Education Is Too Important for a Government Monopoly; It's time to let parents choose

Reason ^ | 2010-02-18 | John Stossel

[Kellis91789]

Well, according to most studies including this one
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=1118
when all costs are taken into account, public schools cost twice what private schools do. So I wouldn’t voucher at 100%, I’d voucher at 50% or 60%. This way the state would actually cut overall spending. And I do think the retiring boomer generation is a golden opportunity for attrition in the ranks of teachers if a hiring freeze were put in place. Selling the existing school properties to private operators makes those properties subject to property taxes as well, and reduces other costs not always included in the school budgets like county legal services, etc. So the net effect to a state’s budget could be even better than just a 50% reduction in per-pupil costs implies.

[Monorprise]

The Democratic party and their “unions” have turned our education system into a gravy train. Of course it all starts with he Federal government’s involvement creating the ultimate monopoly.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I’d leave it at 100% of current levels, because there would be substantial start-up costs to new private schools. Then just don’t do the usual annual increases and inflation will soon slash actual spending in half. The bloated school district I live in in spends well over $20,000/year per student, and last year’s school tax increase and this year’s proposed increase total 11%.

Assuming most new private schools would be set up as non-profits, they would not be subject to property taxes in most jurisdictions.

[secretagent]

Separate school and state.

End all compulsory attendance to and funding of government schools.