I have a question about your pascal's wager vid. You blocked the comment section. If god exists, which god are you talking about? Hare krishna seems more plausible. As it says in the bag avaghita that he created not just this universe, but multiverses and that he also created all this thousands of years before the christian god's time. What if you're wrong about islam or judaism or any of the thousands of religions out there that claim they have the right religion.
...Public schools have served this country through thick and thin, wars, poverty, civil strife and economic disaster and all people can say is that our teachers are to blame. How about the parents who think their kid is some friggin einstein and they call you up hounding you because they think you're not "challenging" their kid enough, that's why don't "excell" because the kid is bored. Yea right.
"Lackadasical behavior" You like so many others who think they know better than actual teachers what constitutes good teaching practices always couch your attitude of disdain for them by perpetuating the idea that the problem with our educational system is that our teachers are all lazy. You can read and write can't you? The problem with education is there are too many people pushing for reforms that are inherently flawed since those peoples goals are political in nature.....
You say bad schools are the teachers fault? well all children are not good or teachable? on that same logic anyone's children that commit crime should be placed in jail? If all children were teachable and trainable there would be no crime in our society. And don't be dumb even though teachers have tenure they can and do get fired! You are so little informed on this topic that you can only read it off of a paper.
BUT the people on social security have paid into it!
What about the people with no children that pay taxes as well as the ones that cannot have children, since most parents with several children will never pay the amount into taxes to fully fund their children's education. And at 2:25 you say the children's freedom of religion? do you think children even have freedom of religion they are only following their parents choices.
Vouchers are BAD since it will harm the public school system even more, why not put the money into fixing the system? In the event of vouchers there will be schools that can select the best students and deny entry to any lessor students. And given how dumb and uneducated you come across as your 5-6 children will never get accepted into a good private school should vouchers go public.
I do wonder why the system favors public schools over private. What gives atheistic schools the right to get money over religious schools...unions prevent competition and prevent firing bad teachers.
Hey I know where to get the funding... cut Wellfare and instead send these kids to better schools so that they can become better and more productive citizens rather then a dependant parasite on the government tit... which is what the political elite want... so this won't happen anytime soon.
@DravenWolfe Agreed. Section 8 should be limited for some of these families. Unless you're a disabled or an elderly person one shouldn't have a section 8 voucher for no more than 5 years. That is more than enough time to get your shit together. It is unfair for many elderly families whom cant get one because of some random young girl whom cant keep her dayum legs closed having numerous kids.
Those opposed to vouchers are hypocrites. The same Democrats who take money from teachers unions and brag about how great public schools are send THEIR kids to private school.
If the definition is too broad, then some parents will be spending the money on indoctrinating their children with religious bullshit like creationism, homophobia, etc. This is NOT in the best interest of the child.
For this reason, I would find it appropriate to stipulate that schools receiving vouchers must be impartial on religious matters. Perhaps the schools may be allowed to provide a religious "education" but only as a separate curriculum not paid for by the vouchers.
@Libertarianist So by your logic social security checks should have a stipulation on them that they can't be used to support churches. Just like the vlogger said, the government hands out money in a myriad of ways, the voucher would just be a form of money. The recipients would be free to spend the vouchers where they wish - any school, including religious schools. For the government to prevent people from going to a religious school would broach separation of church and state.
@megagagnon1 By my logic, social security wouldn't exist. But for the sake of argument, I will point out some critical differences between social security and education. The beneficiary is the person who decides how the money is spent is a legal adult. In education, the beneficiary is a child, and their parent is the recipient. Without some legal definition of "school" a parent would be able to cash their vouchers and leave the child without an education.
@megagagnon1 And let me make one thing clear. In this system, the government would NOT be preventing anyone from going to a religious school anymore than it already is. Requiring impartiality on religious matters in order to receive government funding is not a violation of separation of church and state.
@Libertarianist I guess you are also against the government giving out grants and scholarships that can be used at catholic or christian colleges. I guess you're not so big on freedom of choice. Public policy trumps the parent, right?
Of all the arguments against school vouchers, the only one that holds any water is the "separation of church and state" argument. Obviously the vouchers can't be used for just anything, otherwise you're not distributing vouchers, you're distributing money to the parents. A voucher forces the parent to spend that money on the child's education. But this means the government has to define what education is.
The bad schools won't even shut down, if they shut down, it would create localized demand for a school in that area, as well as an empty building for sale. Most schools that shut down in a voucher district would be immediately bought, refurbished and reopened under new management.
I say cut out the middle man and let people decide if they want to send their kids to school at all or not. Don't tax everybody then give give everyone a portion of the pool of money they collected, that's practically socialism. Education is not a right. If a person can't afford to send their child to school then they need to work hard and raise their children to do the same so that they might be able to send their children to school. This would revitalize the incentive to learn in people.
@Siagos Ron Paul! I don't know if he supports vouchers but if he doesn't then he probably supports freedom to choose if you want to go to school or not.
If the voucher spell the end of public schools so be it. Let the building be used for other purposes such as testing. While home schooling, online schools ect. take over. Let the public school be used as computer labs, study halls. The had their chance.
Parents can still put money into public schools... if they even want to. THAT's the issue! public schools know that private ones work more efficient, and have better quality, so they try to tug your heartstrings by saying that vouchers will take money away from schools, and that children won't be able to get educations. Vouchering will create a good cause of competition between schools. Low quality public schools will start to suffer because they favor private schools therefore, they will strive
to become better. Without vouchers, public schools don't have to worry about being better or worse than others, because they know that you are being forced to pay for them NO MATTER WHAT.
So, what you are saying, is that liberals think they are FAIR because parents HAVE to pay for the shitty schools. While republicans aren't because they let you choose.You need to wake up, and see how the public schools and the "Perfect" liberals are so easily influencing you.
I like the argument about church and state. It makes so much sense, but not many people want to see that solution. Free market for a free country? Profound! ( :
The democrats want to prevent it because they are slaves to the teachers unions. How could you possibly give a summary of the voucher debate without mentioning unions?
I totally disagree with a federal voucher program. Local taxes pay for schools as well as state aid. Get the vouchers from those sources. I don't want to pay for lazy deadbeats in other states...I have enough of them here in NJ.
Now your just talking out of your ass. How do they make the poor poorer? They help the poor attend schools they otherwise wouldn't be able to attend. I support school choice, and I think we need a student/parent first education policy rather than an NEA first policy.
I'll answer your question. Vouchers rarely cover the cost of private schools in urban areas so the parent(s) have to still pay a difference. This difference is usually still too much for poor parents but can be paid by parents of upper middle class families.
For example Washington D.C.'s voucher is $7500 but I only know of one school with tuition below that and it's a parochial school. Using public money for religious schools is controversial also. This problem is compounded with multiple kids.
The market has not fully developed for the voucher system to be effective yet. Suppose the voucher system was more direct and fair where vouchers are granted to everyone at the same amount to attend public or private schools. If there were a uniform $14,000 or even $7,500 to attend either public or private schools, over time the market would adjust and the costs of schooling could even go below the cost of the voucher so as to attain more market share for successful schools.
That's why I support charter schools. Any student can attend since it runs like a public school. If vouchers were able to cover the costs for more schools and private schools were willing to expand to let in as many students as possible I would support vouchers. I was able to go to a private, christian school thanks to private scholarships to help pay tuition so I don't want to deny others access. My main problem is that everyone doesn't have access.
Private school vouchers are a blessing to the American people and should be takent advantage of by every parent that values their childrens future and education.
When people decide on which college to go to, they decide to go to the college that will best help them succeed at getting the degree they want
(at least the serious students do.)
Why would you want to send your kid to an overcrowded, run down public school instead of a goal oriented, less crowded private school?
also this mainly benefits urban students. what about rural students that do not have private schools throughout their entire county or surrounding counties such as ones here in North Carolina. Those areas won't benefit from vouchers and need their public schools reformed though extremely difficult to attract educators to rural areas.
Here is my opposition. Voucher programs do not benefit all children especially the poorest that cannot pay the gap the voucher leaves behind. Programs such as the D.C. program only benefits 1700 students so there are over 30,000 left without access.
hallelujah— if youre still wondering why there is such intense opposition to school vouchers (although im sure you already know), there are 3 primary answers (in order of importance): (1) deeply entrenched interests of powerful teachers unions (2) liberal, ideological commitment to government control of education (3) public fear, however unwarranted, of "private control" of education. (1) and (2) work largely to increase (3). great video: *****
Where does our Constitution give the Federal Government the right to control the education of our children? It's not there. Government-controlled education is a violation of our Constitution.
We wouldn't tolerate a monopoly like this in the private sector. Why do we tolerate such a dangerous government monopoly of our schools, which mold the hearts and minds of future voters?
America, WAKE UP! It's time that we, the PEOPLE, take back education from Big Government!
Before we answer your question we need to know whether you are really asking about school vouchers or if you are a right wing idiot who thinks your child shouldn't learn about evolution and needs to be in a proper school that you choose that doesn't teach unchristian ideals like the earth has 4 corners, that apes are unrelated to man so what point is there in studying fruit flies to determine human genetics and that it may help cure cancer or autism or other satanic things.
We need smart schools so we can further education so we can win religious wars that religious gets us into... imagine the next war... Christians vs Muslims... it won't be like Christians vs Communists... we have heaven they have 77 virgins... it isn't a matter of if they see how much better capitalism is... it is a matter of god... can we argue god? It is a matter of Heaven or 77 virgins... I don't want either and I want to live... last time it was the soviet atheists... next time... BOOM.
Hey, thanks for posting this, it was really helpful. I'm actually writing a research paper on supporting school vouchers, and I'm curious what sources you used (I'm having a hard time finding anything pro vouchers).
"I'm having a hard time finding anything pro vouchers."
Maybe that should suggest something to you. ;)
Actually, there's some good resources out there to illuminate the debate (and the lack of conclusiveness on both sides of the research). You might check out "Rhetoric Verses Reality" by Gill.
If you do not want a public school education, pick a state, move there (all voucher people)and secede. Otherwise, stop begging for socialistic aid aka HYPOCRISY-HELP.
1)Us "voucher people" want to move AWAY from socialism by placing market forces into the school system. It you who is advocating for socialistic government control of our schools. You're not very smart.
2) So if we disagree with you.... we have to "secede"? Hmm. That's what I call an open mind!
Maybe you haven't noticed: the Govt. is "market forces" (bailouts) these days.
When you people want a handout, it's "market forces"--when anybody else gets one, it's "socialism." Most everyone figured out a long time ago that Talk Radio, led by coward-Limbaugh, does not reflect "market forces."
It's corporate stooge-ism. Vouchers are Big Religion stooge-ism. Untaxed Big Religion is all welfare-all the time.
Bailouts are not free market. No free marketers are praising this bailout. You have no idea what it is you are saying. Stop, drop, and roll... upon some Milton Friedman videos here on youtube.
Vouchers are tax payer money. I.E. Govt distributed so vouchers could not be used for religious schools (separation of church and state) Stop swallowing Hillary Clinton's lies. What the public schools need in this country isn't more money; it's more competition, which vouchers provide.
Objective thinkers do not need flamdoodle ala HRC to analyze anything for them. Big Religion is Big Business, both of which are ever seeking corporate welfare, in this case dressed up as "vouchers." You are not fooling anyone, Warpie, with your tired drivel about competition.
Set up your own schools wth your own money.** My tax contributions are NOT your monies.
**The only thing you are entitled to if you send a kid to private school is a reduction or
At the moment, schools receive on average of roughly $6,000 per student, that money goes to the bureaucrats in charge of the public schools. With a voucher system that money would go to individual families in the form of a voucher. Now parents would have more influence in school affairs because now they actually have power. Vouchers take the power away from the state and give it to the people.
1a. Big Religion gets to play big politics while paying no taxes; it is an unfunded mandate which has saved trillions of dollars for itself since our founding.
2. Again, all you are entitled to is a break on your school taxes. Anything more is welfare. No red herring there.
2. As far as moving away, one of us served his country, one probably did not. Guess who has to go.
lumpagogo, I can see some of your point regarding vouchers being "welfare" of a sort. The only problem is this, if we simply do away with the paying of school taxes and expect the parents to use this money saved to go toward private schools, only people who own property and pay this tax will benefit. All living in apartments will suffer. Also, some funding for schools comes from federally collected taxes which wouldn't be represented in simply eliminating the school tax. Also,thanks for serving.
Look what free market competition has provided for consumers. The computer you're typing on, the car you drive, the clothes you where, the super markets you shop in. All products of competition. How you call this elegant mechanism "tired drivel" is beyond me. Perhaps you should live in North Korea. There's no competition there : )
Your video is excellent and well thought out. I have been arguing for vouchers for years and most people see the light. I don't know what the hold-up is except public schools are great places to indoctrinate our children to the liberal agenda.
Can't speak for others, but here's my opposition: voucher systems leave behind those whose parents can't or won't utilize the vouchers. These kids, through no fault of their own, end up stuck in a school that is now actively being drained of its financial resources - not to mention the loss of involved parents and their kids to that school community. I agree that parents should have more options as to where they may educate their kids, but not at the expense of other peoples' kids. Thoughts?
I don't agree with your logic. What reason would keep a parent from using a voucher? I can't help if they choose not to use them. Many parents choose not to supervise and discipline their children. Many parents choose to have children out of wedlock. Why punish those who want to improve the education system available to their children simply because some parents are lazy and irresponsible.
I'm speaking as a former teacher. Plenty of parents are not able to be as actively involved as would be ideal, for a variety of reasons. Vouchers harm kids who don't get to use them. I don't think it's fair for children to be punished just because their parents can't or won't get involved, especially when there are other, better ways to improve schools.
that argument is irrational. by that same logic, all parental decision making should be expropriated to the federal government because, seeing as some parents are not as responsible as others, many children will be unfairly disadvantaged in life. to argue against a freer system that may fail some, in favor of a government-monopolized system that is currently failing everyone—and all under the assumption that parents cannot be trusted to make proper decisions—seems to me to be.. dictatorial.
School vouchers only benefit those students whose parents are able to acquire and use them. Other students, whose parents do not take this initiative, will be left behind in a failing school (Strike 1) that is being depleted of its financial resources (Strike 2) and good students (Strike 3), thanks to vouchers. Thus vouchers present an even worse scenario for the students who are in the most need.
Parents should have more options, but not at the expense of the neediest kids.
It's not at anyone's expense. As Milton Friedman used to say: "You have to have a sense of proportion." Let's say 5% of these "needy kids" would in some way or another not benefit from vouchers... well what about the 95% who would!?!? Ugh. The Democrats are NOT the part of the people. They are the party of the bureaucrats! The only people against school vouchers are teachers and teachers unions that don't want high standards for themselves! And the Liberal politicians they have in there pockets!
So your argument is: (1) Vouchers don't come at anyone's expense. (2) Actually, vouchers do come at the expense of 5% of "needy kids." (3) Democrats/teachers/teachers unions/liberals suck.
Is it some sort of rule, you HAVE to be a pompous prick to be on the Left? You completely oversimplified my last paragraph, and you can't even recognize the level of hypocrisy in your own political party. Democrats claim to be the party of the people, yet what is more contradictory to that message than fighting against giving parents the choice of where they send there kids to school? Because they care more about the big fat checks they get from the teachers unions. Despicable to the core.
I'm not against vouchers because of my political party (which, btw, I haven't brought up), I'm against vouchers because I taught in an inner-city school for two years and have a sense for what that would have done to my school. Why are you invoking party politics into this issue?
Ever asked _why_ it is that public school teachers are virtually unanimous on vouchers? Perhaps the actual ramifications of vouchers are a little more problematic than you are accounting for.
You acknowledge that vouchers harm a certain % of kids (and you pull the % out of thin air). And your response is to be unconcerned so long as you're able to get yours? That seems cold-hearted and socially irresponsible.
The thing is, vouchers aren't the only way to improve failing schools. There are many other measures that have been able to successfully turn schools around - without cutting off resources and demoralizing teachers, students and parents.
Wrong. Vouchers don't have to harm anyone. Everyone gets the same voucher, covering X amount of dollars. The counter argument you seem to be making is: 1) People are idiots and the government knows what's best for everybody. 2) Poor people are too stupid to go out and find there kids the right schools. The point I'm making is, even if the latter maybe true, why hinder the 95% who would benefit because of the 5% that wouldn't?
I disagree with your reduction of my argument and clearly shouldn't have done the same to you above. Sorry.
You seem to be under the impression that vouchers are the only way to improve public schools. They are not. There are many significant ways to turn schools around, but they hinge on more, not less, freedom for administrators and teachers to design their schools to the specific needs in their communities. Squeezing the money prevents the sort of freedom that can radically improve a school.
"but they hinge on more, not less, freedom for administrators and teachers to design their schools to the specific needs in their communities."
I think parents know what's best for there children better than random bureaucrats. And at the very least should have a say in: "designing schools to the specific needs in their communities."
Again, you only further prove my previous accusation. You think people are idiots, and the government knows what's best for everybody.
"Random bureaucrats?" I'm talking about teachers, parents, and school administrators.
These are the people I think know best when it comes to education. The problem begins when vouchers and other district/government programs shackle the resources of public schools.
School choice is one thing, but vouchers don't improve schools. They promote escaping from the problem rather than fixing it. We need to invest in solutions that can solve the problem, not prolong it for the poorest kids.
Do you consider people who don't go to bad restaurants "escaping"? Should the govt force children to go to that restaurant and give that failing restaurant more money to prevent escapism from occurring? Or should restaurants compete for our money?
If you haven't noticed, market forces work much better then bureaucratic. When govt monopolies exist, things turn to shit. If we implement vouchers, moving market forces into the school system, cost will go down, and quality will go up.
"Do you consider people who don't go to bad restaurants "escaping"?"
This is not a good analogy. Unlike a restaurant, school is compulsory. Thus it is incumbent upon society to ensure that each school is good enough, not only for those with means but for every kid, even those whose parents can't or won't take initiative. And yes, I do consider it escaping from the problem if in so doing you (a) leave for your own benefit and (b) worsen the problem in the process.
The problem with school vouchers is that parents can discriminate against education. And it isn't good or bad education... it is Common education (that communists and muslims get) and christian education... so ultimately do you want to teach God is more powerful than the atomic bomb? Do you want the evils to gain the smart bomb? science is what wins our religious wars and saves our religious lives. We need science 15 hours a week, you can have religion the other 150 hours each week.
There is a separation between church and state in this country. Taxpayer money in the form of school vouchers would not be permissible to be used for a religious school.
Now what do you mean, "parents can discriminate against education?" More like against BAD education. Bad schools, bad teachers, parents should discriminate against those things......
Sure, if most people believed that and didn't discriminate based on ideology and "MORAL?!" issues? U would be ok to talk about bad schools/teachers but U don't.
In another comment U say "There are 2 great Milton Friedman videos here on YT proving the moral and practical necessity of school vouchers"... WTF?!
What moral issues? how do those impact on education as there is Ur "separation of church and state"? (yet people fight for ID) Why did you list moral before practical? Be straight.
So I take it English is your...... 47th language!?
When I say the moral necessity of vouchers, I peak of the moral necessity of choice. Having the parents of a child decide where they want to send there kid/s to school, not a Liberal bureaucrat. To have the schools compete for vouchers, not be guaranteed a paycheck regardless of quality or results, everyone is guaranteed tenure by the corrupt teachers unions.
That was pretty straight and not at all evasive and deflecting. But thanks for the complement, it is nice that you think I'm so smart I may know 46 other languages.
I thought you would just insult me after I showed you were probably a hypocrite, but I see now that you are just paranoid and think those evil liberals and those corrupt teachers who really know how to rake in the money are all out to get you.
Which are these Milton vids speaking to the morality related to vouchers? Choice?
For all of you that say school vouchers will create extremist schools is wrong. Legislation on what would be the requirements for which school receives vouchers would remedy the problem.
EXACTLY! Using taxpayer vouchers for religious schools goes against the separation of Church and state. It would be so easy to make it a requirement that vouchers could not be used towards those schools. Leftists just make that bogus argument to distract people from all the good that would come of voucher implementation. Liberal politicians rely to heavily on donations from teachers unions to really make a case for helping families and there children.
WE SPEND MORE MONEY ON EDUCATION THAN SOME COUNTRIES PUT TOGETHER YET THEY OUT PERFORM US BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOICE!
POWER HUNGRY MONGROLS AKA THE TEACHERS UNION'S GREEDY BASTARDS DONT WANT THE STUDENTS AND FAMILIES TO HAVE A CHOICE!
Students need vouchers so atleast they will spend good money on proper education rather than spending $10,000 plus on bad schools that waste the nations money.
OUR FUTURE IS ON THE LINE TOO ASIDE FROM ECONOMIC POWER SO WILL EDUCATION IF NOTHING IS DONE!!!!
This young woman has a very strong point and I support school vouchers. As a high school student I am furious that a strong nation has stupid selfish and power hungry narcissist teacher unions wanting there way and getting it!
This is very wrong because though it is up to students on how they want to perform the academic environment should be chosen by them and not by there zip.
(1) On letting poorly performing schools shut down if people flee the system. Schools are different than businesses--and should be. Schools don't shut down immediately...while they fail, the students stuck there get poor education and are perhaps irreparably harmed.
(2) The superiority of private schools may be due more to the high socioeconomic status of their students than the fact that they're private. Flood them with underprivileged children and the quality may decline.
Private school education actually isn't better on the whole, it's actually worse if you're comparing the socio-economic background of the students.
Anyway, comparing capitalism to education is ridiculous. Students are human beings, not coal. 99.9% of the time if a child is failing it's because of the family enviroment that the student came from, or the student's own interests or abilities.
Creating a market model for education is a terrible and uninformed idea.
Instead of freedom, lets keep all of these kids in the public schools and trap the poor families from educational mobility. I am pretty sure that you went to a good school but what about the millions who cant leave their bad schools. Its a good thing we dont run food stamps like education, the gov't would sweep in and nationalize food stores and tell us what we can and cant have. The teachers unions hate this idea because they will lose their grip in D.C., that is all I need to know.
America is already becoming fragmented -- its a very dangerous trends. YOu idiots that want school vouchers have no flipping idea how this lunatic plan would backfire.
Want gay high schools? Want white power middle schools, run by white supremest? Want Islamic grade schools? You would have all kinds of politically intense groups opening up their own schools, paid for by taxpayers, and polarize this country like crazy.
Cute girl. Too bad school vouchers would be nuts. Here is a clue -- go ahead and do your vouchers. You want Osama middle schools -- paid for by US taxpayers? What the hell you think happened in Saudi Arabia when they paid for Wahabi schools for Osama? They got ALqueda started.
You want Black Power grade schools? Paid for by your taxes? You want White power middle schools opening down the street?
Your idiot voucher program would be a nightmare, and you would bitch the loudest.
I live in SF and several of our public high schools outperform their private counterparts. It's work ethic and what you raise your children to value. An unmotivated child will not produce, regardless of how many resources are at his disposal.
This would also lead to further racial and socioeconomic disparities. Private schools do not have to admit a child who applies. How do we provide "equal access" to children when the school has the right to refuse service? If I was low-income hispanic, do you really think my child would be accepted over middle/upper class white children?
Another problem...if they accept voucher money, there would be more limits on private schools' ability to determine their student body and what they teach. They become quasi-private. I think the whole thing would lead to a three-tiered market for education: (1) public schools, (2) quasi-private schools, and (3) really private schools (no voucher students). I don't see that as a good thing.
Yes at first it would lead to as you say racial and socioeconomic disparities but mostly the second one depending on where you live but the freedom of where a child wants to study out weighs it all. Because then a child who wants to study here because it concentrates on a thing he or she likes would improve him or her rather than staying in a depressed no good teacher union dominating school whose purpose is for themselves and NOT FOR THE STUDENTS!
Thank you. I am also particularly concerned about those students who will be left behind at failing schools, those whose parents are unable or unwilling to secure vouchers in the first place. Those kids get stuck where they are, only now the schools are being depleted of finances and good students. This only furthers the gap.
You said it yourself that public schools would have to compete with private schools in order to remain open. If the state is dumping funding into private schools who already receiving a majority of their funds from parents, how can a public school compete when they receive less overall funding? What if, as in many cases, I can't afford the private school costs above and beyond the voucher? Where does my child receive an education when our local public school closes?
Also, what would we do about the increase in unemployment rate and the overcrowding of public schools due to many of them shutting down due to "incompetence"? Public schools already suffer over-crowding, and the voucher system promises to shut down bad schools. People who don't have a financial choice to sent their kids to private institutions must then enroll their children in another public school, which has actually been the cause of overcrowding
Luisage -- right -- vouchers could cause massive problems like you mentioned. Another thing -- whats to prevent Islamic fundamentalist from opening a school and making the government pay for it with vouchers? How about Black pride schools? White supremest? Gay pride high schools? Southern schools for slavery and sessesion?
I don't understand why you read instead of just speak, but anyway; The school voucher system attacks public schools directly and indirectly and creates an even larger educational gap between the different economic sectors. Also, who would be granted vouchers and who would not? How can you determine the religious, social, or ideological criteria and how could you legally make that criteria constitutional?
We don't even need to have any public schools at all... There's no reason to have them. Have all kids choose between private schools. Right now public school employees and administrators have no incentives to work hard and nearly no accountability. People have to open their eyes.
Good job on the video though, very clear, and very cute!
Excellent question. However, the specifics of vouchers have always been a mystery to me. Would this be the equivalent of a family putting money into a slot, and immediately getting back a voucher for the equivalent of that cash amount? Or would it be the same as it is now, where everyone pays their taxes and gets a voucher? If the concept of vouchers relies on the idea of a free market economy, wouldn't the cash amount of each voucher differ between which schools a student attends?
(Part 2/2) But sadly, private schools still have to teach according to government standards, what subjects to teach, what to teach in each subject, how to grade students etc. Thus no real innovations in teaching methods have occurred. The private schools just do the same things as the public schools, although they do those things cheaper and better.
I think vouchers are about three times as good as no vouchers, but a completely privatized system would be about ten times as good as vouchers.
Interesting! I've never thought about that before...but if the government took its hand out of the education system...you're right...it probably would improve. Could you tell me more about this?
1) Well, my belief in that education would improve tremendously if completely privatized lies primarily in my knowledge of the superiority of capitalism -- practically a n d morally. So I don't know what's going to improve and how, only that it will. It's the same with the computer industry. I know that the freer the computer industry will be, the greater the improvements will be, even though I don't know anything about computers. I can speculate though...
2) One obvious improvement would be order in the classrooms. If your kid came home and complained about disorder during classes, for which you paid $3000--10000 a year, you would demand for the school to kick the bad students out or loose business. This would teach the overwhelming majority of the disturbing students a lesson and they would stop disturbing during class -- which would help them too.
I WISH! No, no, not at all. We have a voucher-system since 1991 in education below univeristy-level, primarely high school. But the private schools have to be approved by the state and need to follow the state's regulations. The exact same classes, same text books, grading standards and so on. And the government are now increasing its regulations I read yesterday.
3) This is a favorite quote of mine from a Swedish newspaper, Svenska Dagbladet, which illustrates the incompetence of government. It was just a small informative article with the headline "No new school law before 2006":
"After one year of negotiations and seven years of investigations and official reports the negotiations was cancelled yesterday without an agreement"
This school law is what determines what standards public and privet schools will have to abide.
If you work in education and get an innovative idea which you want to materialize, under government control you need to get 50 % of the votes in the next election, under capitalism you need to raise the capital and get going.
Hmm! When I heard about school vouchers, I loved the idea so much because it gave the citizens more freedom to decide where to send their kids. Also, I liked it because school vouchers force schools to improve or lose business. But it seems that if schools were not government mandated at ALL...like you say...we would have those benefits to a much larger degree! I really like your idea and am going to discuss it with my friends and see what they think.
(Part 1/2) The best thing would be a completely privatized school system. No funding, no rules, no anything from the government (except a big tax cut, of course).
Here in Sweden we have had School Vouchers since 91 and now even the Left Party leader's (communist) daughter attends a "friskola" (private). The private schools grow at an incredible rate every year.
My mother teacher handicapped children who are in the public schools. To get the education they need parents have to either send their child to a private school that meets their needs OR the parent has to hire the extra educator and send them to the public school to save some money by not going to private. If vouchers were available there would be a more stable job for my mother as well as a more stable place for the handicapped child, and help in private educational tuition.
Public schools are REQUIRED to teach the most expensive, handicapped, difficult and academically challenged children. Private schools can reject these kids because of the costs and difficulties educating them. The only fair comparison would be to require private schools to educate an equal share of the difficult to teach children, and then compare the outcomes. Vouchers just subsidize the wealthy sending their children to elite schools and take funding away from under funded public schools.
My mother teacher handicapped children who are in the public schools. To get the education they need parents have to either send their child to a private school that meets their needs OR the parent has to hire the extra educator and send them to the public school to save some money by not going to private. If vouchers were available there would be a more stable job for my mother as well as a more stable place for the handicapped child, and help in private educational tuition.
I think shawnut2 has brought up a very real problem with the voucher system that I have not seen addressed. "To get the education they need" is what you've said, not all parents can/do afford that education.
(From the NEA site) The current average per student cost is $7,552 and the average cost per special education student is an additional $9,369 per student, or $16,921. Do special ed kids get more voucher money? Do we force any voucher accepters to accept all/any kids?
Great job. I'm favoriting this. I can't understand people who are against vouchers...sure, there are legitimate concerns, but the benefits far outweigh the costs.
You have some very valid points, the business world has always thrived on competition and only the best businesses stay open, while the poor ones close. I see no reason why schools shouldn't be the same it could only promote schools to work harder to create new, innovative, exciting, and overall hopefully better curriculum and instructional methods.
Great points. On the religious schools bit, you'll notice that this is where the Democrats have the biggest problem. Personally, even as an atheist, I really don't care if they go to religious schools - but the fact is that our public schools are secular and tax dollars currently pay for that. The most fair/balanced solution is to employ secular vouchers. It's not that big of a compromise when you think about it.
I haven't seen a financial breakdown on this so I don't know what the overall impact of a voucher program is. But I believe vouchers would be a cost in addition to education costs. Education is funded primarily through property taxes.
Here in Sweden we it's exactly the reverse. Public schools get more funding, about 10 % I think, it varies a little bit. But the private schools now are getting critizised (!) for offering things for free, like lap tops and free driving lessons to the students in order to compete. In a free market they would simply lower the fee, but they are not allowed to give the students money, so they give them stuff insteead.
No. Every child (parents actually) would receive a voucher to spend at the school of the parents' choice, PERHAPS A PUBLIC SCHOOL. This is how all schools, including public schools, would be funded. If less pupils go to public schools, the public schools would receive less money, which is as it should be.
If there really is an economy of scale, the largest public schools should be the least expensive (per pupil) to run. It usually doesn't work out that way. And what's wrong with more and smaller schools? Now that we have electronic classrooms there's not much argument left for the the huge behemoths we now have.
If a school system is broke economically and academically , vouchers may be a good option. If not, then vouchers will unnecessarily raise taxes. They won't hand cks out to parents, it would have to be direct to the school. A layer of bureaucracy will be needed to oversee all this.
I thought we were talking about funding schools. What do we do when a parent misallocates the voucher fund, (deny the child an education?) I think there may be local situations where vouchers make sense, just like magnet and charter schools are pieces of the puzzle.
Yes food stamps work and they require a layer of bureaucracy to administer the program. School vouchers would require a layer of bureaucracy to administer as well. I'm not sure the analogy goes much further than that. Do you think vouchers should be public policy everywhere, in all school districts?
Understand vouchers are NOT a reform or supplement to the current system - but a replacement. Its administrative cost will be much lower than the current system. In GA there was a proposal in the legislature that schools had to spend a min of 60% of their OPERATING budgets (which is separate form capital budgets) directly on education. The schools went crazy. Turned out that most public schools spend 45%-55% of their operating budgets on administrative overhead.
Don't you not watch the news? Rapes, beatings, murders at schools. Graduates who are illiterate. Widespread immaturity and a general unpreparedness for either college or employment? Even teachers hate schools. The teacher attrition rate is 50% in the first 5 years. Only doctors and lawyers are more likely to send their kids to private schools than teachers.
It's debatable wether private schools out- perform public. You would need to correct for special needs and income to know. The freedom of private schools would begin to erode once tax money started to flow in. They would be accountable to all taxpayers not just their constituents. Monopoly isn't necessarily a bad thing when the goal is to serve everyone, (police, fire, rescue, armed services).
I agree that if a district consistently fails to meet standards, vouchers are an option to consider. I don't agree to vouchers in districts that meet and exceed standards, it would undermine a system that works. I don't agree that humanism is the "defacto" faith of public schools. What would you have the "defacto" faith be. Do you consider teaching evolution a faith?
Some schools do not fail as dramatically as others. What standards are you referring to? Do you know who sets them, what are their personal agendas, did you vote for those people, do you know what the "standards" are? If you can't answer these questions (few can) then why are they important to you? The best "standards" will be set by parents who will have the power of a voucher to shop for the best education for their kids.
I'm talking about standardized tests (simular to SATs) children take every year to measure individual progress and as a tool to compare school's performance. Differs from state to state.
SATs are nothing more than vocabulary test and the math section is weighted with types of math that have limited use in everyday life. I believe the test are culturally and racially biased. Some recent studies suggest that high SATs don't always translate into academic, economic or social success. What they're good for is quickly thinning out the number of applications an admissions officer has to review. A lottery might be just as good for choosing college applicants.
did you go to private schools?
ned262626 2 months ago
Both religious and non-religious people pay taxes. Let them take the vouchers that they paid into and spend it on the school they want.
jpzxcvbnm 4 months ago
I have a question about your pascal's wager vid. You blocked the comment section. If god exists, which god are you talking about? Hare krishna seems more plausible. As it says in the bag avaghita that he created not just this universe, but multiverses and that he also created all this thousands of years before the christian god's time. What if you're wrong about islam or judaism or any of the thousands of religions out there that claim they have the right religion.
time2learnnow 5 months ago in playlist More videos from AliveAtNight
This has been flagged as spam show
Listen to Charter School Radio on wsradio.com with Host "Coach" Dennis Snyder. Help support the charter school movement by liking us on facebook.
CharterSchoolRadio 9 months ago
...Public schools have served this country through thick and thin, wars, poverty, civil strife and economic disaster and all people can say is that our teachers are to blame. How about the parents who think their kid is some friggin einstein and they call you up hounding you because they think you're not "challenging" their kid enough, that's why don't "excell" because the kid is bored. Yea right.
fnesb 10 months ago
"Lackadasical behavior" You like so many others who think they know better than actual teachers what constitutes good teaching practices always couch your attitude of disdain for them by perpetuating the idea that the problem with our educational system is that our teachers are all lazy. You can read and write can't you? The problem with education is there are too many people pushing for reforms that are inherently flawed since those peoples goals are political in nature.....
fnesb 10 months ago
the argument agasint vouchers leading to public school closings goes the other way too.
not having vouchers leads to private schools closing.
at its peak in 1970 90% of the private schools in the country had a catholic affiliation. since them around half have closed.
we all need the option of vouchers. we the people should not be forced to have government monopolys in our lives
ned262626 10 months ago
You say bad schools are the teachers fault? well all children are not good or teachable? on that same logic anyone's children that commit crime should be placed in jail? If all children were teachable and trainable there would be no crime in our society. And don't be dumb even though teachers have tenure they can and do get fired! You are so little informed on this topic that you can only read it off of a paper.
bw2182 11 months ago
BUT the people on social security have paid into it!
What about the people with no children that pay taxes as well as the ones that cannot have children, since most parents with several children will never pay the amount into taxes to fully fund their children's education. And at 2:25 you say the children's freedom of religion? do you think children even have freedom of religion they are only following their parents choices.
bw2182 11 months ago
Vouchers are BAD since it will harm the public school system even more, why not put the money into fixing the system? In the event of vouchers there will be schools that can select the best students and deny entry to any lessor students. And given how dumb and uneducated you come across as your 5-6 children will never get accepted into a good private school should vouchers go public.
bw2182 11 months ago
Very good video, you hit all the key points.
I hate politics, once something becomes political the discussion disintegrates as people choose sides. More choice is always better.
ronwandell 11 months ago
I do wonder why the system favors public schools over private. What gives atheistic schools the right to get money over religious schools...unions prevent competition and prevent firing bad teachers.
ace8842 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Greatest Asian women **busizz4me.info**
cinthiacheung 1 year ago
Hey I know where to get the funding... cut Wellfare and instead send these kids to better schools so that they can become better and more productive citizens rather then a dependant parasite on the government tit... which is what the political elite want... so this won't happen anytime soon.
DravenWolfe 1 year ago
@DravenWolfe Agreed. Section 8 should be limited for some of these families. Unless you're a disabled or an elderly person one shouldn't have a section 8 voucher for no more than 5 years. That is more than enough time to get your shit together. It is unfair for many elderly families whom cant get one because of some random young girl whom cant keep her dayum legs closed having numerous kids.
Akumatrunigga 9 months ago
Those opposed to vouchers are hypocrites. The same Democrats who take money from teachers unions and brag about how great public schools are send THEIR kids to private school.
StoogeWatcher 1 year ago
If the definition is too broad, then some parents will be spending the money on indoctrinating their children with religious bullshit like creationism, homophobia, etc. This is NOT in the best interest of the child.
For this reason, I would find it appropriate to stipulate that schools receiving vouchers must be impartial on religious matters. Perhaps the schools may be allowed to provide a religious "education" but only as a separate curriculum not paid for by the vouchers.
Libertarianist 1 year ago
@Libertarianist So by your logic social security checks should have a stipulation on them that they can't be used to support churches. Just like the vlogger said, the government hands out money in a myriad of ways, the voucher would just be a form of money. The recipients would be free to spend the vouchers where they wish - any school, including religious schools. For the government to prevent people from going to a religious school would broach separation of church and state.
megagagnon1 1 year ago
@megagagnon1 By my logic, social security wouldn't exist. But for the sake of argument, I will point out some critical differences between social security and education. The beneficiary is the person who decides how the money is spent is a legal adult. In education, the beneficiary is a child, and their parent is the recipient. Without some legal definition of "school" a parent would be able to cash their vouchers and leave the child without an education.
Libertarianist 1 year ago
@megagagnon1 And let me make one thing clear. In this system, the government would NOT be preventing anyone from going to a religious school anymore than it already is. Requiring impartiality on religious matters in order to receive government funding is not a violation of separation of church and state.
Libertarianist 1 year ago
@Libertarianist I guess you are also against the government giving out grants and scholarships that can be used at catholic or christian colleges. I guess you're not so big on freedom of choice. Public policy trumps the parent, right?
megagagnon1 1 year ago
Of all the arguments against school vouchers, the only one that holds any water is the "separation of church and state" argument. Obviously the vouchers can't be used for just anything, otherwise you're not distributing vouchers, you're distributing money to the parents. A voucher forces the parent to spend that money on the child's education. But this means the government has to define what education is.
continued
Libertarianist 1 year ago
The bad schools won't even shut down, if they shut down, it would create localized demand for a school in that area, as well as an empty building for sale. Most schools that shut down in a voucher district would be immediately bought, refurbished and reopened under new management.
Libertarianist 1 year ago
It comes down to unions once again. Look at GM. Look at the teachers unions. We aren't falling for your shit anymore.
Darkrunner1975 1 year ago
Nicely done. Great little debate to explain pros and cons. I am about to subscribe.
TYTARMY 1 year ago
I say cut out the middle man and let people decide if they want to send their kids to school at all or not. Don't tax everybody then give give everyone a portion of the pool of money they collected, that's practically socialism. Education is not a right. If a person can't afford to send their child to school then they need to work hard and raise their children to do the same so that they might be able to send their children to school. This would revitalize the incentive to learn in people.
zanariot 1 year ago
I agree ill vote for any canidate the supports school vouches come 2012
Siagos 1 year ago
@Siagos Ron Paul! I don't know if he supports vouchers but if he doesn't then he probably supports freedom to choose if you want to go to school or not.
zanariot 1 year ago
If the voucher spell the end of public schools so be it. Let the building be used for other purposes such as testing. While home schooling, online schools ect. take over. Let the public school be used as computer labs, study halls. The had their chance.
LER77 2 years ago
democraps are commie bastards
wake up America
JihadKiller1s1k 2 years ago
100% Right on!!!
ryanjurek 2 years ago
Parents can still put money into public schools... if they even want to. THAT's the issue! public schools know that private ones work more efficient, and have better quality, so they try to tug your heartstrings by saying that vouchers will take money away from schools, and that children won't be able to get educations. Vouchering will create a good cause of competition between schools. Low quality public schools will start to suffer because they favor private schools therefore, they will strive
thef22bird 2 years ago
to become better. Without vouchers, public schools don't have to worry about being better or worse than others, because they know that you are being forced to pay for them NO MATTER WHAT.
So, what you are saying, is that liberals think they are FAIR because parents HAVE to pay for the shitty schools. While republicans aren't because they let you choose.You need to wake up, and see how the public schools and the "Perfect" liberals are so easily influencing you.
thef22bird 2 years ago
I like the argument about church and state. It makes so much sense, but not many people want to see that solution. Free market for a free country? Profound! ( :
ladyosburn 2 years ago
this is great.
HindiReader 2 years ago
The democrats want to prevent it because they are slaves to the teachers unions. How could you possibly give a summary of the voucher debate without mentioning unions?
jsparky321 2 years ago 11
Excellent summary.
regebro 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I totally disagree with a federal voucher program. Local taxes pay for schools as well as state aid. Get the vouchers from those sources. I don't want to pay for lazy deadbeats in other states...I have enough of them here in NJ.
CircusMaximus09 2 years ago
Well you still didn't answer my question....
AWE319 2 years ago
that made no sense.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Now your just talking out of your ass. How do they make the poor poorer? They help the poor attend schools they otherwise wouldn't be able to attend. I support school choice, and I think we need a student/parent first education policy rather than an NEA first policy.
AWE319 2 years ago
I'll answer your question. Vouchers rarely cover the cost of private schools in urban areas so the parent(s) have to still pay a difference. This difference is usually still too much for poor parents but can be paid by parents of upper middle class families.
For example Washington D.C.'s voucher is $7500 but I only know of one school with tuition below that and it's a parochial school. Using public money for religious schools is controversial also. This problem is compounded with multiple kids.
mqf0489 2 years ago
The market has not fully developed for the voucher system to be effective yet. Suppose the voucher system was more direct and fair where vouchers are granted to everyone at the same amount to attend public or private schools. If there were a uniform $14,000 or even $7,500 to attend either public or private schools, over time the market would adjust and the costs of schooling could even go below the cost of the voucher so as to attain more market share for successful schools.
jman196 2 years ago
That's why I support charter schools. Any student can attend since it runs like a public school. If vouchers were able to cover the costs for more schools and private schools were willing to expand to let in as many students as possible I would support vouchers. I was able to go to a private, christian school thanks to private scholarships to help pay tuition so I don't want to deny others access. My main problem is that everyone doesn't have access.
mqf0489 2 years ago
Private school vouchers are a blessing to the American people and should be takent advantage of by every parent that values their childrens future and education.
When people decide on which college to go to, they decide to go to the college that will best help them succeed at getting the degree they want
(at least the serious students do.)
Why would you want to send your kid to an overcrowded, run down public school instead of a goal oriented, less crowded private school?
steyzon80 2 years ago
"School vouchers are the best tool for destroying the middle class ever invented. "
???
moronpaul 2 years ago
also this mainly benefits urban students. what about rural students that do not have private schools throughout their entire county or surrounding counties such as ones here in North Carolina. Those areas won't benefit from vouchers and need their public schools reformed though extremely difficult to attract educators to rural areas.
mqf0489 2 years ago
Here is my opposition. Voucher programs do not benefit all children especially the poorest that cannot pay the gap the voucher leaves behind. Programs such as the D.C. program only benefits 1700 students so there are over 30,000 left without access.
mqf0489 2 years ago
hallelujah— if youre still wondering why there is such intense opposition to school vouchers (although im sure you already know), there are 3 primary answers (in order of importance): (1) deeply entrenched interests of powerful teachers unions (2) liberal, ideological commitment to government control of education (3) public fear, however unwarranted, of "private control" of education. (1) and (2) work largely to increase (3). great video: *****
Weeth 2 years ago
Where does our Constitution give the Federal Government the right to control the education of our children? It's not there. Government-controlled education is a violation of our Constitution.
We wouldn't tolerate a monopoly like this in the private sector. Why do we tolerate such a dangerous government monopoly of our schools, which mold the hearts and minds of future voters?
America, WAKE UP! It's time that we, the PEOPLE, take back education from Big Government!
oneloved1 3 years ago
Before we answer your question we need to know whether you are really asking about school vouchers or if you are a right wing idiot who thinks your child shouldn't learn about evolution and needs to be in a proper school that you choose that doesn't teach unchristian ideals like the earth has 4 corners, that apes are unrelated to man so what point is there in studying fruit flies to determine human genetics and that it may help cure cancer or autism or other satanic things.
tymes10 3 years ago
We need smart schools so we can further education so we can win religious wars that religious gets us into... imagine the next war... Christians vs Muslims... it won't be like Christians vs Communists... we have heaven they have 77 virgins... it isn't a matter of if they see how much better capitalism is... it is a matter of god... can we argue god? It is a matter of Heaven or 77 virgins... I don't want either and I want to live... last time it was the soviet atheists... next time... BOOM.
tymes10 3 years ago
Hey, thanks for posting this, it was really helpful. I'm actually writing a research paper on supporting school vouchers, and I'm curious what sources you used (I'm having a hard time finding anything pro vouchers).
IrishHotSauce 3 years ago
"I'm having a hard time finding anything pro vouchers."
Maybe that should suggest something to you. ;)
Actually, there's some good resources out there to illuminate the debate (and the lack of conclusiveness on both sides of the research). You might check out "Rhetoric Verses Reality" by Gill.
obietom 3 years ago
There are 2 great Milton Friedman videos here on youtube proving the moral and practical necessity of school vouchers.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
If you do not want a public school education, pick a state, move there (all voucher people)and secede. Otherwise, stop begging for socialistic aid aka HYPOCRISY-HELP.
lumpagogo 3 years ago
This post makes no sense.
1)Us "voucher people" want to move AWAY from socialism by placing market forces into the school system. It you who is advocating for socialistic government control of our schools. You're not very smart.
2) So if we disagree with you.... we have to "secede"? Hmm. That's what I call an open mind!
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Maybe you haven't noticed: the Govt. is "market forces" (bailouts) these days.
When you people want a handout, it's "market forces"--when anybody else gets one, it's "socialism." Most everyone figured out a long time ago that Talk Radio, led by coward-Limbaugh, does not reflect "market forces."
It's corporate stooge-ism. Vouchers are Big Religion stooge-ism. Untaxed Big Religion is all welfare-all the time.
lumpagogo 3 years ago
Bailouts are not free market. No free marketers are praising this bailout. You have no idea what it is you are saying. Stop, drop, and roll... upon some Milton Friedman videos here on youtube.
Vouchers are tax payer money. I.E. Govt distributed so vouchers could not be used for religious schools (separation of church and state) Stop swallowing Hillary Clinton's lies. What the public schools need in this country isn't more money; it's more competition, which vouchers provide.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Objective thinkers do not need flamdoodle ala HRC to analyze anything for them. Big Religion is Big Business, both of which are ever seeking corporate welfare, in this case dressed up as "vouchers." You are not fooling anyone, Warpie, with your tired drivel about competition.
Set up your own schools wth your own money.** My tax contributions are NOT your monies.
**The only thing you are entitled to if you send a kid to private school is a reduction or
or elimination of your School Tax.
lumpagogo 3 years ago
This entire post is nothing more then a see of straw men, red herrings, and moot points.
1) How is "big religion" " big business" exactly?
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
2) How in your silly little Libnut mind do you equate vouchers to corporate welfare? I don't think you understand what vouchers are. Let me help:
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
2) Continued:
At the moment, schools receive on average of roughly $6,000 per student, that money goes to the bureaucrats in charge of the public schools. With a voucher system that money would go to individual families in the form of a voucher. Now parents would have more influence in school affairs because now they actually have power. Vouchers take the power away from the state and give it to the people.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Timey:
1. Get thee to a PTA meeting.
1a. Big Religion gets to play big politics while paying no taxes; it is an unfunded mandate which has saved trillions of dollars for itself since our founding.
2. Again, all you are entitled to is a break on your school taxes. Anything more is welfare. No red herring there.
2. As far as moving away, one of us served his country, one probably did not. Guess who has to go.
lumpagogo 3 years ago
1) I agree. And in a Libertarian society there would be much harsher restrictions on government collusion with religion or industry.
2) "all you are entitled to is a break on your school taxes. Anything more is welfare."
?????? You mean if you don't have a kid enrolled in school?
3) (You wrote "2." twice.. hehehe.)
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
lumpagogo, I can see some of your point regarding vouchers being "welfare" of a sort. The only problem is this, if we simply do away with the paying of school taxes and expect the parents to use this money saved to go toward private schools, only people who own property and pay this tax will benefit. All living in apartments will suffer. Also, some funding for schools comes from federally collected taxes which wouldn't be represented in simply eliminating the school tax. Also,thanks for serving.
IrenicIronist 3 years ago
Ireno is true regarding renters; they need an equal amount of relief if they are going to take their kids out of the public school.
It ought not to be too difficult for our tax experts to map out a fair plan.
lumpagogo 3 years ago
3)
My "tired drivel about competition"??
Look what free market competition has provided for consumers. The computer you're typing on, the car you drive, the clothes you where, the super markets you shop in. All products of competition. How you call this elegant mechanism "tired drivel" is beyond me. Perhaps you should live in North Korea. There's no competition there : )
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Yes, moving AWAY from socialism. That's the benefit of school vouchers.
AliveAtNight 3 years ago 2
Your video is excellent and well thought out. I have been arguing for vouchers for years and most people see the light. I don't know what the hold-up is except public schools are great places to indoctrinate our children to the liberal agenda.
IrenicIronist 3 years ago
Can't speak for others, but here's my opposition: voucher systems leave behind those whose parents can't or won't utilize the vouchers. These kids, through no fault of their own, end up stuck in a school that is now actively being drained of its financial resources - not to mention the loss of involved parents and their kids to that school community. I agree that parents should have more options as to where they may educate their kids, but not at the expense of other peoples' kids. Thoughts?
obietom 3 years ago
I don't agree with your logic. What reason would keep a parent from using a voucher? I can't help if they choose not to use them. Many parents choose not to supervise and discipline their children. Many parents choose to have children out of wedlock. Why punish those who want to improve the education system available to their children simply because some parents are lazy and irresponsible.
IrenicIronist 3 years ago
I'm speaking as a former teacher. Plenty of parents are not able to be as actively involved as would be ideal, for a variety of reasons. Vouchers harm kids who don't get to use them. I don't think it's fair for children to be punished just because their parents can't or won't get involved, especially when there are other, better ways to improve schools.
obietom 3 years ago
that argument is irrational. by that same logic, all parental decision making should be expropriated to the federal government because, seeing as some parents are not as responsible as others, many children will be unfairly disadvantaged in life. to argue against a freer system that may fail some, in favor of a government-monopolized system that is currently failing everyone—and all under the assumption that parents cannot be trusted to make proper decisions—seems to me to be.. dictatorial.
Weeth 2 years ago 8
Objection #7:
School vouchers only benefit those students whose parents are able to acquire and use them. Other students, whose parents do not take this initiative, will be left behind in a failing school (Strike 1) that is being depleted of its financial resources (Strike 2) and good students (Strike 3), thanks to vouchers. Thus vouchers present an even worse scenario for the students who are in the most need.
Parents should have more options, but not at the expense of the neediest kids.
obietom 3 years ago
It's not at anyone's expense. As Milton Friedman used to say: "You have to have a sense of proportion." Let's say 5% of these "needy kids" would in some way or another not benefit from vouchers... well what about the 95% who would!?!? Ugh. The Democrats are NOT the part of the people. They are the party of the bureaucrats! The only people against school vouchers are teachers and teachers unions that don't want high standards for themselves! And the Liberal politicians they have in there pockets!
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
So your argument is: (1) Vouchers don't come at anyone's expense. (2) Actually, vouchers do come at the expense of 5% of "needy kids." (3) Democrats/teachers/teachers unions/liberals suck.
Did I get everything?
obietom 3 years ago
Is it some sort of rule, you HAVE to be a pompous prick to be on the Left? You completely oversimplified my last paragraph, and you can't even recognize the level of hypocrisy in your own political party. Democrats claim to be the party of the people, yet what is more contradictory to that message than fighting against giving parents the choice of where they send there kids to school? Because they care more about the big fat checks they get from the teachers unions. Despicable to the core.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
I'm not against vouchers because of my political party (which, btw, I haven't brought up), I'm against vouchers because I taught in an inner-city school for two years and have a sense for what that would have done to my school. Why are you invoking party politics into this issue?
Ever asked _why_ it is that public school teachers are virtually unanimous on vouchers? Perhaps the actual ramifications of vouchers are a little more problematic than you are accounting for.
obietom 3 years ago
You acknowledge that vouchers harm a certain % of kids (and you pull the % out of thin air). And your response is to be unconcerned so long as you're able to get yours? That seems cold-hearted and socially irresponsible.
The thing is, vouchers aren't the only way to improve failing schools. There are many other measures that have been able to successfully turn schools around - without cutting off resources and demoralizing teachers, students and parents.
obietom 3 years ago
Wrong. Vouchers don't have to harm anyone. Everyone gets the same voucher, covering X amount of dollars. The counter argument you seem to be making is: 1) People are idiots and the government knows what's best for everybody. 2) Poor people are too stupid to go out and find there kids the right schools. The point I'm making is, even if the latter maybe true, why hinder the 95% who would benefit because of the 5% that wouldn't?
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
I disagree with your reduction of my argument and clearly shouldn't have done the same to you above. Sorry.
You seem to be under the impression that vouchers are the only way to improve public schools. They are not. There are many significant ways to turn schools around, but they hinge on more, not less, freedom for administrators and teachers to design their schools to the specific needs in their communities. Squeezing the money prevents the sort of freedom that can radically improve a school.
obietom 3 years ago
"but they hinge on more, not less, freedom for administrators and teachers to design their schools to the specific needs in their communities."
I think parents know what's best for there children better than random bureaucrats. And at the very least should have a say in: "designing schools to the specific needs in their communities."
Again, you only further prove my previous accusation. You think people are idiots, and the government knows what's best for everybody.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
"Random bureaucrats?" I'm talking about teachers, parents, and school administrators.
These are the people I think know best when it comes to education. The problem begins when vouchers and other district/government programs shackle the resources of public schools.
School choice is one thing, but vouchers don't improve schools. They promote escaping from the problem rather than fixing it. We need to invest in solutions that can solve the problem, not prolong it for the poorest kids.
obietom 3 years ago
Do you consider people who don't go to bad restaurants "escaping"? Should the govt force children to go to that restaurant and give that failing restaurant more money to prevent escapism from occurring? Or should restaurants compete for our money?
If you haven't noticed, market forces work much better then bureaucratic. When govt monopolies exist, things turn to shit. If we implement vouchers, moving market forces into the school system, cost will go down, and quality will go up.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
"Do you consider people who don't go to bad restaurants "escaping"?"
This is not a good analogy. Unlike a restaurant, school is compulsory. Thus it is incumbent upon society to ensure that each school is good enough, not only for those with means but for every kid, even those whose parents can't or won't take initiative. And yes, I do consider it escaping from the problem if in so doing you (a) leave for your own benefit and (b) worsen the problem in the process.
obietom 3 years ago
The problem with school vouchers is that parents can discriminate against education. And it isn't good or bad education... it is Common education (that communists and muslims get) and christian education... so ultimately do you want to teach God is more powerful than the atomic bomb? Do you want the evils to gain the smart bomb? science is what wins our religious wars and saves our religious lives. We need science 15 hours a week, you can have religion the other 150 hours each week.
tymes10 3 years ago
There is a separation between church and state in this country. Taxpayer money in the form of school vouchers would not be permissible to be used for a religious school.
Now what do you mean, "parents can discriminate against education?" More like against BAD education. Bad schools, bad teachers, parents should discriminate against those things......
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Sure, if most people believed that and didn't discriminate based on ideology and "MORAL?!" issues? U would be ok to talk about bad schools/teachers but U don't.
In another comment U say "There are 2 great Milton Friedman videos here on YT proving the moral and practical necessity of school vouchers"... WTF?!
What moral issues? how do those impact on education as there is Ur "separation of church and state"? (yet people fight for ID) Why did you list moral before practical? Be straight.
tymes10 3 years ago
So I take it English is your...... 47th language!?
When I say the moral necessity of vouchers, I peak of the moral necessity of choice. Having the parents of a child decide where they want to send there kid/s to school, not a Liberal bureaucrat. To have the schools compete for vouchers, not be guaranteed a paycheck regardless of quality or results, everyone is guaranteed tenure by the corrupt teachers unions.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
That was pretty straight and not at all evasive and deflecting. But thanks for the complement, it is nice that you think I'm so smart I may know 46 other languages.
I thought you would just insult me after I showed you were probably a hypocrite, but I see now that you are just paranoid and think those evil liberals and those corrupt teachers who really know how to rake in the money are all out to get you.
Which are these Milton vids speaking to the morality related to vouchers? Choice?
tymes10 3 years ago
For all of you that say school vouchers will create extremist schools is wrong. Legislation on what would be the requirements for which school receives vouchers would remedy the problem.
Deathlordtwo 3 years ago
EXACTLY! Using taxpayer vouchers for religious schools goes against the separation of Church and state. It would be so easy to make it a requirement that vouchers could not be used towards those schools. Leftists just make that bogus argument to distract people from all the good that would come of voucher implementation. Liberal politicians rely to heavily on donations from teachers unions to really make a case for helping families and there children.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Pt.2
WE SPEND MORE MONEY ON EDUCATION THAN SOME COUNTRIES PUT TOGETHER YET THEY OUT PERFORM US BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOICE!
POWER HUNGRY MONGROLS AKA THE TEACHERS UNION'S GREEDY BASTARDS DONT WANT THE STUDENTS AND FAMILIES TO HAVE A CHOICE!
Students need vouchers so atleast they will spend good money on proper education rather than spending $10,000 plus on bad schools that waste the nations money.
OUR FUTURE IS ON THE LINE TOO ASIDE FROM ECONOMIC POWER SO WILL EDUCATION IF NOTHING IS DONE!!!!
melmnre86 3 years ago
Part. 1
This young woman has a very strong point and I support school vouchers. As a high school student I am furious that a strong nation has stupid selfish and power hungry narcissist teacher unions wanting there way and getting it!
This is very wrong because though it is up to students on how they want to perform the academic environment should be chosen by them and not by there zip.
melmnre86 3 years ago
A couple thoughts:
(1) On letting poorly performing schools shut down if people flee the system. Schools are different than businesses--and should be. Schools don't shut down immediately...while they fail, the students stuck there get poor education and are perhaps irreparably harmed.
(2) The superiority of private schools may be due more to the high socioeconomic status of their students than the fact that they're private. Flood them with underprivileged children and the quality may decline.
proteaglen97 3 years ago
Private school education actually isn't better on the whole, it's actually worse if you're comparing the socio-economic background of the students.
Anyway, comparing capitalism to education is ridiculous. Students are human beings, not coal. 99.9% of the time if a child is failing it's because of the family enviroment that the student came from, or the student's own interests or abilities.
Creating a market model for education is a terrible and uninformed idea.
mtf10 3 years ago
Instead of freedom, lets keep all of these kids in the public schools and trap the poor families from educational mobility. I am pretty sure that you went to a good school but what about the millions who cant leave their bad schools. Its a good thing we dont run food stamps like education, the gov't would sweep in and nationalize food stores and tell us what we can and cant have. The teachers unions hate this idea because they will lose their grip in D.C., that is all I need to know.
almostheroes3 3 years ago
America is already becoming fragmented -- its a very dangerous trends. YOu idiots that want school vouchers have no flipping idea how this lunatic plan would backfire.
Want gay high schools? Want white power middle schools, run by white supremest? Want Islamic grade schools? You would have all kinds of politically intense groups opening up their own schools, paid for by taxpayers, and polarize this country like crazy.
Your voucher plan is real, real real stupid.
MarkDouglasC 3 years ago
Cute girl. Too bad school vouchers would be nuts. Here is a clue -- go ahead and do your vouchers. You want Osama middle schools -- paid for by US taxpayers? What the hell you think happened in Saudi Arabia when they paid for Wahabi schools for Osama? They got ALqueda started.
You want Black Power grade schools? Paid for by your taxes? You want White power middle schools opening down the street?
Your idiot voucher program would be a nightmare, and you would bitch the loudest.
MarkDouglasC 3 years ago
I live in SF and several of our public high schools outperform their private counterparts. It's work ethic and what you raise your children to value. An unmotivated child will not produce, regardless of how many resources are at his disposal.
EarlMcCrackin 3 years ago
This would also lead to further racial and socioeconomic disparities. Private schools do not have to admit a child who applies. How do we provide "equal access" to children when the school has the right to refuse service? If I was low-income hispanic, do you really think my child would be accepted over middle/upper class white children?
LadyLoerya 3 years ago 2
Another problem...if they accept voucher money, there would be more limits on private schools' ability to determine their student body and what they teach. They become quasi-private. I think the whole thing would lead to a three-tiered market for education: (1) public schools, (2) quasi-private schools, and (3) really private schools (no voucher students). I don't see that as a good thing.
proteaglen97 3 years ago
Yes at first it would lead to as you say racial and socioeconomic disparities but mostly the second one depending on where you live but the freedom of where a child wants to study out weighs it all. Because then a child who wants to study here because it concentrates on a thing he or she likes would improve him or her rather than staying in a depressed no good teacher union dominating school whose purpose is for themselves and NOT FOR THE STUDENTS!
melmnre86 3 years ago
Thank you. I am also particularly concerned about those students who will be left behind at failing schools, those whose parents are unable or unwilling to secure vouchers in the first place. Those kids get stuck where they are, only now the schools are being depleted of finances and good students. This only furthers the gap.
obietom 3 years ago
You said it yourself that public schools would have to compete with private schools in order to remain open. If the state is dumping funding into private schools who already receiving a majority of their funds from parents, how can a public school compete when they receive less overall funding? What if, as in many cases, I can't afford the private school costs above and beyond the voucher? Where does my child receive an education when our local public school closes?
LadyLoerya 3 years ago
Well said.
petrsakharov 3 years ago
Beautiful, thank you.
JTokko 4 years ago
Also, what would we do about the increase in unemployment rate and the overcrowding of public schools due to many of them shutting down due to "incompetence"? Public schools already suffer over-crowding, and the voucher system promises to shut down bad schools. People who don't have a financial choice to sent their kids to private institutions must then enroll their children in another public school, which has actually been the cause of overcrowding
Luisagee 4 years ago
Luisage -- right -- vouchers could cause massive problems like you mentioned. Another thing -- whats to prevent Islamic fundamentalist from opening a school and making the government pay for it with vouchers? How about Black pride schools? White supremest? Gay pride high schools? Southern schools for slavery and sessesion?
Vouchers are insane. Don't even go there.
MarkDouglasC 3 years ago
I don't understand why you read instead of just speak, but anyway; The school voucher system attacks public schools directly and indirectly and creates an even larger educational gap between the different economic sectors. Also, who would be granted vouchers and who would not? How can you determine the religious, social, or ideological criteria and how could you legally make that criteria constitutional?
Luisagee 4 years ago
We don't even need to have any public schools at all... There's no reason to have them. Have all kids choose between private schools. Right now public school employees and administrators have no incentives to work hard and nearly no accountability. People have to open their eyes.
Good job on the video though, very clear, and very cute!
Tuneman100 4 years ago
Did you write this all yourself? Or did you read an article off of the internet.
There's a lot of great information in here and I would hope more people become aware of this school voucher dilemma!
hellokitty13729 4 years ago
I wrote it, but I read it because it's too long to memorize. :-)
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
Hillary Clinton and Kennedy's send their kids to private schools. Hypocrites !!
k3304 4 years ago
This clip really shows vouchers for what they are: good for everyone!
yaritznet 4 years ago
Excellent question. However, the specifics of vouchers have always been a mystery to me. Would this be the equivalent of a family putting money into a slot, and immediately getting back a voucher for the equivalent of that cash amount? Or would it be the same as it is now, where everyone pays their taxes and gets a voucher? If the concept of vouchers relies on the idea of a free market economy, wouldn't the cash amount of each voucher differ between which schools a student attends?
obdura 4 years ago
(Part 2/2) But sadly, private schools still have to teach according to government standards, what subjects to teach, what to teach in each subject, how to grade students etc. Thus no real innovations in teaching methods have occurred. The private schools just do the same things as the public schools, although they do those things cheaper and better.
I think vouchers are about three times as good as no vouchers, but a completely privatized system would be about ten times as good as vouchers.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
Interesting! I've never thought about that before...but if the government took its hand out of the education system...you're right...it probably would improve. Could you tell me more about this?
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
1) Well, my belief in that education would improve tremendously if completely privatized lies primarily in my knowledge of the superiority of capitalism -- practically a n d morally. So I don't know what's going to improve and how, only that it will. It's the same with the computer industry. I know that the freer the computer industry will be, the greater the improvements will be, even though I don't know anything about computers. I can speculate though...
Jocke1776 4 years ago
2) One obvious improvement would be order in the classrooms. If your kid came home and complained about disorder during classes, for which you paid $3000--10000 a year, you would demand for the school to kick the bad students out or loose business. This would teach the overwhelming majority of the disturbing students a lesson and they would stop disturbing during class -- which would help them too.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
So you said that in Sweden the schools are completely privatized? How is education in Sweden? I don't know much about your country.
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
I WISH! No, no, not at all. We have a voucher-system since 1991 in education below univeristy-level, primarely high school. But the private schools have to be approved by the state and need to follow the state's regulations. The exact same classes, same text books, grading standards and so on. And the government are now increasing its regulations I read yesterday.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
@AliveAtNight Better than the US.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
3) This is a favorite quote of mine from a Swedish newspaper, Svenska Dagbladet, which illustrates the incompetence of government. It was just a small informative article with the headline "No new school law before 2006":
"After one year of negotiations and seven years of investigations and official reports the negotiations was cancelled yesterday without an agreement"
This school law is what determines what standards public and privet schools will have to abide.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
If you work in education and get an innovative idea which you want to materialize, under government control you need to get 50 % of the votes in the next election, under capitalism you need to raise the capital and get going.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
Hmm! When I heard about school vouchers, I loved the idea so much because it gave the citizens more freedom to decide where to send their kids. Also, I liked it because school vouchers force schools to improve or lose business. But it seems that if schools were not government mandated at ALL...like you say...we would have those benefits to a much larger degree! I really like your idea and am going to discuss it with my friends and see what they think.
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
(Part 1/2) The best thing would be a completely privatized school system. No funding, no rules, no anything from the government (except a big tax cut, of course).
Here in Sweden we have had School Vouchers since 91 and now even the Left Party leader's (communist) daughter attends a "friskola" (private). The private schools grow at an incredible rate every year.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
My mother teacher handicapped children who are in the public schools. To get the education they need parents have to either send their child to a private school that meets their needs OR the parent has to hire the extra educator and send them to the public school to save some money by not going to private. If vouchers were available there would be a more stable job for my mother as well as a more stable place for the handicapped child, and help in private educational tuition.
valerievomit23 4 years ago
Public schools are REQUIRED to teach the most expensive, handicapped, difficult and academically challenged children. Private schools can reject these kids because of the costs and difficulties educating them. The only fair comparison would be to require private schools to educate an equal share of the difficult to teach children, and then compare the outcomes. Vouchers just subsidize the wealthy sending their children to elite schools and take funding away from under funded public schools.
shawnut2 4 years ago
My mother teacher handicapped children who are in the public schools. To get the education they need parents have to either send their child to a private school that meets their needs OR the parent has to hire the extra educator and send them to the public school to save some money by not going to private. If vouchers were available there would be a more stable job for my mother as well as a more stable place for the handicapped child, and help in private educational tuition.
valerievomit23 4 years ago
I think shawnut2 has brought up a very real problem with the voucher system that I have not seen addressed. "To get the education they need" is what you've said, not all parents can/do afford that education.
(From the NEA site) The current average per student cost is $7,552 and the average cost per special education student is an additional $9,369 per student, or $16,921. Do special ed kids get more voucher money? Do we force any voucher accepters to accept all/any kids?
commandersprocket 3 years ago
Great job. I'm favoriting this. I can't understand people who are against vouchers...sure, there are legitimate concerns, but the benefits far outweigh the costs.
SeventhHanyou 4 years ago 3
THANK YOU! So true!!!
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
watch?v=pfRUMmTs0ZA
What people need to watch before making a decision on any voucher bill is this 20/20 program on schools.
MrXfromPlanetX 4 years ago
You have some very valid points, the business world has always thrived on competition and only the best businesses stay open, while the poor ones close. I see no reason why schools shouldn't be the same it could only promote schools to work harder to create new, innovative, exciting, and overall hopefully better curriculum and instructional methods.
kakumeikeahi 4 years ago 2
Great video and great debate.
I'm very impressed.
Mind if I link to this?
tyeporter 4 years ago 2
Not at all!
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
Thank you, Ma'am.
Any plans for more?
tyeporter 4 years ago
Great points. On the religious schools bit, you'll notice that this is where the Democrats have the biggest problem. Personally, even as an atheist, I really don't care if they go to religious schools - but the fact is that our public schools are secular and tax dollars currently pay for that. The most fair/balanced solution is to employ secular vouchers. It's not that big of a compromise when you think about it.
chadagg 4 years ago
Concise and on target. Thank you.
DavidMRColeman 4 years ago
I haven't seen a financial breakdown on this so I don't know what the overall impact of a voucher program is. But I believe vouchers would be a cost in addition to education costs. Education is funded primarily through property taxes.
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
Hmm...you are probably right about that...the funds from public schools probably wouldn't be enough....
AliveAtNight 4 years ago
Here in Sweden we it's exactly the reverse. Public schools get more funding, about 10 % I think, it varies a little bit. But the private schools now are getting critizised (!) for offering things for free, like lap tops and free driving lessons to the students in order to compete. In a free market they would simply lower the fee, but they are not allowed to give the students money, so they give them stuff insteead.
Jocke1776 4 years ago
No. Every child (parents actually) would receive a voucher to spend at the school of the parents' choice, PERHAPS A PUBLIC SCHOOL. This is how all schools, including public schools, would be funded. If less pupils go to public schools, the public schools would receive less money, which is as it should be.
DavidMRColeman 4 years ago
How is it not more expensive to fund multiple high Schools (or any level) in one town than it is to fund one? Plant and overhead are fixed costs.
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
If there really is an economy of scale, the largest public schools should be the least expensive (per pupil) to run. It usually doesn't work out that way. And what's wrong with more and smaller schools? Now that we have electronic classrooms there's not much argument left for the the huge behemoths we now have.
DavidMRColeman 4 years ago
If a school system is broke economically and academically , vouchers may be a good option. If not, then vouchers will unnecessarily raise taxes. They won't hand cks out to parents, it would have to be direct to the school. A layer of bureaucracy will be needed to oversee all this.
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
Do Food Stamps work?
DavidMRColeman 4 years ago
I thought we were talking about funding schools. What do we do when a parent misallocates the voucher fund, (deny the child an education?) I think there may be local situations where vouchers make sense, just like magnet and charter schools are pieces of the puzzle.
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
We ARE talking about funding schools. Do Food Stamps work?
DavidMRColeman 4 years ago
Yes food stamps work and they require a layer of bureaucracy to administer the program. School vouchers would require a layer of bureaucracy to administer as well. I'm not sure the analogy goes much further than that. Do you think vouchers should be public policy everywhere, in all school districts?
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
My point is it is not just a matter of shifting funds. The program is going to cost something to adminster.
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
Understand vouchers are NOT a reform or supplement to the current system - but a replacement. Its administrative cost will be much lower than the current system. In GA there was a proposal in the legislature that schools had to spend a min of 60% of their OPERATING budgets (which is separate form capital budgets) directly on education. The schools went crazy. Turned out that most public schools spend 45%-55% of their operating budgets on administrative overhead.
lurner26 4 years ago
Re: "Do you think vouchers should be public policy everywhere, in all school districts?"
Yep, everywhere.
DavidMRColeman 4 years ago
You raise a number of questions. Do you think there is something basically wrong with the way we are affording education to our children?
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
What problem requires such a dramatic change in policy?
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
Don't you not watch the news? Rapes, beatings, murders at schools. Graduates who are illiterate. Widespread immaturity and a general unpreparedness for either college or employment? Even teachers hate schools. The teacher attrition rate is 50% in the first 5 years. Only doctors and lawyers are more likely to send their kids to private schools than teachers.
lurner26 4 years ago
It's debatable wether private schools out- perform public. You would need to correct for special needs and income to know. The freedom of private schools would begin to erode once tax money started to flow in. They would be accountable to all taxpayers not just their constituents. Monopoly isn't necessarily a bad thing when the goal is to serve everyone, (police, fire, rescue, armed services).
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
I agree that if a district consistently fails to meet standards, vouchers are an option to consider. I don't agree to vouchers in districts that meet and exceed standards, it would undermine a system that works. I don't agree that humanism is the "defacto" faith of public schools. What would you have the "defacto" faith be. Do you consider teaching evolution a faith?
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
Some schools do not fail as dramatically as others. What standards are you referring to? Do you know who sets them, what are their personal agendas, did you vote for those people, do you know what the "standards" are? If you can't answer these questions (few can) then why are they important to you? The best "standards" will be set by parents who will have the power of a voucher to shop for the best education for their kids.
lurner26 4 years ago
I'm talking about standardized tests (simular to SATs) children take every year to measure individual progress and as a tool to compare school's performance. Differs from state to state.
owheydusoapsk 4 years ago
SATs are nothing more than vocabulary test and the math section is weighted with types of math that have limited use in everyday life. I believe the test are culturally and racially biased. Some recent studies suggest that high SATs don't always translate into academic, economic or social success. What they're good for is quickly thinning out the number of applications an admissions officer has to review. A lottery might be just as good for choosing college applicants.
lurner26 4 years ago
Similar, not the same as