The Palin/Biden Debate: 10/02/08

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
548

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Sloth wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Sloth wrote:
So, it’s a “if they still can’t do it, others shouldn’t be able to!”

No. It’s that others can and already do. And the federal government shouldn’t be making it easier at the EXPENSE of those who can’t and will never be able to even if they receive the same vouchers.

At the expense? I’d assume that if, after recieving their vouchers, they are still not able to afford the cheapest of schools, they probably aren’t paying taxes.

What? They are in the cheapest of schools. The worst of the public schools. It’s at their expense because there is now even less money going to these schools. Kids in these schools are already 3 to a book. What now?:

“Sorry kids. We can’t afford books at all anymore. Tax money that previously went to the school now goes to vouchers. Unfortunately, the vouchers aren’t close to enough money to help your parents pull you out of this shiteous school. Sorry again. So, instead of reading about the Magna Carta tonight, your homework will be to go to the community youth center and watch Dora the Explorer.”[/quote]

They could apply their own vouchers to the schools they’re “stuck” in. The flipside of your arguement is because some can’t get out of the “shiteous” schools, none should. Equal misery?

549

Where are these fanciful 20% increases in enrollment coming from? In most state programs, ones that provided a FAR bigger voucher than a federal program could, upwards of 80% of recipients were ALREADY enrolled in private school with their parents affording it just fine. No such spikes in enrollement were seen. Nothing even remotely close to double the enrollment. So far from that its not even funny.

In a federal program, there can only be even less of a jump when the voucher is for less money, enabling less public school kids would like to make the transition to private school to do so. Especially low-income schools. So, these kids are still stuck in these schools (the essential failing of a federal voucher program) but federal tax money that helped bolster these schools is no longer coming in.

You’ve also been avoiding the issue of acceptance. Private schools in states with voucher programs have refused to accept many applicants. And they have every right to do so. That’s one of the hallmarks of a private school. They’ve done it out of fears over what it would do to their statistics and how it would be detrimental to the education of the existing student body.

Private voucher programs have succesfully dealt with these issues by setting up support networks and extensive programs for both voucher children and parents to ease the transition and provide assurance to the private schools that the voucher kids would be successful. This costs additional money. A lot. Public voucher programs have tried with limited success to do the same. In response to all the studies showing that Milwaukee voucher children were faring no better than public school children, the state began to institute programs to help the children. The only problem was they accomplished this by supplementary fees and demands to raise funds from parents. This created a further economic barrier for poorer parents who hoped to utilize the program.

550

Here is an excerpt from a Stanford University study on the Milwaukee voucher program.

“Rather than providing Milwaukee Public School children with choice, the expansion of the Milwaukee voucher and charter school programs appears to be diverting money from children in the public schools and subsidizing families who were already sending their children to private schools. The 5,902 students enrolled in either charter or voucher schools cost the Milwaukee Public Schools $29,214,900 in revenue in 1997-98. Of the 5,902 voucher and charter school students, only 1,379 had attended the Milwaukee Public Schools the previous year.”

551

[quote]Sloth wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Sloth wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Sloth wrote:
So, it’s a “if they still can’t do it, others shouldn’t be able to!”

No. It’s that others can and already do. And the federal government shouldn’t be making it easier at the EXPENSE of those who can’t and will never be able to even if they receive the same vouchers.

At the expense? I’d assume that if, after recieving their vouchers, they are still not able to afford the cheapest of schools, they probably aren’t paying taxes.

What? They are in the cheapest of schools. The worst of the public schools. It’s at their expense because there is now even less money going to these schools. Kids in these schools are already 3 to a book. What now?:

“Sorry kids. We can’t afford books at all anymore. Tax money that previously went to the school now goes to vouchers. Unfortunately, the vouchers aren’t close to enough money to help your parents pull you out of this shiteous school. Sorry again. So, instead of reading about the Magna Carta tonight, your homework will be to go to the community youth center and watch Dora the Explorer.”

They could apply their own vouchers to the schools they’re “stuck” in. The flipside of your arguement is because some can’t get out of the “shiteous” schools, none should. Equal misery?[/quote]

I have to think about this. This might be the first good argument in favor of federal vouchers this entire thread. If a federal voucher program could be instituted that does not actually draw revenue away from public schools, especially the poorest of them, I would not have a problem with it. I think it’s a matter of whether those vouchers, when applied, would result in the same amount of money going to those schools or less. This is an empirical question. One that I find interesting. I’ll try to delve into it in the next week. After that, i won’t have time.

Still, it doesnt’ do much to improve education in any way beyond providing the same education to the same people for less money. That’s an improvement in itself but not enough. Vouchers were touted as a way of improving educational outcomes. But that’s not what state voucher programs have done. And it’s not what a federal program could do. The money’s not there. The current approach is not working. But if we can improve the actual quality of education, that would be a prefereable use of money than the voucher system.

552

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Where are these fanciful 20% increases in enrollment coming from? In most state programs, ones that provided a FAR bigger voucher than a federal program could, upwards of 80% of recipients were ALREADY enrolled in private school with their parents affording it just fine. No such spikes in enrollement were seen. Nothing even remotely close to double the enrollment. So far from that its not even funny.
[/quote]
You sure like the work fanciful. Again, you completely missed the point. All students would get a voucher that could be applied to any school, including the public schools. Even if there is no new enrollment $ per student goes up in PUBLIC schools just by eliminating oversight of all the diffent programs that the DoE has to administer. If you think they are going to need $20B to handout vouchers then this falls apart a bit. AS MORE PARENTS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS, THE $S PER STUDENT IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS GOES UP. There is no downside. $s per student in public schools can either go up a bit, or a lot. What aren’t you getting here?

You are arguing semantics. Even if nobody changes schools more money goes to public schools in absolute dollars and dollars per student. Only if partents put their childeren in private schools will absolute federal dollars decrease. This will be at the exact same rate as public student decrease which will INCREASE $s per student becuase the state and local dollars stay. Again, what are you not getting?

Wrong again. If student move from public to private, those in the public schools get more attension and more money going toward thier individual education. Same point over and over again.

I avoid it because it has no relavence. If class sizes in public schools goes down, every student left get more attention.

This will never happen but let’s say your schizophrenic fantasy comes true and all the smart kids leave the public schools. There will no longer be stupid kids left behind becuase the teacher will be moving at their pace, rather than the genius’ that are gobbled up by the private schools.

If states get on board the real fun begins. There will be programs competing for the slow kids. What do sylvan and others advertise? Just average student intellect or improvements of childeren in their programs? They have made a business out of helping the dumb kids. What happens if you open up another $500B to these programs?

We’ve already addressed this. Limited programs with no assurance of continuation will not bring competition or inovation.

[quote]
The only problem was they accomplished this by supplementary fees and demands to raise funds from parents. This created a further economic barrier for poorer parents who hoped to utilize the program. [/quote]
This is not at all what we are discussing. We are talking about more efficiently distributing money that is already being spent in the name of education. If schools don’t want this money, they don’t have to take it. If parent want to give to the public schools and the money hungry teachers unions, they can.

553

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Here is an excerpt from a Stanford University study on the Milwaukee voucher program.

“Rather than providing Milwaukee Public School children with choice, the expansion of the Milwaukee voucher and charter school programs appears to be diverting money from children in the public schools and subsidizing families who were already sending their children to private schools. The 5,902 students enrolled in either charter or voucher schools cost the Milwaukee Public Schools $29,214,900 in revenue in 1997-98. Of the 5,902 voucher and charter school students, only 1,379 had attended the Milwaukee Public Schools the previous year.”[/quote]

nobody gives a shit about milwaukee. that is not what we are talking about. not even close. you might as well go jump on the treadmill. you are running your ass off but not getting anywher.

554

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Teacher quality was quite low. This was, I think due to a few factors.

  1. in ability to get non-certified teachers in the door. I knew a PhD who wanted to “give a year” teaching at MPS…they wouldn’t have him for anything but a sub or part time-er because he wasn’t certified. B/c ofthis he couldn’t make the money #s work and he didn’t do it… this is just one example, but it’s a huge problem, IMO, when a PhD who teaches at the local uni can’t quickly “get certified”

  2. Shitty situations. The teachers were treated like hell, the schools were falling apart, administration was hellish, the kids were treated like hell…would you want to work there?

  3. Low pay for teachers…especially given the shitty situations. Hell, would you want to work there? How about if we only paid you 32,000/year? low pay will produce low quality. Low pay + shitty situation will equal even worse quality.

Shit, I’ve got to go, I’ll try to type more later.[/quote]

Ha! Milwaukee High Schools. Go Purgolders!

I loved it and had a blast when I was a 16-year-old bad ass. But now that I’m older I would never send my kids there.

555

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

Still, it doesnt’ do much to improve education in any way beyond providing the same education to the same people for less money. That’s an improvement in itself but not enough. Vouchers were touted as a way of improving educational outcomes. But that’s not what state voucher programs have done. And it’s not what a federal program could do. The money’s not there. The current approach is not working. But if we can improve the actual quality of education, that would be a prefereable use of money than the voucher system.[/quote]

Jesus Christ you are dim. What the fuck have we been talking about this whole thread. Private schools provide a better education today. Proven. More kids will have access to this better education. Public schools will either have to compete, ie improve, or lose students. If they compete we are all better off. If they lose students, smaller class sizes, more individual attension, and more money per student. What the fuck part of this are you not getting?

556

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Charter schools in Texas are growing every year. Not exactly a voucher system, but it does give parents a choice between the crap that is traditional public education, and expensive private schools.

[/quote]

What exactly is a charter school? How does it differ from vouchers? I know I could probably just look it up somewhere, but I was hoping someone could just give me brief description. Thanks.

557
558

[quote]doogie wrote:
Charter school - Wikipedia [/quote]

Thanks. I suppose I could have just done that.

559

[quote]dhickey wrote:
What the fuck have we been talking about this whole thread. [/quote]

I was wondering the same thing. In all these posts not one naked pic of Palin. What the heck can she be inspiring in all of you that it warrants 22 pages of discussion?

560

.

561

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
What the fuck have we been talking about this whole thread.

I was wondering the same thing. In all these posts not one naked pic of Palin. What the heck can she be inspiring in all of you that it warrants 22 pages of discussion?[/quote]

Yeah, we got track a bit. I meant the education hijack.

562

[quote]Christine wrote:
.
[/quote]

Brilliant! Some of the “debaters” here should should memorize that flow chart.

563

[quote]dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

Still, it doesnt’ do much to improve education in any way beyond providing the same education to the same people for less money. That’s an improvement in itself but not enough. Vouchers were touted as a way of improving educational outcomes. But that’s not what state voucher programs have done. And it’s not what a federal program could do. The money’s not there. The current approach is not working. But if we can improve the actual quality of education, that would be a prefereable use of money than the voucher system.

Jesus Christ you are dim. What the fuck have we been talking about this whole thread. Private schools provide a better education today. Proven. More kids will have access to this better education. Public schools will either have to compete, ie improve, or lose students. If they compete we are all better off. If they lose students, smaller class sizes, more individual attension, and more money per student. What the fuck part of this are you not getting?[/quote]

You are truly the dumbest person I have come across. I know you like to spin beautiful stories in your head about what things would be like. But you completely ignore reality. Go research the educational outcomes of voucher programs and compare them to initatives taken to improve public schools. In states that have adopted voucher programs, the FEW students who moved to private school (as opposed to the mass or recipients who were already there) did NOT do better. They floundered in a curriculum way above there heads without support from either the private school or the voucher program. Unlike the private voucher programs, funded by donations, which set up such programs. Which cost a lot MORE money than just dumping public school kids into private school. You know what has bee much more effective than public voucher programs? Reducing class size at the public schools for one.

Inner city and podunk public schools with no money and semi-literate teachers can’t compete with private schools you idiot. What the fuck don’t you understand about that? There’s waste and mismangement. Duh. If they schools werre perefectly managed, they still couldn’t compete. And no, they won’t lose students because those students can’t afford to go to private schools even with a federal voucher. The schools stay open with the same students they always had. The private schools remain with the same students they always had. Students who parents get them tutors and the resources they need and stress the imporance of education. The very small percentage of public school kids who go to private schools DON’T do better because they don’t have this, and the program you’ve outlined doesn’t work towards this. One that does would cost a lot more than the federal government can afford.

I can’t even respond to the rest of your drivel. This time I really am done. You’ve made me tired of arguing. And that’s tough to do. I do it for a living. Your analysis could not be more flawed. I could give a shit if you don’t see how. and I’m not wasting another second of my life trying to explain it.

564

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

You are truly the dumbest person I have come across. I know you like to spin beautiful stories in your head about what things would be like. But you completely ignore reality. In states that have adopted voucher programs, the FEW students who moved to private school (as opposed to most or recipents who were already there) did NOT do better. You know what was effective? Reducing class size at the public school.
[/quote] We are talking about federal vouchers. not some trial managed by the intelligencia that has already fucked up education. If would like to get into state vouchers I would be happy to. I am also happy to point out the shortcommings of other programs. As far as private schools not being better, how about this:

SAT Test Scores
Class of 2003

        Verbal Math

National 507 519
Public 504 516
Religious 535 530
Independent550 573

They do it with almost half the money on average. They also have less kids per school which should mean it is more expensive to run. 11% of student but 23% of schools. Yep your right we should leave things the way they are.

[quote]
I can’t even respond to the rest of your drivel. This time I really am dumb. You’ve made me tired of arguing. And that’s tough to do. I do it for a living.[/quote]
I find this very hard to believe.[quote]
Your analysis could not be more flawed.[/quote]
You have not addressed how[quote]
I could give a shit if you don’t see how. and I’m not wasting another second of my life trying to explain it. [/quote]

You haven’t addressed a single point I’ve made. You’ve added post after post with the same vomit you spewed in the first post.

Translation :

I’m not wasting anohter second of my life = I’m an idiot and I have nothing more to add other than reciting the garbage I have already posted.

565

[quote]dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

You are truly the dumbest person I have come across. I know you like to spin beautiful stories in your head about what things would be like. But you completely ignore reality. In states that have adopted voucher programs, the FEW students who moved to private school (as opposed to most or recipents who were already there) did NOT do better. You know what was effective? Reducing class size at the public school.
We are talking about federal vouchers. not some trial managed by the intelligencia that has already fucked up education. If would like to get into state vouchers I would be happy to. I am also happy to point out the shortcommings of other programs. As far as private schools not being better, how about this:

SAT Test Scores
Class of 2003

        Verbal Math

National 507 519
Public 504 516
Religious 535 530
Independent550 573

They do it with almost half the money on average. They also have less kids per school which should mean it is more expensive to run. 11% of student but 23% of schools. Yep your right we should leave things the way they are.

I can’t even respond to the rest of your drivel. This time I really am dumb. You’ve made me tired of arguing. And that’s tough to do. I do it for a living.
I find this very hard to believe.
Your analysis could not be more flawed.
You have not addressed how
I could give a shit if you don’t see how. and I’m not wasting another second of my life trying to explain it.

You haven’t addressed a single point I’ve made. You’ve added post after post with the same vomit you spewed in the first post.

Translation :

I’m not wasting anohter second of my life = I’m an idiot and I have nothing more to add other than reciting the garbage I have already posted.

[/quote]

I edited my post to further explain to you how stupid and wrong you are. You can read it or not. This post is the last you’ll get out of me on this. I addressed EVERY damn point you made. If you can’t see that the kids who need the most help can’t afford the private schools even with a federal voucher, don’t do well even if they get there, and that the public schools will remain open with the same students and be just as crappy because these students have nowhere to go, I can’t help you.

I never said private schoools on average weren’t better than public schools on average. Who gives a shit? It’s meaningless when the vast majority of voucher recipients were already enrolled in these private schools. And the few who weren’t don’t succeed just by being picked up and dumped in them without additional support. Which costs more money. You’ve failed to show that a federal voucher program would improve education. You’ve just shown that it would make it cheaper for the same people. Something never in dispute. You even failed to establish that vouchers applied by those still stuck in bad public schools wouldn’t result in a decrease in revenue.

The federal government doesn’t provide equal funding across the board to all schools. The worst schools get more. Rightly so. The best public schools rival any private school and are supported by massive state and local taxes. The worst schools don’t have enough even with additional federal aid. Not enough that each kid can even have their own textbooks. If there was a voucher in equal amount for each student, those schools would receive less than they do now under federal funding.

566

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

Inner city and podunk [/quote]podunk school are typically pretty good.[quote]

public schools with no money [/quote]What are you talking about no money?

[quote]and semi-literate teachers [/quote] thank the teacher’s union for that, this has nothing to do with vouchers

What the fuck don’t you understand about that? [/quote] what I don’t understand about that is not wanting to put pressure on them. If there is pressure put on them they will either change or fail. If they fail one will take their place. Or do you think all the kids will just go home? We have inefficient s

chools that close all time without catastrophy. I travel through small towns across IA, NE, MN, and KS for a living. I see plenty of old school houses that are now apartments. Bad schools need to fail.

[quote]
There’s waste and mismangement. [/quote] what does this have to do with your opposition to vouchers?

[quote]Duh. If they schools werre perefectly managed, they still couldn’t compete. [/quote]why not? what if they had fewer students and more money per student?

[quote]And no, they won’t lose students because those students can’t afford to go to private schools even with a federal voucher. [/quote]THEN NOTHING HAS CHANGED, ie they are no worse off.

[quote]The schools stay open with the same students they always had. The private schools remain with the same students they always had. [/quote] this is just plain stupid. You’re saying that vouchers won’t help some partents send their kids to better schools? Every little bit helps. How often do we hear about parents working second jobs and skimping on luxury items to send their kids to college. A

re you saying this won’t help those same type of partents chose what they believe to be a better primary education?

this is just plain wrong. not every kid in private school has a tutor. Not every kid in private school comes from a well to do family. Some make tremendous sacrifices to send their children to private school, but I guess you still think their child’s share should still go to a public school they don’t even attend.

567

You know what WOULD be interesting to see? A comparison of SAT scores between kids who did no prep and those who had private tutors or took a prep course.

I had a private SAT tutor. MOST of friends at my affluent, public high school also did or at least a prep course. ALL of my private school friends did. I wonder how inner city Philaelphia kids did? Probably none. I wonder how many of their parents even know what the SATs are.

Things like this explain why poor recipients of state vouchers that have made the jump to private school don’t do particularly well without additional support systems, which cost money. Prviate schools and affluent public schools have good teachers, yes. But even more importantly, there are parents who make junior do his history homework. And find that math tutor if junior is struggling. Know who junior’s friends are and what junior’s doing. Hire an SAT tutor. Get junior involved in sports. These are the things that really make the difference. Some parents even in these schools can’t provide all these things. But the kids still have support, and the parents do their damndest to identify what they need and provide it. That’s why early intervention and PARENTAL education are so important. And probably why, depsite best efforts, there always will be discrepancies in education.

But no matter WHAT, a kid needs a textbook. A kid needs a desk to sit at.