Religious education, Public Education

[Pahoran]

how many times it need to be repeated. School funding comes from a .03 in Arizona, in Texas school funding comes from property tax, in Utah 85% of school funding comes from income tax. I a person in any of those states is not paying the tax which is designated to fund school that person has not claim

That's a very narrow view. An alternative view is to say that the several states choose to fund compulsory, and ostenstibly "free," education from the revenue streams that seem most appropriate to their needs. If there was a shortfall in that particular revenue stream, they would make it up elsewhere. The decision is first made to fund public schools, and only secondly to choose a particular source of funds.

But the fact remains that all of the states fund public schools, and require children to attend them, or a state-approved alternative.

Thus, it seems that a truly [small l] "liberal" view would be to say that a parent ought to be entitled to apply the state education funding to their children, not according to what they contributed, but according to what the state would allocate were the children to attend the school the state had designated.

The king decreed: "Peasants, We command that you shall send your children to school!"

And a bold peasant replied: "If it please Your Majesty, we would like to choose the schools our children attend."

Then said the king: "Out of the plenitude of Our royal beneficence, We shall fund the schools to which you may send your children!"

The peasant, his knees knocking, replied: "But Your Majesty's royal beneficence is in turn funded by the taxes collected from us: if not directly from our earnings, then indirectly from the buying and selling of our livestock, our quaffing of ale at the alehouses, and the tolls we pay for the use of the king's highway."

Then the king thundered: "Oaf! How dare you question Our right to collect such taxes as may please Us!"

The peasant replied: "It's not that we're not grateful for the chance to fund Your Majesty's royal lifestyle -- not to mention the growing retinue of lazy courtiers -- but we just think that since it was our money to start with, then mayhap we might like to choose where it is spent?"

The king thought a moment. This was an intelligent peasant, and his arguments made sense. There was only one thing to be done. "Off with his head!" he commanded.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Tarski]

While I agree with this in principle (and this is something Frankenstein doesn't seem to understand), if a gov't is no longer representing the people, they are essentially stealing. They spend money on huge amounts of garbage for special interests. In that sense, they are taking money that doesn't belong to them, e.g. spending millions to follow insane and self-defeating rules set by the teacher's union.

Nothing is stopping us from voting in people that will dismantle the tax system. Nothing except us that is. The majority apparently votes for people who think there should be both taxes and public social programs such as public education etc. The only real differences amoung the majority of elected officials concerns what we should spend tax revenue on. Even Reagan raised taxes.

Once most people get elected and become familiar with the various problems and needs around the country, they inevitably see the need for taxes and the value of some social programs especially for the poor, disadvantaged, sick, old, handicapped and children. Taxes also pay for roads -roads that even separatist nuts drive on. Taxes pay for the inspection and mandated quality control of our meat and dairy (the history of this is quite revealing and proves that industry does not regulate itself)

Appealing to people's hate of paying taxes is like appealing to a child's desire to avoid a bath. It is sheer demagoguery.

Most complaining about taxes and the evils of Uncle Sam is based on simplistic and often selfish thinking or on scary talk injected into discussion by corporate voices. Intelligent criticisms and concerns about taxes, spending and social programs exist but one rarely hears them in cyberspace or on the street.

Frankly, I would like to hear more about the claim that many corporations such as GE or ExxonModile often end up not paying any taxes. This would be disturbing if true.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081102324.html

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/node/8816

[JDMordecai]

Really, what the school voucher debate comes down to is the this. The goal is to educate children. As a society, we have decided that the government should fund the education of the poor. (Of course, we also fund the education of the rich when they choose government schools.) The question is, does the government also have to provide the service, or should it be outsourced when it can be done more efficiently and effectively by private entities? That is the question that Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman asked in the 1950s, and the debate still rages.

The Washington DC Opportunity Scholarship program provides a concrete example. Washington DC has some of the highest per-pupil funding in the country, yet its schools are some of the lowest performing, not to mention the most dangerous. It was decided that low-income parents of students in failing schools could take even a portion of that funding to cover the tuition of safe and effective private schools. It took a bipartisan effort to pass legislation to make that possible. Despite very positive results, the Obama administration caved to union pressure and chose to discontinue the program (despite the fact that many intelligent Democrats supported it):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/25/AR2009012501816.html

Luckily, Republicans in Congress fought to bring it back:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/apr/11/school-choice-returns-dc/?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4da34e4e66510000,0

It is strange that opponents treat the idea of school vouchers as a dangerous experiment because many successful voucher programs exist in the United States (Town Tuitioning--another name for voucher--programs in Vermont and Maine date back to 1869 and 1873) and abroad:

http://www.heartland.org/publications/school%20reform/article/9904/Voucher_Programs_Around_the_World.html

For more research, see the work of the Friedman Foundation, Paul E. Peterson, and Terry Moe (among others):

http://www.edchoice.org/About-Us/Our-Founders.aspx

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/about/faculty-staff-directory/paul-peterson

http://politicalscience.stanford.edu/faculty/moe.html

Research shows that although most American parents realize there is a problem with American education, they falsely believe that their own children's school is effective. The first step is to overcome that bias. New legislation in Utah, which grades schools according to achievement and progress, allows parents to see the performance of their children's schools in very simple terms (A-F grades). Such legislation may cause parents to rethink the failure of traditional government schools and the importance of greater school choice. Of course, parents should also be concerned about the behavior and morals found in their children's schools...

[semlogo]

How many times do I have to repeat this: if you can't afford it, you don't have a choice.

I never figured you for a left-winger Mordecai. Good on you!

[Nathair/|\]

Really, what the school voucher debate comes down to is the this. The goal is to educate children. As a society, we have decided that the government should fund the education of the poor. (Of course, we also fund the education of the rich when they choose government schools.) The question is, does the government also have to provide the service, or should it be outsourced when it can be done more efficiently and effectively by private entities? That is the question that Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman asked in the 1950s, and the debate still rages.

The Washington DC Opportunity Scholarship program provides a concrete example. Washington DC has some of the highest per-pupil funding in the country, yet its schools are some of the lowest performing, not to mention the most dangerous. It was decided that low-income parents of students in failing schools could take even a portion of that funding to cover the tuition of safe and effective private schools. It took a bipartisan effort to pass legislation to make that possible. Despite very positive results, the Obama administration caved to union pressure and chose to discontinue the program (despite the fact that many intelligent Democrats supported it):

http://www.washingto...9012501816.html

Luckily, Republicans in Congress fought to bring it back:

http://www.washingto...34e4e66510000,0

It is strange that opponents treat the idea of school vouchers as a dangerous experiment because many successful voucher programs exist in the United States (Town Tuitioning--another name for voucher--programs in Vermont and Maine date back to 1869 and 1873) and abroad:

http://www.heartland..._the_World.html

For more research, see the work of the Friedman Foundation, Paul E. Peterson, and Terry Moe (among others):

http://www.edchoice....r-Founders.aspx

http://www.hks.harva...y/paul-peterson

http://politicalscie...aculty/moe.html

Research shows that although most American parents realize there is a problem with American education, they falsely believe that their own children's school is effective. The first step is to overcome that bias. New legislation in Utah, which grades schools according to achievement and progress, allows parents to see the performance of their children's schools in very simple terms (A-F grades). Such legislation may cause parents to rethink the failure of traditional government schools and the importance of greater school choice. Of course, parents should also be concerned about the behavior and morals found in their children's schools...

For 3 3/4 years, I worked at a private correctional facility. We were successful because we could do the job more effectively, more safely and at a lower cost than the state run facility. Schools could be the same way. A private company has to compete effectively. Government agencies all too often have a monopoly.

[Mordecai]

I never figured you for a left-winger Mordecai. Good on you!

Don't get too excited. At the federal level, I'm pretty much full on libertarian, or perhaps more accurately described as a hardcore Constitutional conservative. It's only at state levels, where I can sometimes come across as a lefty.

[thesometimesaint]

frankenstein:

I disagree. The person without children still profits from increase in the standard of living that comes from an educated electorate.

In general the better education one has the higher earning potential of that individual. The better quality of home they can buy. Thus increasing everyone's standard of living.

Also as any vacant house in the neighborhood decreases the value of the overall neighborhood. The undereducated tend not to buy the better homes, and have a greater potential for loosing that home due to unemployment and/or underemployment.

[Mordecai]

Research shows that... most American parents... falsely believe that their own children's school is effective...

emphasis added

This is the problem, bro'. People think all is well in zion, but if you look at how we are comparing to other nations, and you look at how poorly prepared our kids are for skilled vocations, it's just not happening.

Washington DC has some of the highest per-pupil funding in the country, yet its schools are some of the lowest performing, not to mention the most dangerous. It took a bipartisan effort to pass legislation to make [a limited voucher system in Washington DC] possible:

EARLY SURVEYS of D.C. parents... showed many of them liked the program because they believed their children were in safe schools. Over time... their satisfaction has deepened to include an appreciation for small class sizes, rich curricula and positive change in their sons and daughters. Above all, what parents most value is the freedom to choose where their children go to school...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/25/AR2009012501816.html

emphasis added

...opponents treat the idea of school vouchers as a dangerous experiment [but] many successful voucher programs exist in the United States (Town Tuitioning--another name for voucher--programs in Vermont and Maine date back to 1869 and 1873) and abroad:

http://www.heartland.org/publications/school%20reform/article/9904/Voucher_Programs_Around_the_World.html

For more research, see the work of the Friedman Foundation, Paul E. Peterson, and Terry Moe (among others):

http://www.edchoice.org/About-Us/Our-Founders.aspx

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/about/faculty-staff-directory/paul-peterson

http://politicalscience.stanford.edu/faculty/moe.html

Anyway, I wanted to highlight this stuff, because my bro', JD, knows his stuff. I sincerely hope people read this, because it's really important for the future of our country. JD wrote some other useful and important stuff, particularly, information on legislative changes to how the state deals with Utah schools, so you might click on the arrow immediately left of where it says "JDMordecai wrote."

[mtomm]

The problem I'm having at our public schools is that my children are being indoctrinated with right-wing rhetoric with which I disagree. I hope they are hearing enough dissent at home to question what's being taught at school.

When I look at my schooling alternatives: homeschool, I really appreciate having public school! Some of us don't live in areas where there are a lot of options. I always wondered where I'd use those school vouchers they want us so desperately to have.

My 17-year old has figured out that church/seminary/primary is indoctrination. I've taught him that it's okay as long as he has his eyes and mind open.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The problem I'm having at our public schools is that my children are being indoctrinated with right-wing rhetoric with which I disagree. I hope they are hearing enough dissent at home to question what's being taught at school.

When I look at my schooling alternatives: homeschool, I really appreciate having public school! Some of us don't live in areas where there are a lot of options. I always wondered where I'd use those school vouchers they want us so desperately to have.

My 17-year old has figured out that church/seminary/primary is indoctrination. I've taught him that it's okay as long as he has his eyes and mind open.

Right wing rheotric? Did you mean to say left wing?

What specifically do you object to your kids being taught? Just curious.

[mtomm]

Right wing rheotric? Did you mean to say left wing?

What specifically do you object to your kids being taught? Just curious.

No, I really meant right-wing. Yep, I'm a mormon and I'm a liberal.

I specifically object to the government teacher teaching that the Republican/conservative way of governing is the only correct way. And the point being that I just get sick and tired of people claiming that the liberals have taken over the schools when in reality each classroom is it's own little environment and each teacher will teach with their own prejudice. And I know that not every teacher in this nation is a liberal. I just want all teachers to be and neutral and mutli-faceted so that kids can see and experience a variety of thoughts and ideas. That's also another reason I would never want to homeschool my children. They need to learn from others even if I disagree with it.

[Jeff K.]

And heaven forbid the whole follow the commandment parts in seminary. How can they indoctrinate students that way!!!

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

No, I really meant right-wing. Yep, I'm a mormon and I'm a liberal.

I specifically object to the government teacher teaching that the Republican/conservative way of governing is the only correct way. And the point being that I just get sick and tired of people claiming that the liberals have taken over the schools when in reality each classroom is it's own little environment and each teacher will teach with their own prejudice. And I know that not every teacher in this nation is a liberal. I just want all teachers to be and neutral and mutli-faceted so that kids can see and experience a variety of thoughts and ideas. That's also another reason I would never want to homeschool my children. They need to learn from others even if I disagree with it.

I agree that teachers should be neutral. It is not their job to suggest to students which way is the correct way. They should presnet the options and let each kid make up their own mind.

Now, would you say the department of Education is left wing or right wing?

[mtomm]

I agree that teachers should be neutral. It is not their job to suggest to students which way is the correct way. They should presnet the options and let each kid make up their own mind.

Now, would you say the department of Education is left wing or right wing?

I would say the Dept of Education has little to do with what is actually taught on a daily basis in each individual classroom so I don't really care. I know lots of teachers of both conservative and liberal persuasions that don't care much for the DOE.

[Jeff K.]

Actually it mandates a great deal that passes down to the classroom. Most teachers are liberal, due to their education, and most teachers teach a liberal slant. That much is obvious to anyone to attends class. A liberal slant is taught to teachers who take teaching classes too.

[thesometimesaint]

I thought we were supposed to be all for a liberal education.

[thesometimesaint]

mtomm:

We(in the US) are guaranteed a republican(note the lower case "r" form of government in the Constitution. We vote for our representatives. It has nothing to do with political parties, or ideology. In fact no political party or ideology is mentioned in the US Constitution.

[Mordecai]

Actually it mandates a great deal that passes down to the classroom. Most teachers are liberal, due to their education, and most teachers teach a liberal slant. That much is obvious to anyone to attends class. A liberal slant is taught to teachers who take teaching classes too.

My younger brother took a class wherein a tenured teacher would lecture on how evil George Bush was and how good socialism is... which had nothing to do with the class. When people complained, his response was, "I get paid either way." He tested on the book but wasted everyone's class time with liberal indoctrination. I've heard of high school teachers doing the same.

Regardless, the statistics indicate the vast majority of teachers and professors are liberal.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I thought we were supposed to be all for a liberal education.

In the claissic sense you are correct.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I would say the Dept of Education has little to do with what is actually taught on a daily basis in each individual classroom so I don't really care. I know lots of teachers of both conservative and liberal persuasions that don't care much for the DOE.

To some extent I agree. I am all for getting rid of the DOE and all other "non essential goverment workers".

Ah, good times.

[mtomm]

mtomm:

We(in the US) are guaranteed a republican(note the lower case "r" form of government in the Constitution. We vote for our representatives. It has nothing to do with political parties, or ideology. In fact no political party or ideology is mentioned in the US Constitution.

I'm not sure what this fact has to do with my comments? Please explain.

[Nathair/|\]

My younger brother took a class wherein a tenured teacher would lecture on how evil George Bush was and how good socialism is... which had nothing to do with the class. When people complained, his response was, "I get paid either way." He tested on the book but wasted everyone's class time with liberal indoctrination. I've heard of high school teachers doing the same.

Regardless, the statistics indicate the vast majority of teachers and professors are liberal.

Don't forget the teacher who led her elementary school students in a hymn to "mm mm mm Barack Hussein Obama." I can't think of any similar cases on "my" side, but that's likely just me being uninformed. If there are, I condemn them as well.

[mtomm]

My younger brother took a class wherein a tenured teacher would lecture on how evil George Bush was and how good socialism is... which had nothing to do with the class. When people complained, his response was, "I get paid either way." He tested on the book but wasted everyone's class time with liberal indoctrination. I've heard of high school teachers doing the same.

Regardless, the statistics indicate the vast majority of teachers and professors are liberal.

CFR, because I'd like to see the statistics. I personally think most teachers are conservative but are represented by liberal unions.

[thesometimesaint]

Nathair

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/04/17/out-of-the-mouths-of-babes/

[Nathair/|\]

Nathair

http://blogs.wsj.com...ouths-of-babes/

Thank you. That almost disturbs me even more. It's irrational of me, but I tend to expect better behavior from those on "my side" in any issue than I do from my opponents. As a conservative/libertarian, I officially condemn such behavior.