[LightBeam]

Okay, I understand what you're saying, but how do you educate the children of those taxpayers who have no money to begin with without some sort of "wealth distribution measure"?

You don't. Theres nothing in the constitution about providing education for the poor or anyone else. Hell, the poor kids of this country would probably be better off without public education teaching them about evolution, atheism and homosexuality.

Sometimes less "education" can be a good thing.

[Amelia]

You don't. Theres nothing in the constitution about providing education for the poor or anyone else.

There isn't in the federal Constitution, but there is in most state constitutions.

[SoftballMominVA]

Hell, the poor kids of this country would probably be better off without public education teaching them about evolution, atheism and homosexuality.

But would the country be better off with millions of feral children growing up without the ability to read, write, and do math? And please don't give me a line about how it's happening now. There are districts that do a very poor job, but the overwhelming majority of kids do have a basic education and many have an excellent education. It goes without saying that many schools can do a MUCH better job and some teachers are worthless and should be behind bars rather than a desk, but I believe they are the minority

Please remember that these children growing up illiterate and innumerate still carry the right to vote. And the dumber people are, the easier they are to sway with 'bread and circuses.' So it makes me wonder if the people here on FR calling for the destruction of public schools and claiming it would be better to grow up that way are simply shills for DU and the Democrat party trying to destroy the one thing in this country that does help the poor.