Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 07:41:47PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Christopher Nelson wrote:
> > The same reason you should pay taxes for roads you don't drive
> > on--because at all stages of life having an educated workforce benifits
> > you, just as it benifits you for people (eg utility companies) to drive
> > on roads you particularly don't use. Or would you rather not pay your
> > doctor to pass high school anatomy and biology?
>
> That's all well and good except for one problem. I can tell when the
> roads aren't working. My suspension goes to hell. I can convince other
> people of the same by pointing to my crappy suspension.
>
> I also can tell when the public school system isn't working. But help me
> if I try to convince others of that! The key word here is an educated public
> is a benefit. I do not believe that is what public schooling is offering in
> the least. As one poster said they believed they are educated in spite of the
> public school system. I believe the same thing.
I believe I was educated through the public school system. Apparently
we inherently differ on the quality of schooling that goes on, so more
words would accomplish little.
> > As to the free--I don't plan on having children before I can afford
> > them, but that doesn't help the middle class who can't afford most
> > private schools (the ones I've seen advertised aren't cheap), but
> > can otherwise afford to raise children in a decent environment. Do you
> > purport that you must be wealthy to raise children, or just well enough
> > off?
>
> You're also pricing against a limited market. If the market were more
> open then prices would fall as more would enter the market. On the flip side
> if the parents aren't paying for public schooling via taxes one would presume
> the money they save there could be applied to private schooling?
It could be, but a more salient question might be, would it be applied
to private schooling? There are people I know who despite the evidence
they should, don't spend in retirement funds, etc., and probably would
buy an extra case of beer instead of paying their kid's tuition.
> BTW, just curious, have you compared private schooling to public schooling
> when it comes to cost per pupil? The last time I checked (Sacramento, late
> 90s) private schooling was cheaper per pupil.
I have looked at private school costs in curiosity, but never really in
the cost of public schools per pupil. Care to point me to where I could
find that statistic? (I'm in California now, so the same type place
you looked should work)
> > Sure you can. Nothing's forcing you to have your kids in public
> > schools. And shopping around for a good public school district is part
> > of being a responsible parent if you can't afford/don't like private
> > school.
>
> A good public school district. Which implies one can purchase a home in a
> good district. Or do you believe only the wealthy can obtain a decent
> education for their children?
I lived in a good public school district with cheap housing, albeit in
Kentucky where everything's cheaper, but it was still not one of the more
expensive places we could have lived there.
> > Plus, she was blatantly violating the schools policy (based on
> > the secretary of the Department of Education) that you cannot teach
> > religious tenets as matters of fact in the public school system.
>
> Now if we could only get political beliefs out of the school system and
> get back to basics.
I feel like I'm missing the point, but in case it's teaching political
tenets as fact: on that I think we squarely agree. I've not heard people
complaining about it, but it would be equally as reprehensible as
religion
--
Christopher Nelson -- chris@cavein.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A memorandum is written not to inform the reader, but to protect the
writer. -- Dean Acheson
Reply to: