And to those whining about a tax rebate for home schooling, how about for
those who have no children? Shall I get a rebate for the 30 years I've
been paying property taxes for schools I'm not using? Or the roads *I*
don't personally drive on, or the Fire Department *I've* never personally
used, or...get the point? Public education, as with all social services,
benefits *society as a whole* when done properly. We all reap the
benefits, we all pay the costs. We all have a responsibility to get out
and do something when it's not done properly. Look at voter turnout and
tell me how involved people are in society.

Keith Hughes

Ummmm...in the context of the thread, the silly point was offered that home
schoolers should be "consistent" in their philosophy and not seek any
services from the public school system. Some of us pointed out that there is
no inconsistency in this at all, since those who home school pay into the
system through taxes and are entitled to get something out of it. Indeed,
whatever services a home schooling parent would receive is far less than
what has been paid in.

Now, even if there were a "rebate" for home schooling, that money would be
used to eduate the children in question, though outside of the public
system. This would still provide the alleged societal benefit you are
touting above. Unless, of course, the real issue isn't whether children
receive an education but whether it is the government doing it?

BTW: My wife is a public school teacher in So. California. She's a great
teacher but it's a really crappy system--massively top heavy bureaucracy,
wasteful, poorly run, etc. Granting that we cannot abolish the public
education system entirely (my personal preference), we support vouchers as a
good compromise. And as for the teacher's union, we got her out of that
years ago (though we are obligated to pay a relatively small amount of dues
that goes to the collective bargaining portion, but nothing that goes to
support their political agenda).

--Alan Gomes