Fine, I would have no problem with the elimination of publicly funded education. And before anyone tries to convince me I'm wrong, I'll just go ahead and tell ya, you're wasting your time.

I know you said wait until after the election. But it's nice to have a little break from non stop election topics and I think this is a very interesting topic (so please don't be mad). I had a great weekend with several registered Dems, registered Republicans, and two former Republicans (including me) hanging out discussing politics, we happened to have this very same discussion.

 

One of the funny things about the Republicans were the ones with children thought education should be funded and also supported vouchers. The others were against publicly funded education as were the former Republicans. I don't think one Dem had ever even thought about it and one Libertarian leaning Dem was against public funded education.

 

I for one am against it and have been for some time. I don't have children, don't really intend on it, and it makes me mad that I have to pay a school tax to fund someone else's choice to have children. If you have a child, you should be able to pay for it's education. Plus I want the government out of basically all aspects of life. I will say I went to a public school, but there were no non public schools in my area, my mother has said many times that if there were, that's where I would have gone.

 

I could even deal with a localization of schools and not a total privatization.

Without publicly-funded education, this would be a third-world country.

I know you said wait until after the election. But it's nice to have a little break from non stop election topics and I think this is a very interesting topic (so please don't be mad). I had a great weekend with several registered Dems, registered Republicans, and two former Republicans (including me) hanging out discussing politics, we happened to have this very same discussion.

 

One of the funny things about the Republicans were the ones with children thought education should be funded and also supported vouchers. The others were against publicly funded education as were the former Republicans. I don't think one Dem had ever even thought about it and one Libertarian leaning Dem was against public funded education.

 

I for one am against it and have been for some time. I don't have children, don't really intend on it, and it makes me mad that I have to pay a school tax to fund someone else's choice to have children. If you have a child, you should be able to pay for it's education. Plus I want the government out of basically all aspects of life. I will say I went to a public school, but there were no non public schools in my area, my mother has said many times that if there were, that's where I would have gone.

 

I could even deal with a localization of schools and not a total privatization.

 

 

Are you against taxes for roads? If you're going to have a car you should be able to pay for the repairs.

 

Are you for kids not being educated?

Are you against taxes for roads? If you're going to have a car you should be able to pay for the repairs.

 

Are you for kids not being educated?

I actually think a tax for our infrastructure is mandatory. It is a matter of safety, which is basically all I want the government to do, keep me safe.

 

I think kids should definitely be educated, but don't send me the bill.

Without publicly-funded education, this would be a third-world country.

Care to elaborate?

Care to elaborate?

 

Well, literacy rates would plummet, for one.

Without publicly-funded education, this would be a third-world country.

 

:thumb:

Care to elaborate?

 

If it lacks compulsion and costs money out of pocket no one would attend. Well, there would be those who would attend, of course, but their success would be crippled by the lack of an educated workforce, an educated electorate, and the poverty and crime that would certainly consume us.

 

Now, I'm all for adding market mechanisms to education to increase its effectiveness and efficiency, but to go the laissez-faire route would cause the U.S. to collapse on itself.

Some issues of concern that I feel are relevant to the premise that FKY is proposing:

 

People in this country take public education for granted. For what I would call a significant minority, they send their kids to school because that's what the law requires. Many are lackadasical about doing even that. Isn't it sad that we have to have a laws to compel some people to send their children to school? Or to compel some students to stay in school?

 

Eductation funded by public monies involves politics. Does anything else need to be said about that? :lol:

Some issues of concern that I feel are relevant to the premise that FKY is proposing:

 

People in this country take public education for granted. For what I would call a significant minority, they send their kids to school because that's what the law requires. Many are lackadasical about doing even that. Isn't it sad that we have to have a laws to compel some people to send their children to school? Or to compel some students to stay in school?

 

Eductation funded by public monies involves politics. Does anything else need to be said about that? :lol:

 

While what you say is generally true it doesn't mean we punish the children (unable to make intelligent decisions for themselves) due to their screwed up parents.

 

Now if you want to debate how much we spend vs what we could be/should be spending then you've(collective you) got an intelligent discussion going. Otherwise...

I actually think a tax for our infrastructure is mandatory. It is a matter of safety, which is basically all I want the government to do, keep me safe.

If we ran out of nuclear physicists, engineers, and many other educated positions, it would be a matter of national security. We need thinkers.

 

Anyways, my primary argument for public education comes from the philosophy of JS Mill. He essentially said that the cultivated can not be competent judges of the uncultivated. Without education, essentially, if we have a society/economy based on supply and demand, the uneducated would be able to supply what is being demanded in a timely fashion.

 

Sounds lame, but I believe it. And for what it's worth, I believe we should have school vouchers so parents can have a choice in their kids' education. But public education is a good idea...

I have howled at the moon about this for fifteen years and noone cares.

 

MacroPublicly-funded education and public welfare work hand-in-hand.

 

This country was a world power at the turn of the century and into the 1920's, and publicly funded education was not mandatory. Everything was local option. Each community paid for its own schoolhouse. Even the state university system was local option (as it still is. Ever wonder why colleges have not been federalized?).

 

People cared enough about their children to educate them, and communities cared enough in some circumstances to pay for it. If they didn't, people starved. Why? Because they were not guaranteed a social safety net.

 

Now, people are guaranteed a social safety net. Therefore, education is no longer critical. The government will provide you with a baseline level of subsistence no matter what animalistic behavior you engage in, therefore, education is no longer critical mass. In an ironic twist, mandatory education is actually viewed as "elective."

 

I'm with FormerKY, albeit for different reasons.

While what you say is generally true it doesn't mean we punish the children (unable to make intelligent decisions for themselves) due to their screwed up parents.

 

Now if you want to debate how much we spend vs what we could be/should be spending then you've(collective you) got an intelligent discussion going. Otherwise...

 

 

That's where I was going, but wasn't sure if this was the right point in the thread. :lol:

 

I feel that the most money should be spent at the elementary level and at the higher education level. After raising two kids, both with great abilities, but each with different personal priorities and drive, I don't believe all kids should be encouraged to pursue a college education. Yes, it makes the path easier, but as my daugter says...."I don't care at all about being rich. I want to be able to pay my bills, and enjoy my job. I don't want to "be" anything." (i.e. doctor, etc).

 

I pushed her and pushed her and she was miserable throughout her high school years, because I wanted her to go to college. I really do regret that.

Here's my take...Why do children go to school? The answer is easy. So they can succeed in life, and create a better life for themselves. Fair enough, but why do tax payers have to pay for it?

 

Here's a comparison that you guys may find silly, but I liken it too...If I won the lottery tomorrow, my life would improve drastically. I have to pay for the opportunity to do so though by purchasing the ticket. Kids go to school to improve their lives, so shouldn't they have to pay for it too? I mean a kid can go to school and never amount to anything, just like you could buy a ticket and lose. They're both games of chance if you ask me.

Here's my take...Why do children go to school? The answer is easy. So they can succeed in life, and create a better life for themselves. Fair enough, but why do tax payers have to pay for it?

 

Here's a comparison that you guys may find silly, but I liken it too...If I won the lottery tomorrow, my life would improve drastically. I have to pay for the opportunity to do so though by purchasing the ticket. Kids go to school to improve their lives, so shouldn't they have to pay for it too? I mean a kid can go to school and never amount to anything, just like you could buy a ticket and lose. They're both games of chance if you ask me.

What if the parents can't afford it? The kids are automatically screwed. I understand that logic for college but this country would be exponentially worse off if education wasn't publicly funded.