Public education, yes or no?

Dan.... · #1 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 08:29 AM

Should the taxpayers (whether from property taxes, income tax, sales tax, etc...) be responsible for providing for public education?

Here are the options above, but more fully expounded:

1. Yes - all children should be required to attend. -Education is the responsibility of the state. All parents should be held legally accountable (criminal sanctions apply) to see that their children attend public education.

2. Yes - funded by local taxes, and fed funding -This is the status quo. All tax payers at local, state and federal levels are responsible to provide for the public education system, although, individual households may choose to provide other means (yet still must pay their taxes).

3. Same as above but with no Federal revenues. (All taxpayers at the local (and/or state levels) must contribute).

4. Yes - but funded only by participants - Public schools should be overseen by the public sector and provided for through taxes. However, if the household chooses other means for providing for their children's education, they should become exempt by some means (e.g., by tax credits).

5. No - ed. is private sector, no gvrnmnt oversight. Education should be provided for completely in the private sector, without government (local, state and federal) oversight. (The private schools are liable to the government only in the protection of the rights of the citizens, eg., no discrimination). The various schools are fully funded by those who send their children to the school, and hence, the schools are accountable to their customers (i.e., the parents).

6. No -same as above option, but w/gvrnmnt oversight. Private sector, but the local governments should exercise some say in educational standards.

7. No - homeschooling is the only option. -Self explanatory.

8. Other, please expound.

Okay, I hope I covered everything (but I'm sure I missed something)please pick one and expound on it.

Theoretical · #2 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 08:40 AM

I pick option 5. Even in a Christian government, education is the responsibility of the parents, with the church and private entities needing to be the ones to provide charity funding. Government education, even in the very best government, will still have a dangerous degree of influence over the children's hearts and minds.

LadyFlynt · #3 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 08:45 AM

Because of the variances within the Christian community, I would not be able to agree with Scott in the case of a "Christian Government".

#5

North Jersey Baptist · #4 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 08:54 AM

I voted for #5 but realize that answer does not address the inability of certain segments of the population to afford a formal education for their children. We homeschool but not everyone does or is convinced in that area. The fact is that majority of children in the United States are products of the public school system. My answer is more of a Polly Anna wish.

Theoretical · #5 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyFlynt

Because of the variances within the Christian community, I would not be able to agree with Scott in the case of a "Christian Government".

#5

That's a good point. On further reflection, I agree with you, so I edited my post.

toddpedlar · #6 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BaptistInCrisis

I voted for #5 but realize that answer does not address the inability of certain segments of the population to afford a formal education for their children. We homeschool but not everyone does or is convinced in that area. The fact is that majority of children in the United States are products of the public school system. My answer is more of a Polly Anna wish.

I'm not sure whether the inability of certain segments of the population to afford a formal education for their children is something that needs to be considered in the decision about what kind of educational system is proper. Is formal education somehow a "basic human right?" Certainly this is what the establishment says is the case... but I'm not sure I could construct an argument in favor of such a position.

Beth Ellen Nagle · #7 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:10 AM

#5 and I agree with Mr. Brown. I plan to homeschool and co-op with other homeschooling families.

jsup · #8 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:12 AM

#5. Even though I support homeschooling whole-heartedly, there are some people that can't or shouldn't be the teachers of education to their children. The government has no place in education, that should be the responsibilities of the families to oversee.

Dan.... · #9 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:14 AM

#5.

To me it comes back to the question of whether the governments (whether local, state or federal) are charity organizations. Charity is a good thing, but it should not be forced on the taxpayer.

Not only, but as a taxpayer, I am being forced to fund the teaching of philosophical views that I consider unacceptable. (I put this in the same category as government funding for abortion. I should not have to pay for abortions, nor should I have to pay to have children taught immoral philosophies).

As for the expense of paying for private education, I note that I pay approx $3200 per year to the local school district (via property tax). That is not to mention whatever I pay in income taxes for education. This I have been paying long before my children are of school age, and probably, will be paying long after. I also note that private education costs typically start between $2500 and up per student:

Link here

Link here

...if that $3200+ in education tax were still in our pockets (where it should be), maybe we'd be more able to afford private education.

Note the following article in which local private educators were more efficient per student than local public educators:

Link here

There are different price tags at various schools, just as there are different price tags at various auto dealerships, or different grades of fuel at a gas station. You can pay for an 87 octane education for your child, or a 92 octane education.

In the private sector, the schools answer to the customer, i.e., the parent. Those schools with higher standards have a draw to the parent that schools with lower standards may not have. If a school wants to stay in business, they will figure out how to balance their quality of education with the price tag.

LadyFlynt · #10 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theoretical

That's a good point. On further reflection, I agree with you, so I edited my post.

Theoretical · #11 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:28 AM

LadyFlynt · #12 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:43 AM

Also on those that can't afford it...

1) there are many ways to homeschool for less than it cost to provide clothes and paper for the child to attend public school

2) it is amazing how much people "can't afford" and yet, their children have name brand clothing and every electronic game equipment there is (I saw this happen in E. St. L....however, there are those that truely have nothing)

3) Charity should start with people, not the government. Churches can start schools without insisting on outrageous fees.

4) Communities used to start schools and provide for their teacher's expenses.

5) Granted everyone gets what they can afford...but amazingly, we've had scientists come from uneducated slavery, presidents come from homeschooling and borrowed books, bums/non-thinkers/criminals come out of the "best education money could buy". I've seen people that are well-off, some that have millions, that never moved past the eighth grades...some with enough money to buy a farm, their own personal combines and other impliments, housing, and even new vehicles that many here have only drooled over...bought outright and by the age of 18-21. All of the above have come out of public and private sectors. Therefore, I don't place much weight the price of the education, but rather upon the educator and the student, as well as their ability to combine efforts.

Southern Presbyterian · #13 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

I'm not sure whether the inability of certain segments of the population to afford a formal education for their children is something that needs to be considered in the decision about what kind of educational system is proper. Is formal education somehow a "basic human right?" Certainly this is what the establishment says is the case... but I'm not sure I could construct an argument in favor of such a position.

Everyone should be educated to the degree that their abilities, life's calling, and pocketbook allow.

Semper Fidelis · #14 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:12 AM

Where's the option for: As long as my kids are educated they can send all the pagan kids with wicked parents into the factory to work

blhowes · #15 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:13 AM

I selected the last option, Other, please expound. I'm not against public education, per se, and I think it should be available to any child. They shouldn't be required to attend public schools, but they should have that option.

I think its a good idea for the government to have some oversight over private schools, and even home-schools, though minimally. I don't think its valid to assume that just because a child goes to public schools that they're receiving a bad education, nor do I think its valid to assume that just because a child goes to a private school or is homeschooled that they're receiving a good education. In public schools, children have to take MCAS tests every few years to show that the children are learning their math, english, science, etc. properly, and that their teachers are doing a good job teaching. Requiring this of private schools I don't think would be a bad idea.

I think there should be more of a level playing field for parents to choose between public/private schooling. Parents should be given the option of applying whatever money that they've paid (through taxes) towards private education if they so choose.

LadyFlynt · #16 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:16 AM

Bob, so you believe that education is necessary to survival and the government should make it mandatory (yes, they already have, I know)? You don't see this as a private issue?

blhowes · #17 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyFlynt

Bob, so you believe that education is necessary to survival and the government should make it mandatory (yes, they already have, I know)? You don't see this as a private issue?

I think its a private issue to some extent, which is why I think parents should have the option, and not be required to send their children to public schools. To what extent its a private issue, I'm not sure. Should parents have the option of not educating their children (other than teaching them the scriptures) at all, if that's their choice?

mangum · #18 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blhowes

I selected the last option, Other, please expound. I'm not against public education, per se, and I think it should be available to any child. They shouldn't be required to attend public schools, but they should have that option.

I think its a good idea for the government to have some oversight over private schools, and even home-schools, though minimally. I don't think its valid to assume that just because a child goes to public schools that they're receiving a bad education, nor do I think its valid to assume that just because a child goes to a private school or is homeschooled that they're receiving a good education. In public schools, children have to take MCAS tests every few years to show that the children are learning their math, english, science, etc. properly, and that their teachers are doing a good job teaching. Requiring this of private schools I don't think would be a bad idea.

I think there should be more of a level playing field for parents to choose between public/private schooling. Parents should be given the option of applying whatever money that they've paid (through taxes) towards private education if they so choose.

Quote:

Requiring this of private schools I don't think would be a bad idea.

Well, then, they wouldn't be 'Private' anymore now would they? What would they then become? Oh, subservient to a lawbreaking Centralized State.

Doublethink. See 1984.

Anyone here read the Communist Manifesto?

LadyFlynt · #19 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:39 AM

Too true, Mangum...unfortunately some states refuse to see homeschooling for what it is...private education. Oh and they do require testing of private school students.

Yep...no freedom here.

toddpedlar · #20 (**permalink**) 07-20-2007, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blhowes

I think its a good idea for the government to have some oversight over private schools, and even home-schools, though minimally.

Home schools? Can you explain how you've come to this view?

Quote:

I don't think its valid to assume that just because a child goes to public schools that they're receiving a bad education, nor do I think its valid to assume that just because a child goes to a private school or is homeschooled that they're receiving a good education. In public schools, children have to take MCAS tests every few years to show that the children are learning their math, english, science, etc. properly, and that their teachers are doing a good job teaching. Requiring this of private schools I don't think would be a bad idea.

Please, Bob, this is really surprising... can you explain more why this is your view? Why should the federal government have any right at all to dictate anything about private schools - and home schools? What would the purpose of such oversight be?