The Palin/Biden Debate: 10/02/08

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
488

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
So, then what happens to someone like me under this who is happy with the public school in the district he’s chosen to live in? I get to just cash that check?[/quote]

No, you just let your taxes go where they go. If you’re happy to pay for your public school, why do anything at all?

Why not treat public education as a consumption tax. Tax those families who participate in the public school system and rely on fund raising, donations, and endowments for the rest.

You’ll create: local responsibility, more accountability in budgets and test results, and local control of education. Why do I want some activists in D.C. deciding what to teach my children? I and my neighborhood parents want control of our education system.

re: $5k vs. $1k-- I was just using a hypothetical number to make a point. I’ve never even mentioned the proposed Federal voucher plan. I could probably dig up a handful of other proposals that are much better than that plan. I certainly know of a few local groups here that advocate often.

489

Well…

Since discussion of the Palin/Biden debate is history as far as this thread is concerned, I have to share with you an eye-opening experience.

Perhaps because I don’t have kids, I had NO idea how much this voucher issue must be one that threatens some AWFULLY sacred cows.

The issue came up in a local Ballott…and all hell broke loose.

National teachers Unions and Organizations just POURED money into the fight as it seemed like every-other add on TV was some sweet, little retired Teacher telling us how “It’s about the Children…Vote “NO” for…” (Whatever the proposition was).

HOLY Hanna! It was NASTY! I won’t even BEGIN to talk about the arguments at work or when people would ask you where you stood.

(By the way; the Proposition lost).

Call me ignorant; but what is the “threat” that Vouchers pose to these National Unions?

Mufasa

490

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
So, then what happens to someone like me under this who is happy with the public school in the district he’s chosen to live in? I get to just cash that check?

No, you just let your taxes go where they go. If you’re happy to pay for your public school, why do anything at all?

Why not treat public education as a consumption tax. Tax those families who participate in the public school system and rely on fund raising, donations, and endowments for the rest.

You’ll create: local responsibility, more accountability in budgets and test results, and local control of education. Why do I want some activists in D.C. deciding what to teach my children? I and my neighborhood parents want control of our education system.

[/quote]

It’s fine for you and it’s fine for me. Poor people still lose. And end up worse off and with less funding than before. $970 is not enough for them to send their kids to private school.

And much of the money that was going to the federal government to support those schools no longer will. I suppose you could say it doesn’t matter since the feds only put up 9% of education funding in the first place.

But less funding is less funding. And more of that money goes to these schools that are struggling than wealthy public schools that really don’t need it in any case. Without an effective complementary state voucher progam, if then, poor people end up worse off.

You could say that federal government shouldn’t be involved in education at all. But if the feds are going to make some small contribution to fund education, like they do, I think that it should go where it’s most needed. That’s not what would happen.

People who are reasonably comfortable are not affected or get about a thousand dollars back. And bad public schools get worse. A state voucher program if done right (though none have been) potentially chould make a real difference because the moeny people are getting back is so much greater.

The problems of slots in private schools, selectivity issues, and the potential degredation of private schools still remain issues even in state program.

491

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Call me ignorant; but what is the “threat” that Vouchers pose to these National Unions?
[/quote]

I’m not sure T-Nation has the bandwidth…

492

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Well…

Since discussion of the Palin/Biden debate is history as far as this thread is concerned, I have to share with you an eye-opening experience.

Perhaps because I don’t have kids, I had NO idea how much this voucher issue must be one that threatens some AWFULLY sacred cows.

The issue came up in a local Ballott…and all hell broke loose.

National teachers Unions and Organizations just POURED money into the fight as it seemed like every-other add on TV was some sweet, little retired Teacher telling us how “It’s about the Children…Vote “NO” for…” (Whatever the proposition was).

HOLY Hanna! It was NASTY! I won’t even BEGIN to talk about the arguments at work or when people would ask you where you stood.

(By the way; the Proposition lost).

Call me ignorant; but what is the “threat” that Vouchers pose to these National Unions?

Mufasa[/quote]

The threat? Less funds going into the schools where they work. Making do and trying to educate the kids with even less resources.

The best and brightest kids leaving the public schools since they tend to be the only ones the private ones will accept. And in most voucher programs, the only ones who will be able afford to go even with the vouchers.

494

[quote]pushharder wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Well…

Since discussion of the Palin/Biden debate is history as far as this thread is concerned, I have to share with you an eye-opening experience.

Perhaps because I don’t have kids, I had NO idea how much this voucher issue must be one that threatens some AWFULLY sacred cows.

The issue came up in a local Ballott…and all hell broke loose.

National teachers Unions and Organizations just POURED money into the fight as it seemed like every-other add on TV was some sweet, little retired Teacher telling us how “It’s about the Children…Vote “NO” for…” (Whatever the proposition was).

HOLY Hanna! It was NASTY! I won’t even BEGIN to talk about the arguments at work or when people would ask you where you stood.

(By the way; the Proposition lost).

Call me ignorant; but what is the “threat” that Vouchers pose to these National Unions?

Mufasa

The threat? Less funds going into the schools where they work. Making do and trying to educate the kids with even less resources.

The best and brightest kids leaving the public schools since they tend to be the only ones the private ones will accept. And in most voucher programs, the only ones who will be able afford to go even with the vouchers.

It goes way beyond that. Teacher’s unions want control of your and my children. They lose that with vouchers and private schools. They do not think your children are yours. Instead they think they belong to society. It takes a village, dude…[/quote]

Sure. That’s all probably true. Doesn’t change that fact that federal vouchers don’t make education better in every way. They only give a little money back to families who send their kids to private school.

And help make bad public schools even worse. State voucher programs could potentially be different. But none have been done right to date.

496

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
<<< Sure. That’s all probably true. Doesn’t change that fact that federal vouchers don’t make education better in every way. They only give a little money back to families who send their kids to private school.

And help make bad public schools even worse. State voucher programs could potentially be different. But none have been done right to date.[/quote]

I’m still waiting for the very first convincing argument that it was ever the governments job to provide education in the first place. If they had never started stealing our money to pay for it and there was a market for education, private institutions would have been competing over who could provide it best for the most competitive rates.

Public schools are a money mill for unions and an indoctrination machine for the leftists now controlling them.

498

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
<<< Sure. That’s all probably true. Doesn’t change that fact that federal vouchers don’t make education better in every way. They only give a little money back to families who send their kids to private school.

And help make bad public schools even worse. State voucher programs could potentially be different. But none have been done right to date.

I’m still waiting for the very first convincing argument that it was ever the governments job to provide education in the first place. If they had never started stealing our money to pay for it and there was a market for education, private institutions would have been competing over who could provide it best for the most competitive rates.

Public schools are a money mill for unions and an indoctrination machine for the leftists now controlling them.

[/quote]

I’m not making that argument. But perhaps you would like to be the one to rewrite history. As things exist today, federal government does not take much of the public’s money to use on education and it does not fund much public education. The solution is not subverting the little federal involvement which shouldn’t exist but does exist to further shortchange the poor and provide a windfall for those who can and do afford private school.

Personally, I believe it is the state and not the federal government’s job to provide education. If your problem is with public schools as an instution, even funded by state and local funds, that is a battle long since lost. A federal voucher program does nothing to change that.

I highly doubt that private education system would’ve been better. Under that model, many poorer people couldn’t have afford an education at all. And this is exactly what happened before public schools really sprung up. This is particularly true in the South. Wealthy kids had private tutors. Middle class kids were taught by parents. And poor kids were unschooled. Not educated. Literacy rates were pretty dismal. Contrast this to Massachusetts where laws all the way back to the 1640s REQUIRED that every town of 50 or more families support an elementary school and every town of 100 or more families support a grammar school. Shockingly, the literacy rate was exponentially higher. Yeah, government really sucks. It put a crimp on all that coveted illiteracy private competition was engendering.

Regardless, that’s neither here nor there. I’m sorry but the days of the one-room schoolhouse are over. If your hope with a system of vouchers is to return to a private system of education, which never even truly existed in this country, then federal vouchers fall far short of doing this. The majority of public school parents don’t want it. And vouchers don’t provide nearly enough money to accomplish such a feat even if they did.

I’m going to bed. This discussion can continue tomorrow though I’m not really sure what more there is to say.

499

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
<<< Sure. That’s all probably true. Doesn’t change that fact that federal vouchers don’t make education better in every way. They only give a little money back to families who send their kids to private school.

And help make bad public schools even worse. State voucher programs could potentially be different. But none have been done right to date.

I’m still waiting for the very first convincing argument that it was ever the governments job to provide education in the first place. If they had never started stealing our money to pay for it and there was a market for education, private institutions would have been competing over who could provide it best for the most competitive rates.

Public schools are a money mill for unions and an indoctrination machine for the leftists now controlling them.

There have been no public schools in this country for longer than there have been. They are pretty much a product of the 20th century. (I’m not speaking of the university level)[/quote]

Maybe not public schools as they existed today. But in the South, where education was left almost entirely to the free market, it did not exist for large segments of the population. ‘Competition’ didn’t provide much of an impetus. In places like Massachusetts ordering the establishment of schools, low and behold, towns set them up and educated their chilren.

501

[quote]pushharder:
It goes way beyond that. Teacher’s unions want control of your and my children. They lose that with vouchers and private schools. They do not think your children are yours. Instead they think they belong to society. It takes a village, dude…
[/quote]

Just recently, here in The People’s Republic of Maine, legislation was submitted (D-majority) to require compulsory government education starting at---- 4 years old

Guess who’s been pushing the hardest for this legislation. Oh, yeah, another law just passed that requires private run daycare centers to pay union dues.

jsbrook wrote:

You need to stop believing the bumper stickers you read.

502

jsbrook’s argument has gone from ALL vouchers to just Federal vouchers.

js - pick a position and stick with it.

Education will not improve until parents care enough to teach their children.

It is not the Federal government’s job to teach my kids. It is not the State government’s job to teach my kids.

It is MY job to teach my kids.

And the last time I checked, money doesn’t teach a damn thing.

And of you think federal money does anything but funnel money to the teacher ,you are crazy.

503

[quote]pushharder wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
…As things exist today, federal government does not take much of the public’s money to use on education and it does not fund much public education…

If it’s not taking it from the public then where is it getting the vast amount of money that I see budgeted for the Dept. of Education?

JS, I simply can’t believe you just wrote what you did. Did you find some different mushrooms in your back yard lately?[/quote]

What are you NOT getting? We do not have VAST amounts of money budgeted for the Dept. of Education. Not when you think about how many students there are. And how many people there are in this country paying federal taxes. The federal government only funds 9% of education. It spends less than $1000 on each student. Most of the taxes we pay to the federal government do not go to fund education. And most of the taxes we DO pay to fund education are paid to state and local governments. About 6.29% of the federal budget went to education. About 6.29% of our federal taxes go to fund education.

Here. Go to Office of Management and Budget and see the breakdown of what our money is spent on:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/09msr.pdf

504

[quote]rainjack wrote:
jsbrook’s argument has gone from ALL vouchers to just Federal vouchers.

js - pick a position and stick with it.

Education will not improve until parents care enough to teach their children.

It is not the Federal government’s job to teach my kids. It is not the State government’s job to teach my kids.

It is MY job to teach my kids.

And the last time I checked, money doesn’t teach a damn thing.

And of you think federal money does anything but funnel money to the teacher ,you are crazy.[/quote]

No, I don’t think state voucher systems work either. Certainly not the way they’ve been implemented. None have. But the states can decide for themselves if they want a voucher program. It’s not the FEDERAL goverment’s job to institute a voucher program. Not when the amount of education it funds anyway is so small and a federal voucher program can be nothing but ineffectual.

The federal government needs to stay the fuck out of education. Or at most pick up the slack and give funds to impoverished schools where state and local government can’t or haven’t done the job.

You don’t like this ‘redistribution.’ But that’s all a voucher program is to. It puts money in the pockets of parents who have CHOSEN to send their kids to private school and takes it away from the schools that need it most. If the federal government’s going to stick its nose in in the first place by taxing us(which I don’t it should), federal money should at least go where it’s actually most needed. Not to you. Or me. Or SteelyD.

505

[quote]rainjack wrote:
jsbrook’s argument has gone from ALL vouchers to just Federal vouchers.

js - pick a position and stick with it.

Education will not improve until parents care enough to teach their children.

It is not the Federal government’s job to teach my kids. It is not the State government’s job to teach my kids.

It is MY job to teach my kids.

And the last time I checked, money doesn’t teach a damn thing.

And of you think federal money does anything but funnel money to the teacher ,you are crazy.[/quote]

I’m the FIRST one to say you can’t just throw money at the problem and early intervention is needed and that it ultimately starts with the parents. I said this dozens of pages ago before you morons started this shitfest about how wonderful this ridiculous voucher proposol is.

BUT, money is still necessary. There are schools where students don’t have textbooks. They share 2-3 to a textbook and don’t get to take the textbooks home for assignments. I don’t give a damn what kind of environment they have at home or how much parents might stress the importance of education. There are schools that don’t have the resources for kids to learn EVEN if everything else was perfect (which it is decidely not). If the federal government’s going to stick it’s nose and tax us, those are the places where most of the money should be going.

I don’t believe equality in education is possible. There will always be discrepancies in education. There will always be poverty too. But at least we can make sure we meet a bare subsistence level in education, schools have minimum of resources, and the money goes where it’s most needed.

506

[quote]rainjack wrote:

And of you think federal money does anything but funnel money to the teacher ,you are crazy.[/quote]

Wait, you think federal money increases teachers wages? did you mean to say “administrators”?

What did you mean by this?

507

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
rainjack wrote:
jsbrook’s argument has gone from ALL vouchers to just Federal vouchers.

js - pick a position and stick with it.

Education will not improve until parents care enough to teach their children.

It is not the Federal government’s job to teach my kids. It is not the State government’s job to teach my kids.

It is MY job to teach my kids.

And the last time I checked, money doesn’t teach a damn thing.

And of you think federal money does anything but funnel money to the teacher ,you are crazy.

I’m the FIRST one to say you can’t just throw money at the problem and early intervention is needed and that it ultimately starts with the parents. I said this dozens of pages ago before you morons started this shitfest about how wonderful this ridiculous voucher proposol is.

BUT, money is still necessary. There are schools where students don’t have textbooks. They share 2-3 to a textbook and don’t get to take the textbooks home for assignments. I don’t give a damn what kind of environment they have at home or how much parents might stress the importance of education. There are schools that don’t have the resources for kids to learn EVEN if everything else was perfect (which it is decidely not). If the federal government’s going to stick it’s nose and tax us, those are the places where most of the money should be going.[/quote]

This is an excellent point and I’ll add to it. There are schools that not only lack funding, but lack administrative capacity to get the job done.

Years ago I did some work with Milwaukee public schools. One quick example: One school was supposedly the “college prep” high school in the area. As JS said, they did not have enough books to go around and students had to share textbooks. The teacher had ordered books over a year previously (still used the same book from the previous year) but still had not received any. Supposedly this was due to 1) funding issues, 2) simple lack of administrative capacity.

Another school in Milwaukee simply didn’t have an emergency plan. When I asked the VP who was supposedly in charge of it, he told me it was “a secret.” The teachers involved told me the truth…it didn’t exist.

Throwing money at these type of problems won’t solve them, but taking money away from these situations won’t solve them either. Vouchers may have helped some kids to get into better schools and given them an opportunity that changed their lives, but vouchers certainly didn’t fix a broken system.

Again, I think vouchers are necesary to help kids and parents who care to have opportunities that they otherwise wouldn’t have had, but it’s certainly no panacea, and the problems that JSbrook is bringing up should be DEALT WITH and not ignored as some on this thread are doing.