Although the 'How to Tutor' book makes some good points, it would be easy for anyone who hasn't been educated about learning theories to passively agree with its bold statements, because they "seem" to be right. We should be aware that traditional approaches may not apply to children the same way they may have done two decades ago, and acknowledge that there have been significant changes in how learning is thought to occur, particularly in the last decade!
The nature of thought and rationality has been the same ever since Aristotle outlined formal thinking methods 2,300 years ago. What kind of changes could occur in two decades for god's sake?
Life's a bitch. Seriously, though, we do have charities, and they can take care of the poor. If they can't, well then too bad for the poor. Taxing one citizen to pay for benefits for another makes the taxed man a slave, the products of his labour being forcefully taken away and handed to another man who has done nothing to deserve them. You speak of a fair and civilized society, and yet you advocate slavery. Seems a bit contradictory, eh?
Public education isn't necessarily bad. It's generally bad in the US because it's not a political priority. In many times and places, public education is and has been of the highest quality.
Public education is theft from honest citizens, forcing them to pay for education they do not necessarily support, for children who are not their own, teaching lessons they do not believe in. It is wrong by its very premise: that one man has a right to another's life. That is why it is forever doomed to failure, no matter how "good" the education is.
Okay CrazyCarl I take your point, but under purely private education, children who just happened to be born to poor or lazy parents (not their choice) would be deprived of education. This would prejudice their chances of any success in life, at which we all only get one shot. Is that less unfair than imposing taxes, which does not infringe "one man's right to another's life" but only asks for a small part of what he produces as the price for living in a fair and civilized society?
Some of the smartest people educate themselves. But even if the poor didn't educate their kids, what in the hell gives YOU the right to take money from me by force? Just because IN YOUR OPINION education is benificial. Your a dictator in disguise, aren't you?...
I'm sorry. Half the budget of our state is committed to public education. The money our politicians spend on education just within our state, not counting our Federal "contribution" is enough per child to pay for every public school student to go to an average private school with enough left over to buy each a laptop every year.
Although the 'How to Tutor' book makes some good points, it would be easy for anyone who hasn't been educated about learning theories to passively agree with its bold statements, because they "seem" to be right. We should be aware that traditional approaches may not apply to children the same way they may have done two decades ago, and acknowledge that there have been significant changes in how learning is thought to occur, particularly in the last decade!
becj 4 years ago
The nature of thought and rationality has been the same ever since Aristotle outlined formal thinking methods 2,300 years ago. What kind of changes could occur in two decades for god's sake?
cropperb 4 years ago
Life's a bitch. Seriously, though, we do have charities, and they can take care of the poor. If they can't, well then too bad for the poor. Taxing one citizen to pay for benefits for another makes the taxed man a slave, the products of his labour being forcefully taken away and handed to another man who has done nothing to deserve them. You speak of a fair and civilized society, and yet you advocate slavery. Seems a bit contradictory, eh?
CrazyCarl15367 4 years ago
Spoken like Neal Boortz... Public Schools are horrible! Why would you trust the government (who does very little correctly) to teach your child.
P.S. If you havent.. Read Neal Boortz new book.."Somebodys gota say it"
dartbull24 4 years ago
Public education isn't necessarily bad. It's generally bad in the US because it's not a political priority. In many times and places, public education is and has been of the highest quality.
parispeter2 4 years ago
Public education is theft from honest citizens, forcing them to pay for education they do not necessarily support, for children who are not their own, teaching lessons they do not believe in. It is wrong by its very premise: that one man has a right to another's life. That is why it is forever doomed to failure, no matter how "good" the education is.
CrazyCarl15367 4 years ago
Okay CrazyCarl I take your point, but under purely private education, children who just happened to be born to poor or lazy parents (not their choice) would be deprived of education. This would prejudice their chances of any success in life, at which we all only get one shot. Is that less unfair than imposing taxes, which does not infringe "one man's right to another's life" but only asks for a small part of what he produces as the price for living in a fair and civilized society?
parispeter2 4 years ago
Some of the smartest people educate themselves. But even if the poor didn't educate their kids, what in the hell gives YOU the right to take money from me by force? Just because IN YOUR OPINION education is benificial. Your a dictator in disguise, aren't you?...
cropperb 4 years ago
I'm sorry. Half the budget of our state is committed to public education. The money our politicians spend on education just within our state, not counting our Federal "contribution" is enough per child to pay for every public school student to go to an average private school with enough left over to buy each a laptop every year.
Don't tell me it's not a political priority.
martynspeck 4 years ago