Yes they should and school vouchers are one solution.
New York in particular needs to come up with a system of taxation where everyone pays their fair share rather than property owners shouldering the burden.
Parents already do have an alternative to the public school system, it's called private schools! Yes, they do have tuition costs, but as a parent you have the right and responsibility to make choices and sacrifices for your children.
Do you really NEED cable television, to purchase coffee, to eat out, to buy a prestigious vehicle?
Don't forget the option all parents have that allows perfect oversight of the education of their children... The option that many (including us) are already using:
Homeschooling!
I personally know of hundreds of kids in the county who are being educated at home, or in homeschool co-ops...
If real alternatives to public education were readily available and affordable to all, how would we guarantee our kindergartners would get sex education, that revisionist history would be taught, and that any alternatives to evolution would be mocked and trivialized? Liberals are pro-choice, as long as it's their choice
The public school system only continues to exist in order to protect itself by indoctrinating children into the idea that they must follow the guidelines and get a college degree so they can be a part of the system and indoctrinate the next generation. It's all about the values the state and the educational "illuminati" deem important. To call it anything else is completely disingenuous. I'm all for education and all against civic indoctrination. We can help our children to learn voluntarily and we can establish institutes of higher learning through association with each other and the government can stop seizing people's money in order to fund a grossly inefficient system of schools that don;t do a very good job of educating in general.
For reference:
Should parents have alternatives to public schools? Yes. ...And they do. Even within the shallow economics of rural Western New York there are private schools and home-schools.
Should private schools receive public funding?
In some utopian dream-world (that does not exist anywhere nearby), yes. In the real world? No.
New York State has billions of dollars invested in real estate, infrastructure and bureaucracy devoted to public education. The same can be said for any of the fifty states. In the current economic climate, many individual schools/districts are struggling to remain financially viable. To further underfund the existing public education system by siphoning public money to private, alternative schools (especially for-profit schools) would only exacerbate the situation. Given the rarefied nature of education dollars, how thin can those dollars be spent in any effective manner?
The criticism aimed at public schools falls within one of four categories: those concerned with the quality of THEIR children's education, those concerned with the cost of education vis-a-vis their tax bill, those whose narrow lens focuses on socio-political aspects and those who see financial opportunities, competing with public schools.
As a taxpayer, within the context of the current status of public education, I disregard all but the first group, parents eager for their children to receive an education. Under the circumstances, existing public schools/districts, ready-willing-able to serve children, where-ever they live, what-ever their means or ability; I see no urgency so overwhelming as to hinder those public schools in fulfilling their missions.
The REAL alternative is getting involved in public education. Nothing operates in a vacuum. School districts have local governance for a reason. Parents who are displeased with the quality of education in their local school should follow through on their complaints utilizing the avenues available.
I agree that the mode of taxation is inappropriate. Real estate value should not be a determinant for school funding. It's neither fair to homeowners nor is it fair to districts located in economically depressed settings. In New York there are 'rich districts' and 'poor districts.' Those designations should not impose disparity in the QUALITY of education offered in either setting.
I DO agree that school taxes and tuition should be tax deductible. ...And I DO suggest that we resist offering tax deferrals to the very base that SHOULD be the predominant source of school funding.
Just now read the article you referenced Howard. Sorry, voted and spouted first. The author is very enlightened. Education is about nothing less than the molding of a student. Which is of course absolutely wrong. Individuals learn and develop differently, to put children into a rigid, structured system and forcing them to become a "good" citizen (I call them sheeple) is so counter productive to imagination and creativity. We, as a society need to celebrate our individuality and not reward conformity.
"What is at stake is nothing less than the very concept of what it
means to live and thrive as a human being. Must people be con-
trolled and coerced from the cradle by enormous political bureau-
cracies with preset agendas on who may teach and how, what we
must learn and when?"
Kevin Ryan
Emeritus Professor of Education
Director, Center for the Advancement of Ethics and Character
Boston University
writing the preface to Rothbard's "Education: Free and Compulsory" which I linked to above. Great read and brilliant
"In the current economic climate, many individual schools/districts are struggling to remain financially viable."
Because the "ed mafia" has proclaimed that all schools must have this fad funded and that new shiny bauble paid for. They have demanded all sorts of non-education spending in the name of education. We spend way more than we should have to for a way inferior eduction result than much of the world does, because of politics and moronic fad worship by our educators.
Deny as you will, but show a random teen or twenty-something a series of polysyllabic words and expect hilarious results due to the fad of "sight reading" which has been embraced by the "ed mafia" as being an improvement in education. Never have there been such a bunch of suckers as educators.
Yes they should and school
Yes they should and school vouchers are one solution.
New York in particular needs to come up with a system of taxation where everyone pays their fair share rather than property owners shouldering the burden.
Parents already do have an
Parents already do have an alternative to the public school system, it's called private schools! Yes, they do have tuition costs, but as a parent you have the right and responsibility to make choices and sacrifices for your children.
Do you really NEED cable television, to purchase coffee, to eat out, to buy a prestigious vehicle?
Don't forget the option all
Don't forget the option all parents have that allows perfect oversight of the education of their children... The option that many (including us) are already using:
Homeschooling!
I personally know of hundreds of kids in the county who are being educated at home, or in homeschool co-ops...
I agree with Mr. Richmond.
I agree with Mr. Richmond. You should be allowed vouchers.
If real alternatives to
If real alternatives to public education were readily available and affordable to all, how would we guarantee our kindergartners would get sex education, that revisionist history would be taught, and that any alternatives to evolution would be mocked and trivialized? Liberals are pro-choice, as long as it's their choice
Until and unless there are
Until and unless there are vouchers and/or widespread charter schools, there really isn't choice.
The public school system only
The public school system only continues to exist in order to protect itself by indoctrinating children into the idea that they must follow the guidelines and get a college degree so they can be a part of the system and indoctrinate the next generation. It's all about the values the state and the educational "illuminati" deem important. To call it anything else is completely disingenuous. I'm all for education and all against civic indoctrination. We can help our children to learn voluntarily and we can establish institutes of higher learning through association with each other and the government can stop seizing people's money in order to fund a grossly inefficient system of schools that don;t do a very good job of educating in general.
For reference:
http://mises.org/daily/2937/
http://mises.org/document/2689/Education-Free-and-Compulsory
Should parents have
Should parents have alternatives to public schools? Yes. ...And they do. Even within the shallow economics of rural Western New York there are private schools and home-schools.
Should private schools receive public funding?
In some utopian dream-world (that does not exist anywhere nearby), yes. In the real world? No.
New York State has billions of dollars invested in real estate, infrastructure and bureaucracy devoted to public education. The same can be said for any of the fifty states. In the current economic climate, many individual schools/districts are struggling to remain financially viable. To further underfund the existing public education system by siphoning public money to private, alternative schools (especially for-profit schools) would only exacerbate the situation. Given the rarefied nature of education dollars, how thin can those dollars be spent in any effective manner?
The criticism aimed at public schools falls within one of four categories: those concerned with the quality of THEIR children's education, those concerned with the cost of education vis-a-vis their tax bill, those whose narrow lens focuses on socio-political aspects and those who see financial opportunities, competing with public schools.
As a taxpayer, within the context of the current status of public education, I disregard all but the first group, parents eager for their children to receive an education. Under the circumstances, existing public schools/districts, ready-willing-able to serve children, where-ever they live, what-ever their means or ability; I see no urgency so overwhelming as to hinder those public schools in fulfilling their missions.
The REAL alternative is getting involved in public education. Nothing operates in a vacuum. School districts have local governance for a reason. Parents who are displeased with the quality of education in their local school should follow through on their complaints utilizing the avenues available.
I agree that the mode of taxation is inappropriate. Real estate value should not be a determinant for school funding. It's neither fair to homeowners nor is it fair to districts located in economically depressed settings. In New York there are 'rich districts' and 'poor districts.' Those designations should not impose disparity in the QUALITY of education offered in either setting.
I DO agree that school taxes and tuition should be tax deductible. ...And I DO suggest that we resist offering tax deferrals to the very base that SHOULD be the predominant source of school funding.
Just now read the article you
Just now read the article you referenced Howard. Sorry, voted and spouted first. The author is very enlightened. Education is about nothing less than the molding of a student. Which is of course absolutely wrong. Individuals learn and develop differently, to put children into a rigid, structured system and forcing them to become a "good" citizen (I call them sheeple) is so counter productive to imagination and creativity. We, as a society need to celebrate our individuality and not reward conformity.
"What is at stake is nothing less than the very concept of what it
means to live and thrive as a human being. Must people be con-
trolled and coerced from the cradle by enormous political bureau-
cracies with preset agendas on who may teach and how, what we
must learn and when?"
Kevin Ryan
Emeritus Professor of Education
Director, Center for the Advancement of Ethics and Character
Boston University
writing the preface to Rothbard's "Education: Free and Compulsory" which I linked to above. Great read and brilliant
"In the current economic
"In the current economic climate, many individual schools/districts are struggling to remain financially viable."
Because the "ed mafia" has proclaimed that all schools must have this fad funded and that new shiny bauble paid for. They have demanded all sorts of non-education spending in the name of education. We spend way more than we should have to for a way inferior eduction result than much of the world does, because of politics and moronic fad worship by our educators.
Deny as you will, but show a random teen or twenty-something a series of polysyllabic words and expect hilarious results due to the fad of "sight reading" which has been embraced by the "ed mafia" as being an improvement in education. Never have there been such a bunch of suckers as educators.