mnealtx 0
Recommended Posts
kallend 2,030
QuoteQuoteWhat they paid in is IRRELEVANT. Once paid, the taxes are not, repeat NOT, owned by the payer any more.
So, we won't be seeing any more posts from you crying about how the rich 'aren't paying their share', then? Outstanding.
A most amazing inversion of logic and disregard for facts. Haven't previously seen one like that from anyone but rushmc.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat they paid in is IRRELEVANT. Once paid, the taxes are not, repeat NOT, owned by the payer any more.
So, we won't be seeing any more posts from you crying about how the rich 'aren't paying their share', then? Outstanding.
A most amazing inversion of logic and disregard for facts. Haven't previously seen one like that from anyone but rushmc.
Funny, I see quite a lot of odd logic and disregard for facts from some posters...especially when it comes to taxes and benefits.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
rehmwa 2
QuoteYou are wanting to subsidize private schools at the expense of public schools.
Either
1 - currently, public schools are being subsidized by families that pay for private. (an individualist's viewpoint)
or
2 - with vouchers, the vouchers will be at the expense of 'current' public budgets (a more socialist viewpoint)
(same thing, just a viewpoint thing)
Frankly, I agree, vouchers WILL, and should, take money from public schools - to support kids that aren't currently getting the benefit. (I understand your point that all kids have the OPTION to go to public - no matter how much it might suck in certain areas - it's much like all gays have the right 'marry' the opposite sex argument)
If public schools teaches 80% of the kids, then they should not get 100% of the funding. They should get 80% of the funding.
So yes, I do think public schools should get less money than they do now. It'll make them compete.
You don't want to see that money leave the public system.
I don't agree. Since this should touch each kid's life, it doesn't have to be spread like peanut butter (like the CDC, defense, etc) - it CAN be individually targetted to each child.
That seems more fair to me.
The other is just more redistribution methods. Some people think that's more fair.
If we have a public school or private school - each needs to me constrained in that it will be required to teach the basic curriculum for the price of the voucher. (which isn't true today even, they still charge and beg and transfer for everything)
privates can offer more, but that will cost more to the parents, not the public
publics can offer more, but should cost extra too - and to the parents, not the public
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
jcd11235 0
Quotewith vouchers, the vouchers will be at the expense of 'current' public budgets (a more
socialistrealist viewpoint)
I fixed that for you.
QuoteFrankly, I agree, vouchers … should, take money from public schools …
I believe this is the fundamental point of our disagreement. It has nothing to do with funding systems versus funding kids, and everything to do with subsidizing private enterprise with public funds, similar to the proposed GA user fees.
I do not believe private schools should receive public funds at the expense of public schools. Private schools should be funded with private funds. Public schools should be funded by public funds. If the quality of public education needs to be addressed - and I'm not arguing that it does not - then we should address that. Undermining the funding is not the way to do that.
QuoteI understand your point that all kids have the OPTION to go to public - no matter how much it might suck in certain areas - it's much like all gays have the right 'marry' the opposite sex argument
Can you clarify that comparison? I don't see the similarity you allude to.
QuoteIf public schools teaches 80% of the kids, then they should not get 100% of the funding. They should get 80% of the funding.
Momentarily ignoring the argument that private schools should not get public funding, your assertion ignores fixed costs versus variable costs, and quantity based variable costs (i.e. product x costs $10 each for orders of 1000 or less or $9 each for orders over 1000).
It also fails to address the fact that there is a nationwide (arguably worldwide) shortage of teachers, which means that the student:teacher ratio is already often too high. Source Source Source Certainly reducing the number of kids in the public schools would help to address that issue, but a simultaneous decrease in funding would eliminate the benefit of that reduction in the number of students.
QuoteSo yes, I do think public schools should get less money than they do now. It'll make them compete.
They already don't have enough funding to attract enough teachers. It's the Law of Supply at work.
QuoteYou don't want to see that money leave the public system.
Correct, I don't. Education is already underfunded as it is. We certainly do not need to undermine public education in order to subsidize private education. If parents want their children's education funded with public funds, they should send their children to public schools. If they do not feel their local public schools are sufficient, they should run for a seat on the school board (or at least attend meetings), move to a different school district, or pay for tuition at a private school.
QuoteI don't agree. Since this should touch each kid's life, it doesn't have to be spread like peanut butter (like the CDC, defense, etc) - it CAN be individually targetted to each child.
That seems more fair to me.
It seems a lot less effective to me. The kids aren't the only ones that benefit from being educated. The entire community benefits. Thus, the entire community should pitch in so that every child has the opportunity to get a quality public education. If parents want to forego that opportunity in favor of private schools, that's fine, but it should be paid for with private funds, not public funds.
QuoteThe other is just more redistribution methods. Some people think that's more fair.
The whole of economics is about redistribution of resources. It's funny how you think that is good when public resources are distributed to private entities but believe it is bad when public resources are distributed to public entities.
QuoteIf we have a public school or private school - each needs to me constrained in that it will be required to teach the basic curriculum for the price of the voucher. (which isn't true today even, they still charge and beg and transfer for everything)
privates can offer more, but that will cost more to the parents, not the public
publics can offer more, but should cost extra too - and to the parents, not the public
Okay, I'll bite. How would you implement such a plan? How would you define "basic curriculum? How would you ensure public funds only go towards the basic curriculum? How will you ensure public funds do not go towards the private schools' profit margin?
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
rehmwa 2
Have a good weekend.
and that's why GA shouldn't fund the airlines' failures
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
and that's why GA shouldn't fund the airlines' failures
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
jcd11235 0
QuoteHave a good weekend.
You too.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
kallend 2,030
QuoteHave a good weekend.
and that's why GA shouldn't fund the airlines' failures
Yes, you are quite correct in this particular case.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
PhreeZone 20
The one aspect that I am yet to see any voucher system try to address is special needs children. For the most part they are not profitable and no private system wants to touch them. This leaves these kids to be left in a public school system where they need more resources then other kids. Private systems will not target this sector since the teacher to student ratio is extremely low, in the area of 1 teacher to 7-9 students compared to the 1:20-1:32 ratio in regular classrooms. This puts a per student cost at 3 times what the voucher system offers so the parents are left to cover the difference. One system that was proposed locally was to pay out for special needs at a different rate then other kids to make up this difference but then they found that more parents wanted to try and get their kids classified as special needs and it diluted the purpose of it and they suddenly had more people in the programs. It just is not profitable to cater towards these types of childern so they are left with no choices.
Ohio has had really poor experiences with the vouchers including schools declaring bankrupcy and just closing middle of a week and leaving the kids to fend for themselves on getting to another school. We've also had here in Columbus charter schools evicted from their properties, contracts to the teachers canceled mid year, "focus" change from arts to military prep year to year and lots of items like that. We have had a series of charter schools appear and almost everyone of them is closed with in 3 years, usually due to finances. They are getting vouchers for the amount that each student costs the local district but they are unable to provide the same level of service for that money and either end up failing certification or over run their money and fold up.
User fees from the FAA are a form of a bailout for an industry that places its bets on the wrong item at every chance they can get. I'm glad congress choose not to consider them.
Ohio has had really poor experiences with the vouchers including schools declaring bankrupcy and just closing middle of a week and leaving the kids to fend for themselves on getting to another school. We've also had here in Columbus charter schools evicted from their properties, contracts to the teachers canceled mid year, "focus" change from arts to military prep year to year and lots of items like that. We have had a series of charter schools appear and almost everyone of them is closed with in 3 years, usually due to finances. They are getting vouchers for the amount that each student costs the local district but they are unable to provide the same level of service for that money and either end up failing certification or over run their money and fold up.
User fees from the FAA are a form of a bailout for an industry that places its bets on the wrong item at every chance they can get. I'm glad congress choose not to consider them.
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
kallend 2,030
QuoteHave a good weekend.
and that's why GA shouldn't fund the airlines' failures
www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/5768616.html
You don't spend $1M on lobbying unless you expect something in return.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
So, we won't be seeing any more posts from you crying about how the rich 'aren't paying their share', then? Outstanding.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites