Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mr. Gomes
Alan Gomes wrote: 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. 'Silly' how exactly? 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. Therein lies the fallacy. You are not entitled to "get something out of it", you are entitled to *participate in* it. My wife and I, by virtue of being childless, *cannot* get anything out of it, yet we support the system equally along with the 'users'. You seem to be misconstruing the purpose of a social program. The sufficiently affluent have always opted out of social programs, yet they have always been required to support them. The point is, *Society* has determined the structure and number of the social systems it supports (nearly a truism), the purpose being to advance the needs and goals of society as a whole, not to address individual needs. By virtue of being part of society, we are all required to support society. Indeed, whatever services a home schooling parent would receive is far less than what has been paid in. Again, your taxes support societal needs and desires. Save for sales tax, there is no quid pro quo relative to taxation. 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. To an extent. Also, to the extent that money is withdrawn from the public system by those who, with voucher money, can afford high cost private schools, the public system is further impoverished, and the education of those left behind suffers accordingly. Even in a well run system, there will be a large fixed overhead that is not proportional to the number of students (e.g. facilities, maintenance, utilities, administration, etc.). As dollars are withdrawn from the system, a higher proportion of the available dollars goes to support this overhead, and the dollars/student drops accordingly. A net loss for society IMO. Unless, of course, the real issue isn't whether children receive an education but whether it is the government doing it? It appears that your wife is 'doing it'. Is she the government? "The Government" is merely a mental construct we use for convenience. It does not exist as an entity. It is 'us', and as we nurture it, it is healthy and productive, but as we neglect it, it grows weeds or lies fallow. 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. There are a great many wonderful teachers out there. I'm glad your wife is one of them. But the system will remain "massively top heavy bureaucracy, wasteful, poorly run, etc." as long as people continue to be mentally lazy and talk in terms of "they", or "them", or "the guvumint", to conveniently divorce themselves from any personal responsibility for either creating, or solving, the problem. Again, look at the voter turnout in this country. Can we really expect parents that are too lazy to even vote, to put adequate effort into rearing and educating their children? Granting that we cannot abolish the public education system entirely (my personal preference), we support vouchers as a good compromise. Well, this is a basic matter of philosophy. Abolish the public system, and only the affluent will be able to afford decent education. And I'm not defending the performance of the extant public school system. It *will* however, work well with parental participation. It happens in *MANY* places. As for vouchers, again, they benefit the affluent, but at the cost of impoverishing the public system. AND it's another bureaucracy, AND it will still require tax money, AND it will still disproportionately disadvantage poor states/counties/municipalities unless federally administered, etc. Hardly a panacea to my mind. And I'm sure you'll easily find a great school that you can afford with *only* the voucher money. One at which your wife would be happy teaching...with the concomitant salary and benefits package of course. 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). Historically, labor unions have played an invaluable role in forming our society, and establishing basic human rights (i.e. labor vs. servitude). Laudable accomplishments. They have also been a source of graft and corruption, often on a grand scale, and thus need policed just as does the government. Given the history of union accomplishments, the right to unionize should clearly be protected, IMO. The 'right to work' should also be protected, IMO. Personally, I've never been in a union, and detest the "union mentality", at least as stereo-typified (i.e. 'it aint *my* job, call a ______[insert trade]'), it's stupid, wasteful, and counterproductive. Bottom line, if you don't want "the government" involved in education, then stay away from *MY* tax dollars - they, like yours, support society at large, and you don't get "line-item abdication" for societal responsibilities. You want to use private schools, great. You want to home school, great. I have no problem with either. But *IF* tax dollars are used for education, they should be used for the maximum benefit to the maximum number of students, irrespective of socioeconomic status. Vouchers don't do that. A reorganization of how public education is funded, administered, and evaluated could. But it would be a lot more work, and lacking sufficient motivation (i.e. angry voters), congress, legislatures, and school boards aren't going to do it. Keith Hughes |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ok, Keith. You win. I'm convinced. The public school system produces such a
massive societal benefit that no amount of taxation to support it is excessive. Without it we'd have a society of kids who could not read or write and who are in general functionally illiterate, who could not do simple math, and who had no knowledge of world history or even of the great books of western civilization. Oh, wait! That's what we presently have *with* the public school system. Quick! Someone raise my property taxes so we can throw some more money at it! Well, it's been fun playing. Gotta get back to life beyond usenet. So go ahead and have the last word and I'll see you around sometime--maybe on the water. (A feeble attempt at getting back to something sailing related here....) --Alan |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:17:40 UTC, "Alan Gomes" wrote:
Ok, Keith. You win. I'm convinced. The public school system produces such a massive societal benefit that no amount of taxation to support it is excessive. Without it we'd have a society of kids who could not read or write and who are in general functionally illiterate, who could not do simple math, and who had no knowledge of world history or even of the great books of western civilization. Oh, wait! That's what we presently have *with* the public school system. Quick! Someone raise my property taxes so we can throw some more money at it! A pathetic strawman setup - that's not what he said, as you well know, but you don't know how to address what he did say. Just to summarise/simplify it for you and the other 'public bad, private good' folks, he did say: the system has flaws; it won't be fixed by opting out with your money; it is the result of people (parents in this case) opting out with their other resources, like participation. Well, it's been fun playing. Gotta get back to life beyond usenet. So go ahead and have the last word and I'll see you around sometime--maybe on the water. (A feeble attempt at getting back to something sailing related here....) --Alan Chris -- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Would you go long term cruising? | Cruising | |||
cruising vs liveaboard boats | Cruising | |||
Red Swastikas, Hate Messages Painted On Deland Home | ASA | |||
GRETTIR'S SAGA (continued) | ASA |