an educated populace ... but I don't believe that taxpayers should be required to subsidize other people's kids.
Public Education--GOOD Public Education-- has the greatest opportunity to reach the greatest number of kids. Our town, and most of the towns in our region have great public schools because we understand this. Therefore we believe in our public schools and make every effort to support them, in addition to our tax dollars. Consequently we graduate many successful people, and some people who aren't wealthy, but who are still decent people.
Quote:
We already have a bunch of illiterate hoodlums under the current system. They're the ones who are often passed along in the public system, and become disasters when they get out in the real world. Other times, the same troublemakers flunk out or drop out ... so they end up as hoodlums with not a lot do anyway. So what's the difference???
That's true, but that means we should REFORM the public schools, not GET RID OF them. Because if we got rid of them, then those kids would still be hoodlums out on the street and not in school where at least they have the opportunity to realize that an education is worth something. They won't learn that at the crack house, that's for sure.
Quote:
More power to you. You're entitled to those socialist beliefs the same as I'm entitled to my capitalist beliefs. That's what makes the USA a great (and diverse) country.
Yes, it is a great country, but my beliefs are not socialist (slightly left of centre--maybe, but not socialist)
There is data to show that people who attended private school are more likely to be college graduates than those who went through the public schools. Therefore, if the system was privatized, you would likely have a lot more attendees of prestegiuos universities, and those with successful careers.
Quote:
Originally posted by Valley Native
Incidentally, in case anybody is concerned that wealthy parents would be the only ones who could afford private schools, consider the fact that I came from a family that was barely qualified to be considered middle class. However, they were wise enough to make sacrifices to where they could afford private school for us. If more parents would quit spending frivolously on things like Ipods, computers, big screen TVs, SUVs, etc., they could afford the cost of tuition for private schools. It's all about taking responsibility for your own finances. If they can't afford it, they're not entitled to have it!
Kudos to your family. You had good, capable parents.
And incidentally, my region doesn't have many big private schools because people here like the public schools so much. They mostly do what private schools already can do....so public schools CAN work, and we reach EVERYBODY. EVERYBODY here has the opportunity to learn. Not everyone takes it, but everyone has the opportunity, and that benefits all of us.
And yes, parents should quit spending frivolous money. But some people are genuinely poor and would not afford the astounding tuition of a private school. What would we do about them? Philosophically, I just don't think education is a commodity that should be sold on the market. (but if you want to send your kids to private school, go ahead) When people are educated, it benefits me, and my town. When they're not, then everyone suffers.
Reform the public schools. They badly need reform. Just don't abolish them.
It's nice debating you
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.
)
