Public schools take everyone private schools don't have to thus many are left out. Plus, if rich kids went to public school the public school systems would be great.
@Lelouch21000 Well, in a perfect world, yes. However, (and feel free to correct me, for this is an opinion that I have drawn on little evidence out of pretty much thin air.) I believe this would lead to greater inequality for kids born into low income families. That isn't to say that the fix for this problem must be government.
I'm just guessing, I'd like to hear a response from somebody with more empirical evidence or experience in this subject.
The high levels of literacy of the modern world acheived NOT by DAH HOLY INVISABLE HAND! But by the introduction of mandatory public education starting in Prussia in the late 18th century. That instititution gave Prussia its ability to unify germany into the German Empire and everyone adopted it because of its obvious success.
Europe has higher standards of education than the US, because their government invests in public education for all. The free market is not the solution for every problem.
@ImperatorZor You are really going to laud Bismark's one size fits all model? A model based on the factory & the military? A model that facilitated to the rise of nationalism, & mass state indoctrination. The prussian system was the worst thing to happen to education, we are only now just starting to getting away from. You should get it into your skull that it is not about the 'market' per se. It is about having a system that is diverse enough for innovation & local adaptation.
It got results, Germany industrialized very fast after the 1871 and by the eve of WW-1 had an output greater than Great Britain with a comparitively small homeland. Not because they were a master race, but because they had a well educated population that made industrialization easy and innovation possible. And you know what, it IS possible to refine away some of its more authoritarian aspects. Thats why everyone adopted it.
Nationalism had its roots in the French Revolution.
@ImperatorZor so you want to support a unionized school run by a government that throws trillions of dollars IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE into it, that right now has graduation rates that HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING SINCE 1971?
ok... good luck...
a voucher program would allow for parents to choose places where there are better test scores and such, and allow for schools to do such things... what we need is not a One Size Fits All System, we need a system where kids are where they NEED TO BE
Public school-School set up and run by the state. Money goes to making the school work as well as possible for the maximum amount of kids.
Private School-School is set up and run by private group wanting to turn a profit. Money goes to making the school work, AND earn a profit.
The latter has a HUGE extra objective on top of it that exists. High end private schools ONLY have higher grades because they cost ALOT to get in, can invest alot more per student and can kick out disruptive kids.
I agree with the premise, but it still doesn't explain how this can really be implemented. So the school staff and parents can be even less accountable than they are now?
We might as well all go live in a hippie commune, what with all this utopian talk. I mean did someone slip some acid into every conservative's coffee when I was not looking?
Layoff the comic books, kids. They will rot your brain.
@hybridmcgee How would the staff be less accountable? The teachers will be far more accountable when the parents can choose a different school if a teacher is doing a bad job.
@bake1617 But just up and going to a different school is not that simple. And what if the next one is as bad or worse? Eventually you could run out of options. Though I like the privatized idea, the standards would likely become more lax while they are not good as it is.
So my argument is not opposed, but the skimming/scheming approach to business we see so often these days makes me way too nervous about universally applying it to something so fundamental.
@StateExempt Yes, exactly. I know you think we are disagreeing anyway. Though I do believe there should be some rules for businesses to operate in our community, just as I think we both agree that government should also have to follow rules and limitations.
Everyone just has so many weird perspectives about the role of government. It's always either too much, or too much. But I think the road warrior thing gets old too.
@hybridmcgee - How is school choice making teachers less accountable then the system we already have in which it is impossible to fire a teacher and students are stuck with whatever they get solely on the basis of where they live?
Thats what the government does for college it doesn't matter what college you go to the government provides loans and grants. But that dosent really work when in State tuition's 7,000 a year verses, what my parents paid per year for me to go to hight school. Including county school taxes on my parents they paid less than 300 dolars per year. Individual schools should be focused on and studied. Improving the quality of individual schools so the rest of the schools systems can see what works.
Vouchers avoid all these conflict of interest and control issues with government funding of private or religious schools. Just like financial aid for college doesn't prohibit goign to church-sponsiored schools, or allow the government to control the schools. It's because parents use the voucher to choose the school--the government does not interfere in that decision.
I would love to look-into Prof. Dill's ideas as pertains to 'school choice'; however, just as a 'person-of-color' might be 'taken-aback' by an improprietous Economics prof (e.g.~ if 1 had a prof that explained Economics whilst obviously indicating his or her superiority as a 'white' person;) so do I have a problem with Prof. Dill's (or her video-processers'?) 'cartoon misandry' (unless of course, your a 'dark-skinned' minority, like at the end -- right?!?)
@drochalsey Newsflash, bub. Chinese and Indian students are wayyy smarter than American ones (white OR black; or Latin-American... or even Chinese-American.) If you want equality (even IF government public education is the way to achieve that), then that's fine. Just know you're hurting American kids, of all creeds and colours.
I was VERY careful to NOT say anything about 'equality'. After all, we (each person on earth) are NOT equal -- but we CAN be 'fair' with each other and strive to make opportune-availability 'fair'.
In #1, I owed my down-thumb. In #2 I indicated 1 powerful (of many) shortcomings working AGAINST getting her point across & in #3, I elucidated her misandry (& its 'possible' racist leanings.)
In Re~ the above, I fail to see (other than tacitly) why you replied to me.
It has been often historically shown, that 1 of the subtlest tacts (& yet biggest, in effect) to exacerbate fairness among races, sexes, etc. (In Re~ education, etc.) is to destroy them in their endeavors, by minimalizing, marginalizing, trivializing & villifying, the words & deeds of those seeking said 'fairness', because those in the 'Catbird seat' are little affected by such (if at all) & so, I wish to avoid such (towards me & mine) with my next post.
Although I don't believe in calling attention to myself for 'negative-indicators' (such as 'thumbing-down'); simultaneously, I also do not believe in just 'thumbing-down' a video without being ready to take responsibility for this action & explain why. I therefore, find myself presently needing to explain my (what otherwise would have been 'anonymous') 'thumbing-down' of this video.
I don’t get the separation of church and state part people bring up. If 60% of people say they are religious than why can’t that 60% be able to choose a religious school for their child. What the GOV is doing, is saying if you pretend not to be religious we will give you money for your child. Everyone pays taxes, not just the non-religious. So until religious people pay no taxes, it is unfair to force them away from their religious values.
When she states that areas with more school choice have lower cost of education, does that include what the government is assisting with? Or is this statistic just considering the parent?
Get rid of all public schools..they are dangerous nest of Socialism. Ban all public schools and let the free market and charities rule education. THe NEA is the 2nd largest (under the ABA) Lobby orgs. They are corrupt Unions organizations that need to be abolished.
@grecorivera941 Exactly! If states/local governments took control back by refusing federal education funding and accepting responsibility for it on their own, they would be free to educate children as best as they saw fit.
@gamegeek2 I agree, although I feel one could in theory also make an arguement that teaching secularism is also unconstitutional, as it presents a particular view of the origins and truth of the world as fact. If the government is to inject itself into the education of children, any position regarding the nature of the universe/reality should be explained as such. Educating students on what religions and worldviews ARE, is very different from teaching one or another as TRUE.
Bottom line, when ANY money comes from the government, it requires of the receiver a degree of control.
The private, religious college I attended was restricted from teaching any religion courses in a building that received partial federal funding.
I do not support the private institution's acceptance of the federal funding, but this is a prime example of what would happen on every level of education if federal funding was involved in paying for private education institutions.
@incircles36 You can have a voucher system implemented locally without any federal oversight. The state and local governments just need to have the political will to pursue implementation themselves. This would clearly be a 10th amendment issue that states could stand strong on if the people demanded it.
These must be some of the smartest comments I've ever seen. I almost forgot I was at YouTube. Anyway, yeah, competition leads to lots of awesome schools.
1:28 Lady, that's because private schools and charter schools don't frequent Hicktown or the Ghetto. They frequent white suburbs. Schooling in white suburbs is of a higher quality because the money is there. I sincerely doubt its because there is a wider variety of options.
I'm sick of everyone using conditionals as reasons behind principles. Principles should be on their own and as the only reason behind an advocation, because reality is ever-changing and unreliable. Though school choices rise and prices lower now, because of so many factors it could rise at any time. You can't use this as weak, unreliable support. That isn't to say that I disagree, I mostly agree with libertarian ideas, but not exclusively, ie chained to it.
Whenever the government makes something "cheaper" it essentially means it allocates resources from one sector to another.
I can say firsthand. I grew up going to private schools all the way up until I graduated high school. Now I go to a public university and the inefficiency and bureaucracy of the system completely blew me away.
The other side of this coin is what happens to the public schools. When you have multiple tiers of schools, private and charter schools generally scoop up the best students thus leaving public schools with the lower income students who don't have the best academic record. These schools tend to get punitive cuts since they don't perform as well as the better funded schools predictably.
More choice is good, but you can't forget about the public schools. You have to fix the public schools too.
@helios5868 Fix the public schools by phasing them out entirely. Competition results in an increasingly better product and decreasing lower prices. This is just a fact of life. We have moved a lot beyond that of a tribe, we need to stop scrambling children's brains and crushing their creativity, imagination and individuality via these kinds of environments.
@regresseur ...there is exactly the reason why people are so hesitant to vote for Ron Paul even over the Barak-star, this universal belief that governments can do no right.
Public school exist so that democracy can exist, without education, there is no informed decision making, thus for democracy to survive, free, fact-based education must remain. How about we try fix what we have before we scrap it to potentially replace it all over again.
@helios5868 If you say that people must be educated to vote or democracy will start to fail you are wrong. After the civil war, many slaves were given freedom and the right to vote. Most former slaves were uneducated and they voted anyways, yet democracy is still alive. India has a low literacy rate and is a stable democracy while Germany had a high literacy rate but still voted in Hitler.Just because someone is uneducated does not mean they do not look out for their own interests.
Fun fact: Hitler was voted in not only because of his great charisma and speaking ability, but also because of policies he instated when he came into office. At the time Germany was in an assload of debt after WWI and Hitler created and improved many social systems to help the impoverished. It wasn't like people were all 'YEAH ETHNIC CLEANSING', it's highly likely that they just didn't know he was going to pull that and voted for the guy who would help them in time of need.
@helios5868 The reason public schools can not be fixed to support a strong democracy is because the ruling class does not want them to be. They control the curriculum. What kids need to know is the inherent contradictions and failings in our countries political history and culture or stated simply, the truth and I think that is much more likely to happen in a private school that does not have to worry about law suits from ignorant disapproving parents.
@regresseur i agree. i would also like to see more private funding of montessori schools. they've been shown to be have excellent results in educating creative children.
it's interactive learning, that groups the kids w/ others in a similar age bracket. so once they learn something then the oldest child can teach the others. as a way to demonstrate their mastery of the material.
@Berelore "...instead forcing the rest of us to pick up the tab." Please explain. Actually, please check your privilege. Are you rich, by chance? (Let's define rich as making more than $75,000/year, net.) It sounds like you are complaining about poor people who pay less in taxes (thus contributing less to public education) than you do. Another possibility is you don't have children yourself and/or you don't understand how society opporates.
@trick29420 "Our school system now is more like day-care, with a little random bits of 'learning' government approved 'facts'."
And what would you have them learn instead? Someone else's approved 'facts'? Perhaps you'd rather them have little to no science education whatsoever from a entirely religious school...like Liberty University? Or are you thinking something else?
They already have, though. They get to dictate what, how and whom the "private" schools get to teach, and with which teachers. Every significant innovation is pretty much prohibited by law, and most of the major failings of public schools are ordained for "private" schools by law.
And they still, somehow, regularly outperform public schools. : D
@carcabe Well, government already controls public schools. What you should be worried about is private schools lobbying the government for favors. (Point being, don't mistakenly think "government is the problem" when the problem is actually with corporate interests that use government as a tool.)
@TheMidwestAtheist Government will always be used as a "tool", i.e., weapon by some against others. That's why we need government to be downsized and kept to an absolute minimum. Nothing but thuggery.
@carcabe There's no such thing as government money because government doesn't make any money, only acquires it through theft and "borrowing" (debt, which is then passed on to the citizens endlessly, generation through generation). But I would agree that when govt. politicians start dumping their stolen money into something, that thing ceases being what it once was, and they will simply turn it into what they want it to be, through new laws / regulations.
@carcabe Agreed. Don't want to teach that FDR's policies saved the U.S. from the Great Depression? No funding for you! As I understand it, that's why federalism has been eroded; the fed. gov't controls the purse strings. But back to the video: how about making the moral argument that you shouldn't have to pay for your neighbor's education?
@carcabe How so or better yet why. Schools will have to compete to provide what parents want not what the government wants. The proposal if for parental choice not parental choice of government approved choices. The one thing the government should never allow to become private which it already has is prisons and that is going to be the pandora's box that brings down America by transforming us into a corporate police state. A profit motive to have more prisoners, longer! Hello, wake up America.
Tax dollars should never go to pay for private religious schooling.
The (Catholic) Church exploits the tax loopholes and receives federal dollars (In addition to getting tax breaks) .. they make money two fold... while public education costs go up and union organized dept's tap the couffers of the state .. The public is getting robbed blind.
@ZoneTelevision Seperation of church and state is first, not a law. It is a letter, refering to the first amendment which states that no single religion can have benefits. Unless they specify you must go to catholic, and not muslim, then it would be problem. As far as education, it violates no laws, and they are held to the same standard as public schools, providing a similar education, able to pass the same science, math, and reading exams.
@bluefootedpig "As far as education, it violates no laws, and they are held to the same standard as public schools,"
It does not violate education laws but it DOES violate the bias with respect to an established Religion. The so called "loophole" is that as long as they are not teaching religion this is considered not a violation . but it still gives money to the Church .. The portion of that money actually goes to "educate" vs furthering the Churches agenda is in question.
@ZoneTelevision So if say a school was founded by communists, then that school shouldn't be allowed to be open? You are honestly suggesting that in a business, we should limit what kind of person is allowed to run a business? What if it turned out Bill Gates donated 10% of his income to a church? would buying microsoft promote the church, therefore Bill Gates should be kicked out? No christian should run any business is what you are suggesting.
@bluefootedpig HUh? its hard to understand how you are inferring from my statement that communist, or Christians cannot run a business.
1.) To be religiously correct Catholicism is NOT a Christian religion though it declares itself as one. Read Catholic Cannon law and then juxtapose against Matthew chapters 5-7.
2.) If you understand why the framers were adamant about no religious ties to government then you would not make such statements.
@bluefootedpig 3.) The COnstitution is very clear on Church and state affairs and what is not covered in the Constitution is delineated in memos and other articles from the Founders.
In the United States, the term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state," as written in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 which reads ...
@bluefootedpig "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion" ..
MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.
WHy are vouchers Unconstitutional ? .... Because it allocates money to an organization that has a direct religious affiliation with a specific religion (even thought that religion may not be taught or discussed)
@bluefootedpig Communism isn't a religion.. its a political ideology
As for Bill Gates when Bill Gates gets his money it becomes HIS Property and thus falls under the auspices of property rights.
The Government does not and cannot withhold from individuals how they choose to spend their money (though that is changing). Donating money to a group that poses a threat to United States is another matter.
@bluefootedpig When a Government makes laws that allocate money to religious organizations (irrespective of the what the religion is or what they use the money for) this violates the Constitution. SO if our Gov provides tax dollars to one Religious organization then it shows favoritism i.e. RESPECT to that religion. By rights then ALL religious schools should get vouchers which implicates the Gov. in being complicit in subsiding religious schools providing education. FAIL.
@ZoneTelevision Your point would be valid if anywhere in the Constitution it said the government can not send funds to churches, let alone the fabled Separation of Church and State. Read the Constitution no where is there separation of Church and State. Now I don't approve of religious favoritism. There is nothing wrong with the government providing funds to religious schools, so long as government isn't telling those schools what to do and the government isn't being bias.
@ShamanMcLamie your kidding right ? .. 1.) the role of government was never to educate its public that is is pretty clear. 2.) "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" Making a LAW to provide vouchers to a religious organization is exactly that. IT is respecting an established religion through education. period. If you want to play linguistic gymnastics we can go there . but its flat out wrong.
@ZoneTelevision It is wrong but you're missing the point of the 1st amend. It was to prevent establishment of an official state religion. Giving money to a certain religion (any religion can get funding) doesn't violate that.
@jaybreak Thats not what it says Einstien .....passing a Voucher Law is passing a lawrespecting an religion not creating one Giving money from PUBLIC COFFERS TO PRIVATE NON profit is illegal and Constitutionally immoral. Period
@ZoneTelevision Your argument is not correct. They are not making a law concerning the "establishment" of a religion. They are not promoting one religion over another or forcing anyone to join a religion. There are lots of laws concerning religion.
@WillCsMom Sorry , but drafting a law that allocates PUBLIC money to an established religious organization is a clear violation of the Constitution The language in the Amendment does not say church and state. .. just because exceptions are made does not mean that its correct . .point being; many of the Constitutional laws are not being followed which is why our country is in a quagmire.
You can sugar coat it with what ever language you wish .. its still a violation.
@ShamanMcLamie NOthing wrong ? With it you are wither Historically Illiterate or just a plain fool. The Catholic church and other church's receive tax free money through contributions Tax dollars are by law not to go to non-profit organizations
When a non-profit and a Church steals my money that is supposed to be allocated for public projects and defense its wrong. When a politician accepts money from the private sector for the purpose of political gain its wrong . Sugacoat.
@ZoneTelevision You are obviously not familiar with Religious history the Vatican's ties to all countries in the form of judicial, monetary, mechanistic, and education . ..It was to be free of England and her ties to Rome... Now our country is littered with Catholic churches .. Universities and Banks. Our laws have begun to morph into something that closely resembles Catholic Cannon Law. Anything considered heresy against the church was/is to be omitted or perverted. Read.
If school vouchers can help in by increasing choice and decreasing cost, why wouldn't this help with higher institution education. When we subsidize higher education, cost goes up. Someone needs to explain to me this discrepancy. What is the difference between funding k-12 and funding college students?
@magnumsynderella assuming it is allowed to continue, we are seeing the dynamic already taking place - for-profit higher education is making large strides in providing people with alternative ways to further their education at a reasonable cost, and on a schedule that suits them. The biggest hurdle these businesses have to overcome is a perception that the quality of their education is inferior and that they are somehow "tainted" because they operate for profit.
@magnumsynderella Because parents are forced at gunpoint to send thier kids to at least k-10.
And unlike public education, most universities are basically the same quality of education. With some being really good, and some being really bad. but 98% fit into that middle ground.
@magnumsynderella So all you are doing is, like most subsidies, increasing that rate at which that product or service is consumed. Which drives down quality and increases price.
@magnumsynderella Well you can choose how to spend your money by picking your college. With k -12 the teachers union decided you need to pay public schools… K – 12 should be 100% demand whereas not everyone should go to college. K – 12 is fixed demand. More funding for higher ed = more demand thus higher cost to consumers.
@magnumsynderella Great question. the reason is where the money comes from. The higher education system is not ran on tax dollars. It is helped, but the big problem is that the loans are garenteed by the government. So the banks can fund a bad student, and won't lose a single dime, because the gov will pay. See? the banks loan the money, then the government pays them. That is what is wrong. Back 30 years, it used to be the univesity financed the education, and lost money if it wasn't paid.
@magnumsynderella cont to explain otherwise, with vouchers, each student is worth the exact same. While in college, the service is what the charge is, so students can go up in value based on what you charge them. So with this system, each student is worth X, the voucher value, then as a charter school, you must make it work with that money.
The question you should ask is "compared to what?" Going from the outright state ownership of public schools to heavily subsidized and heavily regulated private ownership is an increase in efficiency, but going from the relatively free private universities to heavily subsidized and heavily regulated private ownership is a decrease in efficiency.
I meant that in the "free Tibet"-sense, not the "free beer"-sense. I thought it would be obvious from the context, given that universities in the US today charge tuition fees.
If I were the director of a big-research project, I wouldn't hire anyone who went to a private religious high school or college. I'd want people who actually were taught evolution and science. A doctorate in any science field from a private religious school is a worthless piece of paper. Good thing I'm not a big scientific researcher because I know someone would want to sue me.
@TigerghostPictures That is rather silly. Some of the smartest people went to religious schools. So you discriminate? Do you also hate black people as well?
@bluefootedpig I'm a little disappointed that you brought race into this. Having a rational discrimination towards a religious school is in no way related to race. Education is education, and religious institutions do not teach their kids, they indoctrinate them. A person who is researching fossils who believes in his heart that the Earth is 6,000 years old is a problem and should not be tolerated in the scientific community. Our society won't progress any if schools tied to religion exist.
if religious people want to send their kids to a religious school that is their choice. the freedom to choice is what liberty is about. We need to keep that at the forefront of our minds. Keep in mind that any form of teaching can be considered indoctrination, even secularism. It depends on the POV of the observer.
The best solution is to abolish public schools completely. Let private charities, volunteer and community-based organizations run education in the free market.
Exactly. This kind of entrepreneurship is what we need, not more rules on who gets to issue which pieces of paper and when.
Let the structure of production extend all the way back into K-12, with educators in free competition, offering programs based on what kids are expected to need when they go out into the real world.
Public schools take everyone private schools don't have to thus many are left out. Plus, if rich kids went to public school the public school systems would be great.
brokenclockstudios 4 days ago
Shouldn't parents to bear the full cost of educating their child.
Lelouch21000 1 week ago
@Lelouch21000 Well, in a perfect world, yes. However, (and feel free to correct me, for this is an opinion that I have drawn on little evidence out of pretty much thin air.) I believe this would lead to greater inequality for kids born into low income families. That isn't to say that the fix for this problem must be government.
I'm just guessing, I'd like to hear a response from somebody with more empirical evidence or experience in this subject.
trevarsizemore 2 days ago
The high levels of literacy of the modern world acheived NOT by DAH HOLY INVISABLE HAND! But by the introduction of mandatory public education starting in Prussia in the late 18th century. That instititution gave Prussia its ability to unify germany into the German Empire and everyone adopted it because of its obvious success.
Europe has higher standards of education than the US, because their government invests in public education for all. The free market is not the solution for every problem.
ImperatorZor 3 weeks ago
@ImperatorZor You are really going to laud Bismark's one size fits all model? A model based on the factory & the military? A model that facilitated to the rise of nationalism, & mass state indoctrination. The prussian system was the worst thing to happen to education, we are only now just starting to getting away from. You should get it into your skull that it is not about the 'market' per se. It is about having a system that is diverse enough for innovation & local adaptation.
Malthus0 3 weeks ago
It got results, Germany industrialized very fast after the 1871 and by the eve of WW-1 had an output greater than Great Britain with a comparitively small homeland. Not because they were a master race, but because they had a well educated population that made industrialization easy and innovation possible. And you know what, it IS possible to refine away some of its more authoritarian aspects. Thats why everyone adopted it.
Nationalism had its roots in the French Revolution.
ImperatorZor 3 weeks ago
@ImperatorZor so you want to support a unionized school run by a government that throws trillions of dollars IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE into it, that right now has graduation rates that HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING SINCE 1971?
ok... good luck...
a voucher program would allow for parents to choose places where there are better test scores and such, and allow for schools to do such things... what we need is not a One Size Fits All System, we need a system where kids are where they NEED TO BE
lgmmrm 6 days ago
Public school-School set up and run by the state. Money goes to making the school work as well as possible for the maximum amount of kids.
Private School-School is set up and run by private group wanting to turn a profit. Money goes to making the school work, AND earn a profit.
The latter has a HUGE extra objective on top of it that exists. High end private schools ONLY have higher grades because they cost ALOT to get in, can invest alot more per student and can kick out disruptive kids.
ImperatorZor 3 weeks ago
Starve public schools with a broken taxation system, then declare them unworthy and offer people "choice." Well done.
bgd1968 4 weeks ago
@bgd1968 - They already get several times the money private schools do. And yet the latter still does better dollar for dollar.
StateExempt 3 weeks ago
@bgd1968 what are you talking about? who's doing this? not us! we have no control over the current system we just want to get away from it.
Ravengaurd6 3 weeks ago
I am for the separation of school and state.
pete5668 4 weeks ago 14
@pete5668 I second this movement
lgmmrm 6 days ago
I agree with the premise, but it still doesn't explain how this can really be implemented. So the school staff and parents can be even less accountable than they are now?
We might as well all go live in a hippie commune, what with all this utopian talk. I mean did someone slip some acid into every conservative's coffee when I was not looking?
Layoff the comic books, kids. They will rot your brain.
hybridmcgee 4 weeks ago
@hybridmcgee How would the staff be less accountable? The teachers will be far more accountable when the parents can choose a different school if a teacher is doing a bad job.
bake1617 4 weeks ago
@bake1617 But just up and going to a different school is not that simple. And what if the next one is as bad or worse? Eventually you could run out of options. Though I like the privatized idea, the standards would likely become more lax while they are not good as it is.
So my argument is not opposed, but the skimming/scheming approach to business we see so often these days makes me way too nervous about universally applying it to something so fundamental.
hybridmcgee 4 weeks ago
@hybridmcgee - Run out of options? You mean like the monopolized education system we already have?
StateExempt 3 weeks ago
@StateExempt Yes, exactly. I know you think we are disagreeing anyway. Though I do believe there should be some rules for businesses to operate in our community, just as I think we both agree that government should also have to follow rules and limitations.
Everyone just has so many weird perspectives about the role of government. It's always either too much, or too much. But I think the road warrior thing gets old too.
hybridmcgee 3 weeks ago
@hybridmcgee - I agree with you on rules, I think the only disagreement we have is how they should be enforced.
StateExempt 3 weeks ago
@hybridmcgee - How is school choice making teachers less accountable then the system we already have in which it is impossible to fire a teacher and students are stuck with whatever they get solely on the basis of where they live?
StateExempt 3 weeks ago
NJEA is against the subject of this video. "The Cartel" is a great documentary, and is available for viewing on netflix.
ComeOnPelican91 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from LearnLiberty
Just get rid of public schooling/Dept of Ed. Problem solved. No need for voucher schemes.
jaybreak 4 weeks ago
Thats what the government does for college it doesn't matter what college you go to the government provides loans and grants. But that dosent really work when in State tuition's 7,000 a year verses, what my parents paid per year for me to go to hight school. Including county school taxes on my parents they paid less than 300 dolars per year. Individual schools should be focused on and studied. Improving the quality of individual schools so the rest of the schools systems can see what works.
TheRhino154 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Vouchers avoid all these conflict of interest and control issues with government funding of private or religious schools. Just like financial aid for college doesn't prohibit goign to church-sponsiored schools, or allow the government to control the schools. It's because parents use the voucher to choose the school--the government does not interfere in that decision.
DMichaelAtLarge 1 month ago
Hey mam, the camera is over here...
pareody 1 month ago
(Cont'd from #2)
#3
I would love to look-into Prof. Dill's ideas as pertains to 'school choice'; however, just as a 'person-of-color' might be 'taken-aback' by an improprietous Economics prof (e.g.~ if 1 had a prof that explained Economics whilst obviously indicating his or her superiority as a 'white' person;) so do I have a problem with Prof. Dill's (or her video-processers'?) 'cartoon misandry' (unless of course, your a 'dark-skinned' minority, like at the end -- right?!?)
drochalsey 1 month ago
@drochalsey Newsflash, bub. Chinese and Indian students are wayyy smarter than American ones (white OR black; or Latin-American... or even Chinese-American.) If you want equality (even IF government public education is the way to achieve that), then that's fine. Just know you're hurting American kids, of all creeds and colours.
Jordoom777 1 month ago
@Jordoom777
I was VERY careful to NOT say anything about 'equality'. After all, we (each person on earth) are NOT equal -- but we CAN be 'fair' with each other and strive to make opportune-availability 'fair'.
In #1, I owed my down-thumb. In #2 I indicated 1 powerful (of many) shortcomings working AGAINST getting her point across & in #3, I elucidated her misandry (& its 'possible' racist leanings.)
In Re~ the above, I fail to see (other than tacitly) why you replied to me.
drochalsey 1 month ago
(Cont'd from #1)
#2
It has been often historically shown, that 1 of the subtlest tacts (& yet biggest, in effect) to exacerbate fairness among races, sexes, etc. (In Re~ education, etc.) is to destroy them in their endeavors, by minimalizing, marginalizing, trivializing & villifying, the words & deeds of those seeking said 'fairness', because those in the 'Catbird seat' are little affected by such (if at all) & so, I wish to avoid such (towards me & mine) with my next post.
(Cont'd to #3)
drochalsey 1 month ago
#1
Although I don't believe in calling attention to myself for 'negative-indicators' (such as 'thumbing-down'); simultaneously, I also do not believe in just 'thumbing-down' a video without being ready to take responsibility for this action & explain why. I therefore, find myself presently needing to explain my (what otherwise would have been 'anonymous') 'thumbing-down' of this video.
(Cont'd to #2)
drochalsey 1 month ago
Besides that competition makes everything better and cheaper. Think of the kind of TV we would have if the GOV made TV’s.
jaspony1 1 month ago
I don’t get the separation of church and state part people bring up. If 60% of people say they are religious than why can’t that 60% be able to choose a religious school for their child. What the GOV is doing, is saying if you pretend not to be religious we will give you money for your child. Everyone pays taxes, not just the non-religious. So until religious people pay no taxes, it is unfair to force them away from their religious values.
jaspony1 1 month ago
Comment removed
denisonM 1 month ago
When she states that areas with more school choice have lower cost of education, does that include what the government is assisting with? Or is this statistic just considering the parent?
GreyManny 1 month ago
Get rid of all public schools..they are dangerous nest of Socialism. Ban all public schools and let the free market and charities rule education. THe NEA is the 2nd largest (under the ABA) Lobby orgs. They are corrupt Unions organizations that need to be abolished.
doobersmanster 1 month ago 2
@doobersmanster
I am against Public schools. But, banning them would be Government control.
Just get rid of them on Federal level & let states do what ever they like I guess.
IKiLLNRapeCOMMUNISTS 1 month ago
@IKiLLNRapeCOMMUNISTS That would be fine too with me. I hate Communism also with a passion.:)
doobersmanster 1 month ago
@grecorivera941 Exactly! If states/local governments took control back by refusing federal education funding and accepting responsibility for it on their own, they would be free to educate children as best as they saw fit.
incircles36 1 month ago
@gamegeek2 I agree, although I feel one could in theory also make an arguement that teaching secularism is also unconstitutional, as it presents a particular view of the origins and truth of the world as fact. If the government is to inject itself into the education of children, any position regarding the nature of the universe/reality should be explained as such. Educating students on what religions and worldviews ARE, is very different from teaching one or another as TRUE.
incircles36 1 month ago
It is however unconstitutional to send government money to religious institutions.
gamegeek2 1 month ago
Bottom line, when ANY money comes from the government, it requires of the receiver a degree of control.
The private, religious college I attended was restricted from teaching any religion courses in a building that received partial federal funding.
I do not support the private institution's acceptance of the federal funding, but this is a prime example of what would happen on every level of education if federal funding was involved in paying for private education institutions.
incircles36 1 month ago
@incircles36 You can have a voucher system implemented locally without any federal oversight. The state and local governments just need to have the political will to pursue implementation themselves. This would clearly be a 10th amendment issue that states could stand strong on if the people demanded it.
grecorivera941 1 month ago
y u no run for president???
JoXDDFive 1 month ago
Oh cool she's from PC
hands575 1 month ago
These must be some of the smartest comments I've ever seen. I almost forgot I was at YouTube. Anyway, yeah, competition leads to lots of awesome schools.
smcgamer1 1 month ago 15
1:28 Lady, that's because private schools and charter schools don't frequent Hicktown or the Ghetto. They frequent white suburbs. Schooling in white suburbs is of a higher quality because the money is there. I sincerely doubt its because there is a wider variety of options.
Imperiused 1 month ago
I'm sick of everyone using conditionals as reasons behind principles. Principles should be on their own and as the only reason behind an advocation, because reality is ever-changing and unreliable. Though school choices rise and prices lower now, because of so many factors it could rise at any time. You can't use this as weak, unreliable support. That isn't to say that I disagree, I mostly agree with libertarian ideas, but not exclusively, ie chained to it.
BuyBenco 1 month ago
Whenever the government makes something "cheaper" it essentially means it allocates resources from one sector to another.
I can say firsthand. I grew up going to private schools all the way up until I graduated high school. Now I go to a public university and the inefficiency and bureaucracy of the system completely blew me away.
byouno93 1 month ago 3
End the Fascist Institutionalisation of our Youth!
asdfqwerty212 1 month ago 3
The other side of this coin is what happens to the public schools. When you have multiple tiers of schools, private and charter schools generally scoop up the best students thus leaving public schools with the lower income students who don't have the best academic record. These schools tend to get punitive cuts since they don't perform as well as the better funded schools predictably.
More choice is good, but you can't forget about the public schools. You have to fix the public schools too.
helios5868 1 month ago
@helios5868 Fix the public schools by phasing them out entirely. Competition results in an increasingly better product and decreasing lower prices. This is just a fact of life. We have moved a lot beyond that of a tribe, we need to stop scrambling children's brains and crushing their creativity, imagination and individuality via these kinds of environments.
regresseur 1 month ago 24
@regresseur ...there is exactly the reason why people are so hesitant to vote for Ron Paul even over the Barak-star, this universal belief that governments can do no right.
Public school exist so that democracy can exist, without education, there is no informed decision making, thus for democracy to survive, free, fact-based education must remain. How about we try fix what we have before we scrap it to potentially replace it all over again.
helios5868 1 month ago
@helios5868 If you say that people must be educated to vote or democracy will start to fail you are wrong. After the civil war, many slaves were given freedom and the right to vote. Most former slaves were uneducated and they voted anyways, yet democracy is still alive. India has a low literacy rate and is a stable democracy while Germany had a high literacy rate but still voted in Hitler.Just because someone is uneducated does not mean they do not look out for their own interests.
wiiam4 1 month ago
@wiiam4
Fun fact: Hitler was voted in not only because of his great charisma and speaking ability, but also because of policies he instated when he came into office. At the time Germany was in an assload of debt after WWI and Hitler created and improved many social systems to help the impoverished. It wasn't like people were all 'YEAH ETHNIC CLEANSING', it's highly likely that they just didn't know he was going to pull that and voted for the guy who would help them in time of need.
KaraMayonakaSora 1 month ago
@helios5868 The reason public schools can not be fixed to support a strong democracy is because the ruling class does not want them to be. They control the curriculum. What kids need to know is the inherent contradictions and failings in our countries political history and culture or stated simply, the truth and I think that is much more likely to happen in a private school that does not have to worry about law suits from ignorant disapproving parents.
grecorivera941 1 month ago
@helios5868
Public School is non sense. It is actually very poor education.
You learn very basic & often quite manipulative half truths in public school.
I have learned more from the History channel & WIkipedia in 6 months of time than from my entire Public schooling.
Public school is a joke.
IKiLLNRapeCOMMUNISTS 1 month ago 2
@regresseur
I agree you with phasing the Public schools out.
I am a Libertarian but I tend to think we need to phase in Libertarianism.
If we went striaght to Libertarianism over night it would mean sure collapse.
However slowly becoming Libertarian seems to be needed for our Nations survival.
Unlike the Big Government increases every year which only are supporting our collapse.
IKiLLNRapeCOMMUNISTS 1 month ago 2
@regresseur i agree. i would also like to see more private funding of montessori schools. they've been shown to be have excellent results in educating creative children.
it's interactive learning, that groups the kids w/ others in a similar age bracket. so once they learn something then the oldest child can teach the others. as a way to demonstrate their mastery of the material.
this is liberty learning at it's finest.
denisonM 1 month ago
Comment removed
denisonM 1 month ago
Today school choice tomorrow we can work on parents paying for their kids education instead forcing the rest of us to pick up the tab.
Berelore 1 month ago
@Berelore "...instead forcing the rest of us to pick up the tab." Please explain. Actually, please check your privilege. Are you rich, by chance? (Let's define rich as making more than $75,000/year, net.) It sounds like you are complaining about poor people who pay less in taxes (thus contributing less to public education) than you do. Another possibility is you don't have children yourself and/or you don't understand how society opporates.
TheMidwestAtheist 1 month ago
@TheMidwestAtheist
He seems to understand the part in question just fine. That is, the part where you get to send your children to school, and make him pay for it.
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 month ago
Our school system now is more like day-care, with a little random bits of 'learning' government approved 'facts'.
trick29420 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@trick29420 "Our school system now is more like day-care, with a little random bits of 'learning' government approved 'facts'."
And what would you have them learn instead? Someone else's approved 'facts'? Perhaps you'd rather them have little to no science education whatsoever from a entirely religious school...like Liberty University? Or are you thinking something else?
TheMidwestAtheist 1 month ago
Once government money starts funding private schools, government will then control control over those schools. BEWARE.
carcabe 1 month ago 32
@carcabe
They already have, though. They get to dictate what, how and whom the "private" schools get to teach, and with which teachers. Every significant innovation is pretty much prohibited by law, and most of the major failings of public schools are ordained for "private" schools by law.
And they still, somehow, regularly outperform public schools. : D
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 month ago
@carcabe Well, government already controls public schools. What you should be worried about is private schools lobbying the government for favors. (Point being, don't mistakenly think "government is the problem" when the problem is actually with corporate interests that use government as a tool.)
TheMidwestAtheist 1 month ago
@TheMidwestAtheist Government will always be used as a "tool", i.e., weapon by some against others. That's why we need government to be downsized and kept to an absolute minimum. Nothing but thuggery.
carcabe 1 month ago
@carcabe There's no such thing as government money because government doesn't make any money, only acquires it through theft and "borrowing" (debt, which is then passed on to the citizens endlessly, generation through generation). But I would agree that when govt. politicians start dumping their stolen money into something, that thing ceases being what it once was, and they will simply turn it into what they want it to be, through new laws / regulations.
regresseur 1 month ago
@carcabe Agreed. Don't want to teach that FDR's policies saved the U.S. from the Great Depression? No funding for you! As I understand it, that's why federalism has been eroded; the fed. gov't controls the purse strings. But back to the video: how about making the moral argument that you shouldn't have to pay for your neighbor's education?
kkanya 1 month ago
@carcabe How so or better yet why. Schools will have to compete to provide what parents want not what the government wants. The proposal if for parental choice not parental choice of government approved choices. The one thing the government should never allow to become private which it already has is prisons and that is going to be the pandora's box that brings down America by transforming us into a corporate police state. A profit motive to have more prisoners, longer! Hello, wake up America.
grecorivera941 1 month ago
@carcabe A worthwhile point, but the money would go to the parents, not directly to the schools.
PanicButton042 1 month ago
evidence "shows" not "show"
exposelrahc 1 month ago
Vouchers = bad .. Separation of Church and State.
Tax dollars should never go to pay for private religious schooling.
The (Catholic) Church exploits the tax loopholes and receives federal dollars (In addition to getting tax breaks) .. they make money two fold... while public education costs go up and union organized dept's tap the couffers of the state .. The public is getting robbed blind.
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@ZoneTelevision Seperation of church and state is first, not a law. It is a letter, refering to the first amendment which states that no single religion can have benefits. Unless they specify you must go to catholic, and not muslim, then it would be problem. As far as education, it violates no laws, and they are held to the same standard as public schools, providing a similar education, able to pass the same science, math, and reading exams.
bluefootedpig 1 month ago
@bluefootedpig "As far as education, it violates no laws, and they are held to the same standard as public schools,"
It does not violate education laws but it DOES violate the bias with respect to an established Religion. The so called "loophole" is that as long as they are not teaching religion this is considered not a violation . but it still gives money to the Church .. The portion of that money actually goes to "educate" vs furthering the Churches agenda is in question.
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@ZoneTelevision So if say a school was founded by communists, then that school shouldn't be allowed to be open? You are honestly suggesting that in a business, we should limit what kind of person is allowed to run a business? What if it turned out Bill Gates donated 10% of his income to a church? would buying microsoft promote the church, therefore Bill Gates should be kicked out? No christian should run any business is what you are suggesting.
bluefootedpig 1 month ago
@bluefootedpig HUh? its hard to understand how you are inferring from my statement that communist, or Christians cannot run a business.
1.) To be religiously correct Catholicism is NOT a Christian religion though it declares itself as one. Read Catholic Cannon law and then juxtapose against Matthew chapters 5-7.
2.) If you understand why the framers were adamant about no religious ties to government then you would not make such statements.
cont ..
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@bluefootedpig 3.) The COnstitution is very clear on Church and state affairs and what is not covered in the Constitution is delineated in memos and other articles from the Founders.
In the United States, the term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state," as written in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 which reads ...
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
Comment removed
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bluefootedpig "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion" ..
MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.
WHy are vouchers Unconstitutional ? .... Because it allocates money to an organization that has a direct religious affiliation with a specific religion (even thought that religion may not be taught or discussed)
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@bluefootedpig Communism isn't a religion.. its a political ideology
As for Bill Gates when Bill Gates gets his money it becomes HIS Property and thus falls under the auspices of property rights.
The Government does not and cannot withhold from individuals how they choose to spend their money (though that is changing). Donating money to a group that poses a threat to United States is another matter.
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@bluefootedpig When a Government makes laws that allocate money to religious organizations (irrespective of the what the religion is or what they use the money for) this violates the Constitution. SO if our Gov provides tax dollars to one Religious organization then it shows favoritism i.e. RESPECT to that religion. By rights then ALL religious schools should get vouchers which implicates the Gov. in being complicit in subsiding religious schools providing education. FAIL.
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@ZoneTelevision Your point would be valid if anywhere in the Constitution it said the government can not send funds to churches, let alone the fabled Separation of Church and State. Read the Constitution no where is there separation of Church and State. Now I don't approve of religious favoritism. There is nothing wrong with the government providing funds to religious schools, so long as government isn't telling those schools what to do and the government isn't being bias.
ShamanMcLamie 1 month ago
@ShamanMcLamie your kidding right ? .. 1.) the role of government was never to educate its public that is is pretty clear. 2.) "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" Making a LAW to provide vouchers to a religious organization is exactly that. IT is respecting an established religion through education. period. If you want to play linguistic gymnastics we can go there . but its flat out wrong.
ZoneTelevision 4 weeks ago
@ZoneTelevision It is wrong but you're missing the point of the 1st amend. It was to prevent establishment of an official state religion. Giving money to a certain religion (any religion can get funding) doesn't violate that.
jaybreak 4 weeks ago
@jaybreak Thats not what it says Einstien .....passing a Voucher Law is passing a lawrespecting an religion not creating one Giving money from PUBLIC COFFERS TO PRIVATE NON profit is illegal and Constitutionally immoral. Period
ZoneTelevision 4 weeks ago
@ZoneTelevision Your argument is not correct. They are not making a law concerning the "establishment" of a religion. They are not promoting one religion over another or forcing anyone to join a religion. There are lots of laws concerning religion.
WillCsMom 4 weeks ago
@WillCsMom Sorry , but drafting a law that allocates PUBLIC money to an established religious organization is a clear violation of the Constitution The language in the Amendment does not say church and state. .. just because exceptions are made does not mean that its correct . .point being; many of the Constitutional laws are not being followed which is why our country is in a quagmire.
You can sugar coat it with what ever language you wish .. its still a violation.
ZoneTelevision 4 weeks ago
@ShamanMcLamie NOthing wrong ? With it you are wither Historically Illiterate or just a plain fool. The Catholic church and other church's receive tax free money through contributions Tax dollars are by law not to go to non-profit organizations
When a non-profit and a Church steals my money that is supposed to be allocated for public projects and defense its wrong. When a politician accepts money from the private sector for the purpose of political gain its wrong . Sugacoat.
ZoneTelevision 4 weeks ago
@ZoneTelevision You are obviously not familiar with Religious history the Vatican's ties to all countries in the form of judicial, monetary, mechanistic, and education . ..It was to be free of England and her ties to Rome... Now our country is littered with Catholic churches .. Universities and Banks. Our laws have begun to morph into something that closely resembles Catholic Cannon Law. Anything considered heresy against the church was/is to be omitted or perverted. Read.
ZoneTelevision 1 month ago
@ZoneTelevision
Voucher system makes more sense.
Get rid of Public school
Voucher would be ideal just for the poor.
That would help us free up property tax inviting business stimulation & more money in people's pockets to spend.
with more people keeping their property.
It would lead to a higher quality education.
Private school is better than public school.
IKiLLNRapeCOMMUNISTS 1 month ago 2
If school vouchers can help in by increasing choice and decreasing cost, why wouldn't this help with higher institution education. When we subsidize higher education, cost goes up. Someone needs to explain to me this discrepancy. What is the difference between funding k-12 and funding college students?
magnumsynderella 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella assuming it is allowed to continue, we are seeing the dynamic already taking place - for-profit higher education is making large strides in providing people with alternative ways to further their education at a reasonable cost, and on a schedule that suits them. The biggest hurdle these businesses have to overcome is a perception that the quality of their education is inferior and that they are somehow "tainted" because they operate for profit.
gergenheimer 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella Because parents are forced at gunpoint to send thier kids to at least k-10.
And unlike public education, most universities are basically the same quality of education. With some being really good, and some being really bad. but 98% fit into that middle ground.
SquashDog01 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella So all you are doing is, like most subsidies, increasing that rate at which that product or service is consumed. Which drives down quality and increases price.
SquashDog01 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella Well you can choose how to spend your money by picking your college. With k -12 the teachers union decided you need to pay public schools… K – 12 should be 100% demand whereas not everyone should go to college. K – 12 is fixed demand. More funding for higher ed = more demand thus higher cost to consumers.
James01100011 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella Great question. the reason is where the money comes from. The higher education system is not ran on tax dollars. It is helped, but the big problem is that the loans are garenteed by the government. So the banks can fund a bad student, and won't lose a single dime, because the gov will pay. See? the banks loan the money, then the government pays them. That is what is wrong. Back 30 years, it used to be the univesity financed the education, and lost money if it wasn't paid.
bluefootedpig 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella cont to explain otherwise, with vouchers, each student is worth the exact same. While in college, the service is what the charge is, so students can go up in value based on what you charge them. So with this system, each student is worth X, the voucher value, then as a charter school, you must make it work with that money.
bluefootedpig 1 month ago
@magnumsynderella
The question you should ask is "compared to what?" Going from the outright state ownership of public schools to heavily subsidized and heavily regulated private ownership is an increase in efficiency, but going from the relatively free private universities to heavily subsidized and heavily regulated private ownership is a decrease in efficiency.
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 month ago
@PanzerDivisionBOM Nothing is free. Subsidization as it goes today = stolen money.
regresseur 1 month ago
@regresseur
I meant that in the "free Tibet"-sense, not the "free beer"-sense. I thought it would be obvious from the context, given that universities in the US today charge tuition fees.
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 month ago
If I were the director of a big-research project, I wouldn't hire anyone who went to a private religious high school or college. I'd want people who actually were taught evolution and science. A doctorate in any science field from a private religious school is a worthless piece of paper. Good thing I'm not a big scientific researcher because I know someone would want to sue me.
TigerghostPictures 1 month ago
@TigerghostPictures That is rather silly. Some of the smartest people went to religious schools. So you discriminate? Do you also hate black people as well?
bluefootedpig 1 month ago
@bluefootedpig I'm a little disappointed that you brought race into this. Having a rational discrimination towards a religious school is in no way related to race. Education is education, and religious institutions do not teach their kids, they indoctrinate them. A person who is researching fossils who believes in his heart that the Earth is 6,000 years old is a problem and should not be tolerated in the scientific community. Our society won't progress any if schools tied to religion exist.
TigerghostPictures 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
if religious people want to send their kids to a religious school that is their choice. the freedom to choice is what liberty is about. We need to keep that at the forefront of our minds. Keep in mind that any form of teaching can be considered indoctrination, even secularism. It depends on the POV of the observer.
The best solution is to abolish public schools completely. Let private charities, volunteer and community-based organizations run education in the free market.
denisonM 1 month ago
@TigerghostPictures
Exactly. This kind of entrepreneurship is what we need, not more rules on who gets to issue which pieces of paper and when.
Let the structure of production extend all the way back into K-12, with educators in free competition, offering programs based on what kids are expected to need when they go out into the real world.
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 month ago