Bush Administration Supresses Voucher News!

[retrorich]

The bottom line is: Other taxpayers should not be forced to pay any part of the cost of private school educations for students whose parents think their darling little geniuses are too good, or too holy, to attend public schools with the common riffraff.

 

[SoyLeche]

The bottom line is: Other taxpayers should not be forced to pay any part of the cost of private school educations for students whose parents think their darling little geniuses are too good, or too holy, to attend public schools with the common riffraff.

I personally believe that a system like the voucher system would:

a) reduce the overall cost of education in the country
b) improve the level of education in both the public and private sector

Unfortunately, the "I hate the rich" attitude that you have shown here is shared by a lot of people and will stop this from happening.

 

[retrorich]

I personally believe that a system like the voucher system would:

a) reduce the overall cost of education in the country
b) improve the level of education in both the public and private sector

Unfortunately, the "I hate the rich" attitude that you have shown here is shared by a lot of people and will stop this from happening.

I don't hate the rich. I would love to be one of them.

 

[Booko]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_education

Correct me if I'm wrong, because I don't have real data and am going off of hearsay.

If this statement is correct, then taxpayers should welcome vouchers. If the choice is between giving someone $3000 for private school or spending $6000 on the same student in public school, I'd rather pay for the voucher.

The numbers do not tell it all. Private schools have the luxury of not attempting to educate special needs students or the unruly. Public schools have no such luxury.

Private and public schools do not compete on an even playing field. Thus, comparing numbers is much like the proverbial apples and oranges.

 

[Booko]

From people pulling their children out of the more expensive public school and putting them into the more economical private school.

I'm not at all interested in seeing my tax dollars go to fund the supposed education at a private school where they teach less of the basics, and more of the theological idea that me and mine are going to roast in hell.

And yes, living where I do and knowing people who tutor kids from said schools and public schools alike, I know full well where my tax dollars would go.

No sale.

Let parents who want to teach their kids hate do it on their own dime.

 

[Booko]

My idea would be to forget the vouchers, and simply stop imposing school taxes on parents who send their children to private schools.

Now that is a suggestion I can go along with. If you're paying for your kid to be in private school, then you can be exempt from school taxes while they're in the school.

For everyone else -- situation normal.

 

[Booko]

I personally believe that a system like the voucher system would:

a) reduce the overall cost of education in the country
b) improve the level of education in both the public and private sector

I've been told this about any number of other efforts to deregulate and privatize.

None of them have panned out.

So I'm suspicious that this one will.

 

[SoyLeche]

Now that is a suggestion I can go along with. If you're paying for your kid to be in private school, then you can be exempt from school taxes while they're in the school.

For everyone else -- situation normal.

Actually, to tell you the truth - I like this idea better than vouchers.

 

[pdoel]

Now that is a suggestion I can go along with. If you're paying for your kid to be in private school, then you can be exempt from school taxes while they're in the school.

For everyone else -- situation normal.

There are many flaws in our current system. If the government were to decide to make parents of children in private schools exempt from paying school taxes, what about the people out there paying these taxes who have no children? What about the elderly who are on a fixed income and haven't had children in the schools for 30+ years? What about homosexuals such as myself, who aren't allowed to adopt, aren't allowed to marry, but yet are forced to pay school taxes to send the heterosexual couple's children to school?

 

[Booko]

There are many flaws in our current system. If the government were to decide to make parents of children in private schools exempt from paying school taxes, what about the people out there paying these taxes who have no children? What about the elderly who are on a fixed income and haven't had children in the schools for 30+ years? What about homosexuals such as myself, who aren't allowed to adopt, aren't allowed to marry, but yet are forced to pay school taxes to send the heterosexual couple's children to school?

It is in the interest of everyone to educate the younger generation. If we fail, locking up juvenile delinquents and dealing with unemployment is far more expensive. And who exactly is going to pay for our social security if our next generation is a bunch of idiots who can't compete in the global economy?

I have always considered the argument "but I don't have any kids in school" to be somewhere between short-sighted and selfish.

As for the flaws in our system, the biggest one on my list is the failure of my generation of parents to actually parent.

Private schools will not fix that problem, because it isn't about money.

fwiw, if you want to adopt children, move to Atlanta. I will introduce you to a friend of mine who can show you all the ropes. She and her partner have 2 lovely children, and imnsho they make a very loving family. I'm glad the kids have someone to raise them who cares and who is in a position to take care of them properly.

 

[retrorich]

My idea would be to forget the vouchers, and simply stop imposing school taxes on parents who send their children to private schools.

I don't care for that idea, either. People who think their children are too good to attend public schools, or wish their children to be thoroughly indoctrinated with religious dogma, should not be exempt from public school taxes. Public school systems need the support of all tax payers.

I have no children, yet all my working life, I have paid school taxes. And I have never complained about that.

 

[PureX]

Now that is a suggestion I can go along with. If you're paying for your kid to be in private school, then you can be exempt from school taxes while they're in the school.

For everyone else -- situation normal.

Bush's 'hidden' agenda in backing vouchers is that he wants to give tax money to support Christian institutions. He also wants to deregulate the educational system as republicans have deregulated so many other necessary social enterprises. Deregulation basically means the establishment of legalized monopolies in any areas involving social necessities. And public education is one of those enterprises that has yet to be exploited. So far pretty much every public enterprise that the republicans have managed to deregulate in the last 30 years has resulted in monopolies that have cost the American people dearly, but that have made the wealthy investers in those enterprises very, very rich. This is a common theme of the "new" conservatives that have taken over the republican party since the days of Reagan.

There is nothing new in any of this. "Christianizing" America has always been part of the neo-con agenda because it's a way of using tax dollars to bribe Christians for their votes, and Christian leaders for their continued support. No one seems to be reporting on it these days, but the Bush administration has long since been funneling money to Christian religious organizations and have been doing so in such a way that no one is being held accountable.

 

[pdoel]

It is in the interest of everyone to educate the younger generation. If we fail, locking up juvenile delinquents and dealing with unemployment is far more expensive. And who exactly is going to pay for our social security if our next generation is a bunch of idiots who can't compete in the global economy?

I agree. It is in our best interest to educate our youth. However, I just don't agree with the idea that if you CHOOSE to send your child to a private school, that you should be exempt from paying school taxes.

If such a thing were allowed, it would most definitely snowball to the points I made. If one can justify not paying school taxes because their child is in a private school, then people with no children will most certainly justify their reasons for not wanting to pay school taxes.

 

[PureX]

I don't care for that idea, either. People who think their children are too good to attend public schools, or wish their children to be thoroughly indoctrinated with religious dogma, should not be exempt from public school taxes. Public school systems need the support of all tax payers.

You have a point, in that people without children pay school taxes because it's in the best interest of society as a whole that we educate our children. And this is no doubt why people who currently send their children to private schools still have to pay public school taxes.

However, I think we should make exceptions for people who send their children to private schools simply because the state of some of the public schools are so bad as to be disfunctional. I suppose the ideal solution would be to set some realistic standards for all schools to meet, private or public, and then allow the tax exemption to parents who's children do not have an acceptable public school available to them, yet. There are some inner-city public schools that would not meet reasonable standards and that will take some time to bring up to speed. The parents who live in these areas should not have to pay for schools that are substandard while they try to pay for private school, too.

 

[sparc872]

People who think their children are too good to attend public schools, or wish their children to be thoroughly indoctrinated with religious dogma, should not be exempt from public school taxes.

I disagree with your opinion that people think their children are too good for public schools. I believe it has more to do with the percieved quality of public schools in America. You yourself have said that public schools are for the 'common riff raff.' By saying that, you are placing public schools in a derogatory light. Public schools are meant for everyone, from the poor to the rich, not just the 'riff raff' and rejects of America.

IMO, we need to change our current way of doing things completely. Our educational system is slow to respond to new needs and has an excessively high overhead. The reason why private schools can educate just as well as public schools with half of the operating costs is because the parents who send their children there see it more as an investment than those who send their children to public schools. When you invest in something, you expect to see returns and if there are no returns, then you can send your kid to another private school that works better for cheaper. There is more competition in the market for private schools than the market for public schools, so private schools will be more likely to invest in money saving techniques and learn better ways to teach the children, because that is what the parents are demanding.

The same can be said about any company vs the government. Our government is grossly inefficient and moves like a sloth. All you have to do to understand this is look at Katrina and how FEMA responded compared to how the Red Cross responded. Nobody would donate to the Red Cross if they did not meet their 'customers' needs, but everyone is forced to donate to the government, through taxes, to support a failing system.

 

[Booko]

Bush's 'hidden' agenda in backing vouchers is that he wants to give tax money to support Christian institutions.

Of course. Rather like what's been done with faith-based organizations. How appalling, and how unreported all that is.

No one seems to be reporting on it these days, but the Bush administration has long since been funneling money to Christian religious organizations and have been doing so in such a way that no one is being held accountable.

If the media was so anti-religious in their bias, you'd think they'd actually report on such a thing.

The media may have biases, but I don't think they're the ones commonly mentioned.

 

[Booko]

I agree. It is in our best interest to educate our youth. However, I just don't agree with the idea that if you CHOOSE to send your child to a private school, that you should be exempt from paying school taxes.

If such a thing were allowed, it would most definitely snowball to the points I made. If one can justify not paying school taxes because their child is in a private school, then people with no children will most certainly justify their reasons for not wanting to pay school taxes.

I think of it more as a compromise, or even a sop, to those who want vouchers. The majority of Americans would still be paying school tax same as always.

Also, it would not be necessary to allow them to recoup the total amount. It could be a lower amount, as a sort of recognition that their kids are not using public funds.

In fact, if we did such a thing I would argue that it *should* be lower. There's still that overhead to consider. The public school buildings still have to be cleaned, heated and cooled, insured, etc., even if the student population gets cut by 50% overnight thoses costs don't change.

 

[Booko]

There are some inner-city public schools that would not meet reasonable standards and that will take some time to bring up to speed. The parents who live in these areas should not have to pay for schools that are substandard while they try to pay for private school, too.

The rural schools have many problems as well, especially in areas where jobs are scarce.

 

[retrorich]

You yourself have said that public schools are for the 'common riff raff.' By saying that, you are placing public schools in a derogatory light. Public schools are meant for everyone, from the poor to the rich, not just the 'riff raff' and rejects of America.

That statement was made "tongue-in-cheek." I trust MOST readers will be perceptive enough to realize that--and that I think just the opposite.

 

[Booko]

I disagree with your opinion that people think their children are too good for public schools. I believe it has more to do with the percieved quality of public schools in America. You yourself have said that public schools are for the 'common riff raff.' By saying that, you are placing public schools in a derogatory light. Public schools are meant for everyone, from the poor to the rich, not just the 'riff raff' and rejects of America.

I didn't say it, Sparc, but I sure have met some of those parents. They are out there.

IMO, we need to change our current way of doing things completely. Our educational system is slow to respond to new needs and has an excessively high overhead. The reason why private schools can educate just as well as public schools with half of the operating costs is because the parents who send their children there see it more as an investment than those who send their children to public schools.

That and they don't pay their teachers as much as public schools do. And they don't have to deal with the hard cases. And their classrooms are not disrupted by children who, when they are disciplined, have parents who scream "lawsuit."

And yes, there is a certain efficiency in a smaller system such as a private school. In my experience, smaller public school systems tend to be more efficient as well.

I could with that our county's school system could be broken into smaller units. Geographically speaking, it would make a lot more sense. But there are racial and economic issues that are huge that stand in the way of being more efficient.

When you invest in something, you expect to see returns and if there are no returns, then you can send your kid to another private school that works better for cheaper. There is more competition in the market for private schools than the market for public schools, so private schools will be more likely to invest in money saving techniques and learn better ways to teach the children, because that is what the parents are demanding.

And yet where I am, the private schools generally follow the same retarded curriculum the public ones do. The best of them do not do a better job.

My kids' high school (public) is the best in the state, and consistently beats out the well-heeled private schools. This despite the influx of illegal aliens, having to cope with problem kids, and families who are not financially well off.

So why do area parents send their kids to those private high schools we have nearby? Hm...it can't be about the *education.*

The same can be said about any company vs the government. Our government is grossly inefficient and moves like a sloth. All you have to do to understand this is look at Katrina and how FEMA responded compared to how the Red Cross responded. Nobody would donate to the Red Cross if they did not meet their 'customers' needs, but everyone is forced to donate to the government, through taxes, to support a failing system.

It's why I wish we could break up our unwieldy school system. If there were no racial and economic issues that would be exacerbated by doing so, we would be much better off.

But then, we would be better off if we put some demands on our little darlings too, but I don't see that happening much, either in public *or* private schools. Not here, anyway.

It may be, and probably is, different elsewhere. Last I heard, the Catholic schools in my old hometown are still doing well. What can I say -- the Jebbies have never been slack in that department.

The other public school is still a religious segregation academy filled with nice white kids who have a bigger drug problem than they have in the public schools. :sarcastic But hey, their kids' minds are not being polluted by learning anything about *evolution*!