• Pro

  • Con

50% 6 votes
50% 6 votes
  • I support school vouchers for schools where no public option is available, e.g. nursery schools.

  • Why shouldn't people be allowed to choose the school of choice. Would you like to be stuck in a failing school system?

  • Yes, yes, and yes. People need to have more power over where their tax money is spent. Gov't needs to be held accountable for their failures in education. Money (or lack thereof) is the only thing they really respond to. They need to know they are failing because of the way they run things ... not because they are short of funds. You could give them all the money in the world and theyd still fail. Use the tax dollars to show them what a truly good institution is capable of on similar budgets. Then maybe theyll start to adopt something from a successful institution instead of doing guesswork and playing political games with your hard earned money.

  • Will do nothing but make things worse.

  • First of all, who in their right mind would think it is a good thing to have the government create new programs in which they must find more money that we do NOT have to pay for private schooling for people who cannot afford it and do NOT have high enough grades to qualify for a school provided scholarship? I mean seriously, I have seen PLENTY of low-income kids from my home town, including one of my VERY close friends I played football with for 12 years, do so amazingly in school that a local private school that educates only the wealthiest of the wealthy including celebrities, A-List movie stars, and the highest of government officials gave him a full ride scholarship to their institution for his entire high school stay. I mean seriously, spending and spending and spending some more? Are you insane? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results...insanity. Why do we no longer request our children, not to mention ourselves, earn what they want? || Next, what do you think is going to happen if we start mindlessly handing out vouchers for these kids to go attend these private schools without feeling a sense of achievement or accomplishment? Do you really think doing this will cause the heavens to suddenly open after years of being closed, and magically these kids who are consistently failing due to their own laziness and misplaced priorities are going to wake up, have a sudden change in heart and personality, and inexplicably become honor roll, Ivy League prospect students? In reality, one of two things will happen: 1) Seats will be full in all the private schools in the area with deserving students. This will cause another outcry about how the problem is not fixed; which will lead to yet ANOTHER mindless, big government program, throwing more of our tax dollars down the crapper and allowing our Government to assume even more power than they already have. 2) These private schools, whether through government subsidy bribery (more tax dollars being thrown down the crapper) or by their own pure greed, will begin over-stuffing the private school classrooms and renting trailers to add more space, while filling the newly opened classrooms not with private school caliber teachers, but instead with the same public school teachers the kids just left as the public schools will begin shrinking class numbers. With the decreased attendance, the states will begin shrinking public school budgeting, gouging it even further than it already is which will force the schools to cut back even further, including firing their teachers who will promptly be hired by the Private Schools for the same exact wages in order to expand the ability for the private schools to handle even more children. Eventually this "death spiral" will end with the private schools looking, feeling and and producing mirror results as the public schools currently do as they WILL in fact be the new public schools. The only difference will be that it will end up costing the government even more for the educational budget every year, it will just be categorized as a subsidy or tax credit as opposed to an educational budget; and right on queue, within the first three 3 years, liberals will stand up and tout how they are "saving all this money in the educational budget thanks to the program they came up with." while hiding and completely ignoring the fact that it is truly costing the tax payers more; it is simply a budgeting trick by the government, playing Three Card Monty or the Shell Game (3 cup street game, guess which cup the ball is under), they focus on tricking you like they always do while you're sitting there happily getting shafted. Once the private schools start becoming over-populated, the next magic trick will quickly happen without you noticing: The original faculty, owners and board members will leave the schools and start a completely new educational institution that is NOT classified as a private school. Since it is NOT classified a private school, the vouchers will not apply. From here, all of those deserving or wealthy students that used to be in true private school will transfer to this new educational institution, leaving all the public school voucher students back at the private school campus; effectively turning private schools into the new public schools and creating a new genre of private schools for those that are deserving. Congratulations, you just finished the most expensive public school permanent field trip in its history, and you have gotten absolutely nowhere and no progress. The worst part is, during this entire process, while you were so blinded by ignorance and the government's empty promises of grandeur, you completely missed the fact that the government raised taxes even further AND took control of even more of our private sector.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
triangle.128k says2015-09-08T23:07:23.1957492Z
What exactly are they? I can't find a clear answer on google.
tajshar2k says2015-09-08T23:09:03.6561893Z
Same here. I made a forum asking people what it is. From what I understood, its basically something that lets a kid go to a private school through tax money. Still not sure about it.
Huntress says2015-09-08T23:23:53.3184961Z
@tajshar2k Why vote against it if you don't understand it? Instead of public schools you'd have tax dollars going to pay the private school of the parent's choice. If you're local school isn't great then you can send your child to another school. It would add more competition into the educational system. Whatever school has the best teachers and gets the best test scores will be more desirable, so children will be getting a better education as a result. That's the theory. I'm a proponent of it, because I think children will benefit. For some reason most Democrats don't favor the idea, but some do, like Senator Elizabeth Warren.
tajshar2k says2015-09-08T23:27:59.7397189Z
I voted by accident actually. I have no idea what it is.
tajshar2k says2015-09-08T23:29:39.3794737Z
Ok, but wouldn't that effect kids who go to public schools? Overall, thats less funding.
TBR says2015-09-08T23:29:45.5843542Z
It's not as simple as I would like. As I have said a number if times, I prefer private schools for their performance etc. The problems are that failing school districts are hurt by this, not helped. As a parent, you will want the choice, but it does not help fix the problem that may exist in the public school
Varrack says2015-09-08T23:33:33.5486155Z
It seems like a good idea, but I'm unaware of the opposing contentions so I'm not going to pick Pro. It's naive to judge something based on how appealing they seem at face value, and I've criticized people for thinking like that, so I might as well not decide.
Huntress says2015-09-08T23:42:32.5788708Z
Sen. Warren's idea was to have parents be able to pick between public schools only, if I'm not mistaken. That would still leave individual suffering schools underfunded of course, so I get your point. And if you closed all public schools, then it would be tricky, because you'd have to make sure all children, regardless of their intelligence, could get in. Ultimately, I think it'd be worth it for the children who can and who want to do well.
tajshar2k says2015-09-08T23:45:57.0565417Z
But don't school vouchers also kids to switch to private schools?
Huntress says2015-09-08T23:49:46.5424526Z
Most conservatives who support a voucher system do support a choice between private and public, yes.
TBR says2015-09-08T23:52:37.9563514Z
Yes. The 'option' is, in most cases, a private school.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T00:02:17.2348647Z
Exactly, its a violation of church and state being seperate.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-09-09T00:03:20.8637053Z
I support school vouchers for schools where no public option is available, e.g. nursery schools.
TBR says2015-09-09T00:04:19.4744081Z
Not all private schools are religious. Most are secular. Now, in many areas of the country, the only private options are religious, adding to the voucher problem, yes.
Renegader says2015-09-09T00:09:31.9160511Z
I fail to see the problem with private schools. It's ultimately the choice of the parents. Obviously, that doesn't mean I think public schools don't need improvement. Less people would even bother with private schools if public schools were able to raise the bar.
Huntress says2015-09-09T00:11:08.9330730Z
There are plenty of secular, private schools. I attended one for high school.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-09-09T00:11:23.4776797Z
@Renegader: It is easy for private schools to indoctrinate children with incorrect values (often stemming from religion) because they face less government regulation. That's a problem.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T00:47:40.1231190Z
http://www.statisticbrain.com/private-school-statistics/ The number is still pretty high.
TBR says2015-09-09T00:53:40.0642263Z
@tajshar2k - You know... That is very true. If you count Catholic the numbers go heavy for religious based schools. I tend to think of the crazy Christian schools. Regardless, there are a good number of secular schools, and generally they are superior schools. As I have said, it's a tough call for me. I prefer private schools all around, but have real issues with vouchers.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T00:58:24.2952065Z
I have a question, for school vouchers, who exactly pays for them?
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:14:15.7636025Z
So for the school voucher is the tax money coming from the parent who wants their kid to go to a private school, or is it coming from everybody's tax money?
Huntress says2015-09-09T01:17:14.6500941Z
Yeah, because no government has ever indoctrinated anyone before. *sigh*
TBR says2015-09-09T01:26:11.9955386Z
@tajshar2k - Its just tax money. You can't allot taxes per-person in any meaningful way like that. There is a real problem, in my eyes, with tax money going to Christian schools, but that's what is happening.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:27:21.7429553Z
But how much money? What measure do they use? Is the state per pupil capita?
Huntress says2015-09-09T01:30:19.6343165Z
And now we come to the trouble with socialists. They feel they have the right to tell not only their children, but yours what they should learn in schools.
TBR says2015-09-09T01:31:57.2772201Z
I am sure there are good numbers out there somewhere, but anywhere from 6 to 12k I have seen.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:33:10.6615017Z
@Huntress So, we all should be okay with parents sending their kids to schools where they teach you that rape and murder is okay? Thats basically how people feel when religious schools teach their kids creationism. It has literally nothing to do with socialism. If doing drugs is prohibited, then so should creationism. Hypocrisy can flow both ways.
Huntress says2015-09-09T01:36:56.8673017Z
You're seriously comparing a theory on the creation of the universe with rape? Wow. Just wow.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:39:02.8873329Z
I think 97% of scientists agree it is "not" the creation of the universe.
Huntress says2015-09-09T01:40:45.8655733Z
I believe in evolution. That has nothing to do with how offensive what you just said was.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:43:05.2863481Z
Offensive? What did I say that was offensive? I'm not saying rape is equivalent to creationism, I was using it as a figure of speech, to get my point across about how ridiculous it is to teach creationism, and why people should have the choice to do everything they want.
TBR says2015-09-09T01:43:09.5920585Z
We give plenty of slack to Churches already. They don't need an additional break when it comes to some bare minimum teaching standards. Standards like teaching science in science classes, and keeping the religion in religion classes. I have no idea why anyone want's God in a school. It's just a non sequitur. Kids are there to learn a completely different set of skills. "Teach" about religion in Church all you like.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:44:41.5058508Z
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T01:50:09.7163547Z
Well, I apologize if I offended you, I didn't mean to come off like that.
TBR says2015-09-09T01:53:24.5241254Z
Well, it may be offensive, but I sure don't take kindly to the idea you would start by teaching my son that he is a sinner and flawed. That he is risking his eternal "soul" if he touches himself. Yea, that might get you punched in the nose, and I have made it this far without punching anyone.
Huntress says2015-09-09T13:08:58.4106636Z
Whether or not I'm offended is irrelevant. If you want, go tell that tale to a rape victim support group and see if they think it's offensive. I'm done here. I can't reason with people who think that irrationally and subjectively and I honestly don't care enough to waste my energy doing it.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-09-09T13:12:54.2086731Z
@Huntress: A government formed by a good meritocratic system would ensure that public schools teach kids the correct values. That's how things ought to be. When King Hui of Wei (Liang) asked Mencius about politics, one of the first policies Mencius proposed was to ensure that proper values - the filial and fraternal duties - are taught in schools.
Huntress says2015-09-09T13:21:59.0552677Z
@Diqiucun_Cunmin You're not one of the above two, so I'll bite. In an ideal world we would have a government formed by a good meritocratic system, but we don't in the United States. And when we're talking about public education standards and regulations the type of government and our confidence in it makes all the difference in the world. Socialists don't believe in fraternal duty. They spit in the face of their ancestors and their ancestral beliefs.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T20:14:05.4928576Z
Ok, I don't need to apologize more than that. I wasn't promoting rape, or making fun of a rape victim. If you can show me where I said that, that would be great, because I'm not stupid to do such a thing. It was you who turned a discussion about school vouchers into a socialist argument. Please tell me, how being a socialist has anything to do preventing teachers from choosing their school? Nobody is denying your option to switch schools, you want better education, you better pay for it, kinda like how some people in America say the same thing about healthcare. If you want to have a civil discussion on school vouchers, rather than slandering a group of people for supporting an ideology, then I'm up for it.
tajshar2k says2015-09-09T20:14:53.5096576Z
TBR says2015-09-09T20:24:22.7538015Z
I would like to understand this "face spiting" issue.
The_American_Sniper says2015-09-09T21:46:13.0568776Z
So, school vouchers essentially make the already crappy public schools even worse. @Huntress, I'm not a socialist, and I think evolution should only be taught. Its not a socialist capitalist issue. Its more of a common sense one. Why would you reject to teach something, when 97% of scientists agree it's true?
Huntress says2015-09-10T00:43:44.4517213Z
I don't object to evolution being taught at all. It should be. I object to only one side of a debate being heard. I believe in the Socratic method.
The_American_Sniper says2015-09-10T00:49:23.0024992Z
Just because somebody has an opinion on something, doesn't mean it should be taught and endorsed. If kids want to learn creationism, then they can do it in their free time. I don't support endorsing kids to concepts, that aren't scientifically proven.
Huntress says2015-09-10T00:54:58.5791850Z
Enough, seriously. You're being intolerant, you have to know you are and you're just baiting me.
The_American_Sniper says2015-09-10T00:57:58.7014034Z
How am I being intolerant? Science shouldn't be replaced with Creationism. If kids want to take a separate course, then they can have the option to if the school has it available. Its not intolerant to deny something that has 0 proof of existing.
The_American_Sniper says2015-09-10T01:02:01.3188242Z
I'm not saying Evolution is 100% confirmed to be the actual thing, but when Scientists find evidence of it being very possible, I believe it is a important we educate American kids on the science of it. Its not intolerant at all. I'm not persecuting creationists or anything.
tajshar2k says2015-09-10T01:12:14.6344857Z
@American_Sniper. Don't bother. Apparently if you say something that is remotely different some people's opinion s it immediately gets called intolerant and offensive. Scroll up, and you can see I simply started out asking genuine questions without insulting anybody. TBR apparently said something, and that user got pissed off, and resorted to saying "Socialists spit on the face of their ancestors" I'm not sure how you would interpret that, but thats a pointless generalization, and has nothing to do with the conservation on "School Vouchers"
Huntress says2015-09-10T01:14:12.6655762Z
From a guy who thinks teaching a different opinion from his is rape.
tajshar2k says2015-09-10T01:17:03.7199388Z
Tell me exactly where I said that. I dare you. No where did I say Creationism=Rape. That's just your blatant accusation. According to you, helping public schools and promoting something that is (In most people's opinions) beneficial to a child's education somehow correlates to socialist spiting on their ancestors.
TBR says2015-09-10T01:19:27.4592602Z
Yea, still waiting on explanation of the face spitting.
Midnight1131 says2015-09-10T01:31:15.4434006Z
"Socialists don't believe in fraternal duty. They spit in the face of their ancestors and their ancestral beliefs." - Funniest thing I've read all day. I'm surprised you think supporting certain economic policies is equivalent to "spitting in the face of your ancestors."
TBR says2015-09-10T02:08:46.9230310Z
@Midnight1131 - I have been calling for some clarification on that for some time now. Still waiting.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-10T18:56:35.5889985Z
I could explain that one to you. If you wanted.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-10T19:04:03.8578720Z
Vouchers are good in the sense that the government doesnt get to control the flow of money to favor institutions they own and operate inefficiently. They always come out saying "we need more money for this and that" because what they are operating is failing or they are squandering funds they are already granted. Vouchers put the power to hold them accountable for bad results in the peoples hands. It basically brings free market capitalism to a socialist dominated area of influence. It allows peoples natural want for a better education for their children (and via their ability to put their tax dollars where they want) to be the driving force in correcting institutions bad policies, curriculum, spending habits etc. All can be corrected when parents are given the ability to choose.
TBR says2015-09-10T19:08:12.5860796Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality - It is not entirely fair to just call the public schools inefficient. They get saddled with the costs of special need students (2-4x the cost) and a slew of terrible students that the private schools don't have to deal with (or do at a higher cost to the parents). You can object to the necessity of educating the special needs, for example, but while it is mandated, you can't blame them for the high costs.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-10T19:25:06.9979690Z
I do object to that. I think that there should be some level of responsibility on the part of a parent raising those children to discipline them (so that they arent so terrible) or to make appropriate accommodations for their special needs children. Under a voucher program they could still meet that mandate by giving them the money and making them go out and spend it at a facility equipped to handle their child. Thrusting that on every single school out there, to have them all make accommodations, drags the rest of the institution down. If you find a place already equipped and specialized for such a type of person they are already in a better place and not at the expense of all the other children out there.
TBR says2015-09-10T19:36:11.5604430Z
I don't entirely disagree. As I said in the first post, I like private schools better, but don't like what the vouchers do. Regardless, complaining that the schools are wasting money, while they are forced to accommodate ALL students is unfair. That is my point on that score.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-10T19:48:38.2922157Z
Private schools have extra funds they are able to put toward their specializations, and not all of it is due to higher tuition costs. Justin having a focus and a good business model/structure is often enough to make them superior to public schools already. If a public school happens to make special needs children its specialization ... They could totally do that with less impact to their budget than that of a public school that maybe has to cater to a very small minority amongst the rest of their students.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-10T20:01:57.1265364Z
Well thats the Achilles heel of anything socialism really. I could get down with some socialist ideas if they were applied with some logic behind them. Being all inclusive doesnt work. We need to invest where we are assured the biggest payoff. Blanket grants to students does not help. Grants given specifically to a student that excels in writing, given by a writing specialized school, to be used solely to build upon that skillset ... Thats more effective than blanketly giving out pell grant money to poor people and hoping one of them latches onto a skill. Their money might better be applied at an earlier school age getting them into a school with a more vocational type background. Currently public grade schools teach almost exclusively towards what colleges would call "Arts Degrees" instead of teaching more job based or applied science type degrees like they should.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-10T20:09:30.4654424Z
Its unbalanced is all. Government puts school focus on getting everyone on track to get a bachelors or masters degree when they leave and go to college. Instead they should be educating to reflect the actual distribution of people in society. If 80% of your people are working class ... Schools should be identifying that and teaching to that ... Not just reaching for something higher and then when its not attained at the start of college finding out that they left their HS diploma students in no position to take care of themselves or provide anything useful with only an HS degree. Government has directly set that standard of HS diplomas being insufficient. They did that. Highschool could be a ton more applicable in the real world if they would just change their focus a bit.
tajshar2k says2015-09-10T20:29:47.0992906Z
The problem that I see, is that school vouchers don't fix the problem with public schools. It instead makes it harder for them to come out of their problem. With more and more parents switching, the government will take more tax money, and public schools can only get worse, not better. I also have a problem with governments subsidizing private schools, because alot of them are religious based, which violates the church and state seperation.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T05:35:17.6711688Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- Have control over where their tax dollars go? What tax dollars? First off, these voucher programs are strictly for "low-income" families, not for families that are paying enough in state taxes to cover the costs...Not even remotely close. Second, there will be NO lack of funds for the government, in fact, they will heavily increase taxes in order to cover the costs plus some extra for them to use somewhere else that they really want to use them in. Third, private schools cost MUCH more per student than public schools meaning our educational budget will go through the roof; to hide this increase, the budget will be masked as tax credits or some kind of obscure subsidies which don't appear like educational budgets or even worse, they hide themselves inside of a bulk tax credit or subsidy budget plan which means we will NEVER know how much it actually costs...Budgeting slide of hand, in true governmental fashion. What is the true cost difference between public and private schools? Well, liberal mass-media outlets would like to make you believe private schools are cheaper than public schools; "WHAT?!?" I know, we are thinking the same thing here right? How do they make these claims without being called liars? Simple, they use two methods: 1) They use religious private schools as the measurement for all private schools in the area in question. Anyone who takes two seconds to think about this realizes that religious private schools are mostly funded by the donations given at church every Sunday across the world which for the most part is completely non-taxable income across the world. This means these religious schools can pay for their students just as the government pays for public school students...For the most part. 2) Or they use a MUCH dirtier tactic: they compare public schools within the most expensive cities like NYC to private schools in the lowest income cities within the same state. || So now let's get down to the real comparison: I just performed a search on public and private schools in my area, then I calculated the average of all of them (excluding religious private schools as they self-fund which means their costs are way below market value which would skew the results). While reviewing these numbers and seeing the calculations, do NOT jump emotionally and say something like "Look! Why do some students get so much more money than others?" The reason for this is simple: cost of living in the area including property taxes, costs and fees directly charged to the schools; obviously property taxes per county, city, district, municipality, etc. fluctuate depending on the value of the land as well as the desirability of the surrounding areas. In my area, public school costs range from $7,500 per student per year including all needed materials up to $15,000 per student per year. The average cost per student per year in my area, consisting of just under 7 million citizens is $10,230 per student per year for public school. Now private schools: Private schools range from (Using middle school cost tables as this is the median, middle, price range between elementary and high school) $17,000 per student per year including tuition, registration fees, uniforms, learning materials, iPad / laptop, per class cost (assuming standard 7 class schedule per day), and cost of BASIC meals. Note that this does NOT include cost of specialty classes like gym, art, music, etc.; this also does NOT costs of extra curricular activities like band, football, baseball, basketball, etc., nor does it include any type of child care or foreign language classes; this also does NOT include the costs of field trips and AP classes. The addition of these increase costs between $2,500 per student per year, up to an extra $15,000 per student per year. The high end of costs of private schools in my area go up to $40,000 per student per year for the basics listed above, with the optional costs exceeding $25,000 per student per year. The average cost of private school per student per year is $24,560 for the bare minimum attendance requirements: compare this to the public school average of $10,230 per student per year, and one MUST ask the question: "If we use a voucher program, who is going to foot the bill for the extra $14,000 per student per year?" Are the student's parent's going to be responsible for that? HECK NO! Will the wealthy be responsible? HECK NO! The more we tax the wealthy, the worse the job market becomes as the rich who own businesses won't have the expendable income to hire employees. So who will get bent over? That's right, the middle class.....Again. || I think that's enough data for now.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T05:40:30.8753341Z
@tajshar2k -- Read my vote and comment up top on the "Con" side. I give a great and detailed timeline of EXACTLY what will happen with a voucher program including how the government, public schools, private schools, and owners and members of the pre-voucher private schools will react. I think you will like it.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T14:23:29.9698330Z
The voucher programs im referring to are not specific to a families income. They are solely there to promote parental choice in schools. Subsequent subsidies for poor families are an entirely different concern. The voucher concept applies to all families. If theyve been paying into the system and dont partake in the services (public schools) and do private instead, they are essentially being charged double. They should be allowed to use their tax dollars for education towards an institution of their choosing. "If we use a voucher program, who is going to foot the bill for the extra $14,000 per student per year?" Are the student's parent's going to be responsible for that? HECK NO!" Yes, they will do exactly that. They already pay that 10k a year no matter what ... And often opt to do private school anyways. Tack that extra 10k waste that goes to the gov't on as the cost of going to a private institution. And they still do it anyways. They are that desperate to get a good education. It is that important to them. If anything, the voucher program is a tax cut for people. A tax that goes to something no one wants to partake in. The people that do do it out of necessity, not because they want to.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T14:25:31.7910139Z
Literally every private schooled (and home schooled) child's parents do that right now. They pay in and get nothing out ... But do whats best for their child regardless of the tax they had to pay.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T14:25:56.7043736Z
By schooling outside the system.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T14:26:22.2885376Z
Theyve been making that sacrifice to lay the groundwork for parental choice for a long time now.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T15:14:26.9654290Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I think your ideas of grandeur are clouding your judgement and logic. Firstly, let's ignore students already attending private school as voucher programs are designed to allow public school students the ability to attend different schools. After all, if you are already paying for the private school, you have the means to choose any school you want anyway. So, public school students: do you know how many students of public school have parents that actually pay that $10,000 a year? Well, in the location in question, the combined local / state tax rate paid by each person on average is 8.17%, maxing out at 10.90% for the uber wealthy. With an 8.17% tax rate, an individual would need to have a taxable W2 income annually of $135,000; and this does NOT include any assumptions of pre-taxable payments to health insurance, life insurance, 401K, etc. Adding these averages would jump the W2 salary to over $160,000. However, to keep this simple, we will say no extras, so $135,000 is required in order to be charge $10,000 a year in combined taxes. Do you know how many people in the ENTIRE U.S. make over $100,000 a year? 9.52% as of the most recent, solid verified W2 data after fiscal year 2013; that's 1 in 10 Americans, only 1 in 10 Americans actually pay $10,000 in taxes (if they are in my area). || Ready for me to drop some more truth on you here? Get ready cuz here it comes: out of the 8.17% in taxes paid, or the $10,000 paid by the 1 in 10 people making enough to contribute that amount in taxes; only 25% of that goes to education. So, a person making $135,000 a year, paying $10,000 a year in combined local / state taxes, only ends up contributing $2,500 a year to education. So, your assertion that these parents are already paying the $10,000 a year to education is false. In reality, the average person making $40,000 a year, contributes a whopping grand total of $817 a year to education.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T15:17:18.7537302Z
"First of all, who in their right mind would think it is a good thing to have the government create new programs in which they must find more money that we do NOT have to pay for private schooling for people who cannot afford it and do NOT have high enough grades to qualify for a school provided scholarship?" So many things wrong with this statement. 1 the money is already there, the student isnt there anymore ... The money follows that student to a different place. Thats all. No new funds are needed. If they cant afford it then they dont use that voucher at a school they cant afford. Instead they are left using that same voucher and having to spend it at public school instead (where normally it just defaults to). We arent making it so that they have to go to private school on the 10k you gave them from the govt. We're handing them a 10k voucher and giving them the choice. Either go to public for 10k, or pay a little extra on top of your voucher to send them elsewhere. Its all their money anyways.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T15:21:24.1901035Z
Then dont give a 10k fixed voucher! I was using that as an example. Give a voucher based on how much they contributed. The people off to private schools probably did pay a much higher tax toward that to boot. I dont want to ignore them. This is not a charity for the poor that im worried about. Its only right that those people who are paying double get their funds and choose where to spend them. The ones going to school virtually for free are the least of my worries. Them going to school for free is debatable already. Im just talking about setting taxes right.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T15:25:29.9384788Z
And you know as well as i do its not all about contribution anyways. The government manages to come up with this 10k per student you were talking about. If their parents are only paying in less than 1k, the rest is coming from other areas. Areas you were still devoting to education of the masses. They should have no qualms just changing over the hands there. Its still going to the same cause. The voucher is tied to the student. Its predicated on them getting an education. It doesnt matter where it happens. If the parents want to tack a bit on top out of their own pocket, that should be fine.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T15:27:42.7733303Z
Schools are getting moeny from other taxes too. Not just income tax ... We have a sales tax here that goes to our county schools. The lottery. Government grants (which they raised funds for in other areas. Looking at income and property alone is faulty.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T15:29:17.6063382Z
The contribution stays fixed ... All youre doing is changing who the funds go to ... Straight to the public school or to a family to gift to either public or private based on their own personal choice.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T16:02:16.4166228Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- A bit of information for you here: public school fund from the states actually does get funneled down to Private schools. Most people don't realize that Arizona is the originator of the school choice program. Instead of handing out "vouchers", we hand out tax credits. The program was started in 1997, it was estimated at a modest $4.5 million annually; cost to tax-payers. Today, it costs the state tax-payers $140 million annually in addition to the $50 million annually in tax-credits for public school extracurricular activities. This program has spiraled so far out of control that public schools are currently an estimated $320 million increase annually behind the rate of inflation. Public school funding has decreased so much on top of budget cuts to bring the state back into the black within 3 years, that public schools are actually currently suing the state for money. Although this program has helped a small handful of students improve, the improvement was so small that parents started finally putting responsibility for their child's failures on their child; pulling them out of private schools in droves and sending them back to public schools which is causing another nightmare of the now massively underfunded public school system becoming flooded with all of their old students without the money to properly house and educate them. || This voucher system is just like every other subsidy in the nation: they sound amazing in theory to all the bleeding heart people out there, but in practice, all these handouts are bleeding the nation dry and are just hurting and further debilitating the nation and our society. Everyone really needs to step back and start asking themselves what is more important, getting all these handouts for the next decade until the nation is finally dry leaving us in a new great depression, or willingly giving up a good chunk of these subsidies in order to salvage the nation and this sinking ship.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T16:09:13.9064990Z
They are inherently different though. Tax credits as issued to a private school (or public school) originate from the government. They are too forgiving when it comes to failures. They are detached from those failures. They can't see where their shortcomings are until they perform a 10 year long study to evaluate their system. Money in the hands of a parent is instant. If they see something wrong they might go so far as to pull a child out of a bad school that very same year. You get much more rapid results for good changes you make in the institution along with results for the bad. You arent waiting nearly a childs entire school career, until they go to take a standardized test at the end, to find out that you failed them back in elementary school. By then youve already f'ed up an entire generation of kids.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T16:13:33.6793642Z
And gifting back the money that would have gone to their child anyways just serves to decrease the threshold for parents to be able to do that for their children if need be (pulling their kid out to go to private schools). As we've established, the way it is now only the most privileged kids have the opportunity to escape a cycle like that. And when you think about it ... Taxing the parents and funneling the money to public schools is in part holding them down from being in a position to do that for their kids.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T16:14:49.0788496Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- I don't think you understand the way vouchers and tax-credits work. Parents NEVER touch the money either way. With tax-credits, the parents pay up front and claim a credit while filing their taxes at the start of every year. Conversely, Vouchers are managed by the school you intend to enroll your child in; you simply walk in to admissions, fill out income paperwork, hand it to the lady at the desk and she enters it into the computer and sends it to the state. From here, any vouchers you may receive, go directly to the school. The only evidence of the voucher that you ever see is your receipt from the Bursar.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T16:17:28.3121324Z
Additionally, both credits and vouchers originate from the government who collects the funds from the tax-payers. Remember, government has no ability to generate income outside of tax revenue. Government is not a business after all.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T16:25:01.4721731Z
I mean ofcourse the origination of intent. Maybe i worded this incorrectly. It doesnt matter that the government holds the funds the whole time ... What matters is who gets to make the decision of where that money goes. By government origination i meant they are in full control via a school board and chains of public financial offices. By parent origination i mean that they actively choose where that money goes instead. I get that its a voucher and there isnt any actual money involved there.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T16:28:58.7652942Z
In fact ... What you could do is ... Instead of having a voucher at all just pay all schools (public and private) based on their attendance. Then you capture all schools and all of those students. The only ones forgotten about then are home schoolers ... Who would then need to register that they home schooled instead and they could write it off that way. Then all youd see is a uniform decrease in tuition rates at private schools based on the services they provide. There wouldnt be any of this "pay teachers based on performance" thing either, which im sure the teachers would be happy about. The accountability there would again come from the parents and what they saw happening at the school for their kid. They are closer to the situation than some gov't official. Closer to the actual focus at least, that being the child.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T16:31:38.4947181Z
Youd be essentially doing away with standardized testing too, by having a system like that. A bonus for all the people that think that needs to go. You wouldnt be sacrificing performance standards either because youd be in power to move your child to a place where they could excel.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-11T16:33:38.4594871Z
I hope this all doesnt sound too too revolutionary. It was the way schools used to be run afterall, before public schools began to take over (by the same method government takes over). What a novel concept.
tajshar2k says2015-09-11T20:54:35.1566499Z
@MakeSensePeopleDont Thank you for the lengthly reply, and you even mentioned things I didn't even think of.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-11T22:34:52.0549871Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- For identifying as a conservative, you sure have a lot of Liberal beliefs and ideas. Look, I can tell you from personal experience that paying teachers based on parental feedback is a HORRIBLE idea. It's a great theory, but in practice, it doesn't work. Think of low-income regions where parents are gang bangers, drug addicts, neglectful, careless, selfish, etc. These parents never come in to even meet the teacher, they don't care about their kid's performance, they don't care about anything but themselves. My wife has a ton of these types of parents and I can tell you that the last thing we want is for her bonuses and raises to be based on their feedback. She had one parent last year who literally came to the school every day just to file false complaints and throw hissy fits to her and the principal. Additionally, as she teaches special education including 12 year old behavioral students who have rap sheets longer than a Torah Scroll, she would be punished simply because she is driven to help troubled youth. As far as distributing wealth between public and private schools based on attendance, this doesn't account for cost differences. Think about it, if you equally distribute funds based on attendance forcing costs to equalize, there are no longer private schools, then the private schools will be re-categorized o they can go back to charging higher costs to employ the better teachers. I really don't want to repeat my previous comments so please go back and review. || Let's talk bottom line here: politicians, parents, students, etc. can sit around all day every day coming up with endless theories on how to fix the perceived issue of educational inequality, but at the end of the day it is perceived. Every school may not be able to afford iPads and laptops for their students, some are still using chalk boards, but every child has the ability to learn just the same as every other child regardless of societal station. Finally, all the theories on how to create equality for all schools are pipe dreams and political talking points that when implemented, quickly become tax-payer debt holes and lead to either the government assuming more power and another section of the private sector or the creation of a new institution skirting regulations which turns back into the way it was before with a slide of hand used to convince uninformed citizens that it was a success. Capitalism does not hold the ability to create equality in any facet of the culture, a person earning $20,000 a year will never be equivalent to a person earning $100,000 a year.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-14T16:12:22.6309737Z
"Let's talk bottom line here: politicians, parents, students, etc. can sit around all day every day coming up with endless theories on how to fix the perceived issue of educational inequality, but at the end of the day it is perceived." Ok. And who better to perceive that things are being done the way they want than the constituents! The people who actually paid that money in, getting to see their work up close. Beyond that it doesnt matter whether its perceived or real. At least at the end of the day that person reaps what they sow. IPads being superior to chalkboards as used in education is a perception in itself. Let parents be the one to make that distinction. "... The creation of a new institution skirting regulations which turns back into the way it was before with a slide of hand used to convince uninformed citizens that it was a success." Not before people pull their funding and kill it. Also there is less collateral damage there since the institution will be markedly smaller than the entire county's public schools failing all at once. Most schools outside of it will just prosper from the ones that skirt regulation and fail. Failure by an institution would never ever last more than a couple years. People will instantly see the results when a student graduates and tries to move on. Ive seen current public schools get the lowest ranks possible several years running ... Absolutely no change ... Always behind the curve.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-14T16:12:44.6431381Z
"Let's talk bottom line here: politicians, parents, students, etc. can sit around all day every day coming up with endless theories on how to fix the perceived issue of educational inequality, but at the end of the day it is perceived." Ok. And who better to perceive that things are being done the way they want than the constituents! The people who actually paid that money in, getting to see their work up close. Beyond that it doesnt matter whether its perceived or real. At least at the end of the day that person reaps what they sow. IPads being superior to chalkboards as used in education is a perception in itself. Let parents be the one to make that distinction. "... The creation of a new institution skirting regulations which turns back into the way it was before with a slide of hand used to convince uninformed citizens that it was a success." Not before people pull their funding and kill it. Also there is less collateral damage there since the institution will be markedly smaller than the entire county's public schools failing all at once. Most schools outside of it will just prosper from the ones that skirt regulation and fail. Failure by an institution would never ever last more than a couple years. People will instantly see the results when a student graduates and tries to move on. Ive seen current public schools get the lowest ranks possible several years running ... Absolutely no change ... Always behind the curve.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-15T02:16:05.6295685Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- You state "At least at the end of the day that person reaps what they sow." So true. But you can't just accept this from one side of the coin and ignore the other side of the coin. Yes, there is a very small percentage of citizens who are low-income because of circumstances out of their control, these cases though, are very small; consisting of diseases that eat away at your mental faculties, freak accidents out of the person's control that cause physical disabilities, massive natural disasters that displace a large population, etc. It should be noted that these cover ONLY individuals whose station in society is drastically decreased due to these events, this does NOT cover those individuals who are next to be listed. Most of the individuals within the low-income spectrum are, as you stated, reaping what they sow. These individuals (or multiple individuals making the base of a familial unit) did not take their K-12 educational opportunity as serious as they could have, never went to college, were satisfied with entry-level / low-income low-skill labor opportunities, may have gotten in trouble with the law, had children before they were ready, etc.; all avoidable, self-inflicted wounds that led to them raising children in a low-income environment and low-income school district. This is the important part here: as an American, you are guaranteed the right to an education; however, that does NOT guarantee the right to an equivalent education as a higher-income individual who dumps more money into their child's education. Again, as you stated, you reap what you sow. Which leads into your statement about seeing what you spent your money on. But how much money did you actually spend on your child's education? Well, I did some research on this recently and found that in my state, the average public school costs about $10,000 per student per year to educate; the average earner (include multiple income households) in my state pays about $865 per year. So if you have the American average of 2.5 children, out of the $25,000 a year you cost the state for educating them, you only pay $865 or 3.46% of your child's education; you get what you pay for, want better then you gotta pay better. Next, you can NEVER pull your funding for education as it is a right. As it is a right for every child, that means the government can never deny you access to the local school system (with the exception of students disciplinary issues causing expulsion). Under this right, if you were to have the choice to pull your payments from the educational institution, there would be no recourse available by the state as they cannot deny you access to the local public school system; this will quickly mutate into nobody paying into the system and everyone taking out of the system - failure. You then state that "People will instantly see the results when a student graduates and tries to move on." This has actually proven in the opposite direction. Arizona was the first state to implement a school choice program with a tax credit system. Initialized in 1997, the first few years had proven a success which caught the attention of more parents. However, the first few years came with a budget of $4.5 million annually which went to select low-income students and special education students who qualified which included good disciplinary standing. As the program expanded, removing the disciplinary restrictions per the demands of parents, and reaching a cost of $140 million as of 2015, the program has now become a complete failure with politicians wondering if it should be cancelled or at least moved back to where it was in the beginning; the data has shown something individuals like myself have been saying for years; even though we had this program giving school choice, the school was not the problem, instead the problem rested with the student and his own disciplinary issues including their own view of the importance of education. Parents, now finally realizing their children are the problem, not the schools, are now pulling their kids from the program and moving them back to their original schools. Finally, you bring up public schools getting the lowest ranks possible for several years. What you don't do, and MOST importantly, is quantify or provide ANY data what-so-ever showing that the problem is with the budget and NOT with the students. There MUST be accountability on the student's behalf as well.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-15T13:39:20.0045184Z
Thats all wrong ... There is no guarantee as an American that you get an education. It is not owed to you just for being an American. You are owed as a tax payer in America, an education if thats what your funds were appropriated for. It also turns out that those people reaping the poverty they created for themselves arent happy with entry level positions and not going to college. Their knee-jerk reaction that involves all of us picking up their slack is proof of that.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-15T15:45:33.8027026Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- You are focusing on the U.S. Constitution which does NOT have this right listed; it is not listed here as there is no reason to. Could you imagine if everything you are and everything you are NOT allowed to do was listed in the U.S. constitution? It would be MASSIVE. So, as there has not been an influx of incidents requiring congressional review, there is no reason to spend the time and money amending the national constitution. Instead, every STATE has its own right listed in each of their constitutions. Open each state constitution and look for something like "education article"; you'll find basic rights for some sort of adequate free public education usually through 12th grade noted there. As for the low-income people, I agree with you, they are happy until they realize how bad they screwed themselves, then they start whining about how unfair America is; completely failing to inform the masses how they got to the position they are in, taking responsibility for their actions...Or lack-thereof.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-15T17:16:10.0504937Z
It shouldnt be that long of a list ... Because we are supposed to be free. If they arent listed in there there was probably a reason for it. I dont think they just left that part out because they were 'too lazy to write it all out'.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-15T17:16:54.2308265Z
It shouldnt be that long of a list ... Because we are supposed to be free. If they arent listed in there there was probably a reason for it. I dont think they just left that part out because they were 'too lazy to write it all out'.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-15T17:40:47.9855885Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- True, it was more of a point being made. However, the reason it is in the state's constitutions and NOT the federal constitution is because the educational system is a section of public life handled by the states. The federal government does not hold jurisdiction over education save the appeals process in the justice system.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-15T17:45:58.1995425Z
And yet they are allowed to appropriate funds for it on a national level and influence it. Its shady and should have been left to the states. Lots of stuff should have been left to the states to run.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-15T17:46:19.7436949Z
And yet they are allowed to appropriate funds for it on a national level and influence it. Its shady and should have been left to the states. Lots of stuff should have been left to the states to run.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-09-15T18:03:42.7446963Z
@FBE -- Well, you are missing the important half here: Yes, the federal government CAN give money to the states for their educational budget. However, the states do NOT have to accept it, they are able to refuse. The reason states do NOT generally refuse federal aide is a little dirty though. The federal government generally attaches stipulations to these funds. The fed would say: "If you take federal funding, you MUST fully implement the common core program." The state would generally say they don't want it then. The fed then comes back and says something like "OK, well if you don't want to implement common core, then we will cut the educational funding you already get by half." If the state stands firm, the fed goes on attacking other budget areas even remotely attached to education like: "OK, that's fine, but we need to make sure we give common core the best effort we can. For this reason, the federal funding your state receives for college grants and tax credits will need to be decreased...By say.....35%" This keeps going until the state ends up complying or the state is placed in such a terrible position, they will eventually have no choice but to comply with the fed due to the outcry of the citizens of the state who have no idea what went on in the previous bargaining conversations.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-16T17:29:46.0346798Z
Yep ... Its a bad deal. Influence where it shouldnt be. Government where it shouldnt be.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.