Posted on 06/27/2020 9:45:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
**Americans of all races, political persuasions, and socio-economic status overwhelmingly support school choice.**
School choice, whether its home schooling or a waiting list for the best elementary, middle or high school in town are valid choices.
So choose!
I don’t have kids - why am I paying school tax?
What are they being taught - how to use the perferred pronoun? How to have gay sex? You girls must accept competing against the boys in sport?
Yes but not in today’s world because the system is a failure. It needs a complete overhaul.
Exactly unless you want to.
I couldn’t disagree more. Why should I work hard and pay more in taxes for ghetto kids to come to my school?Or am I interpreting this incorrectly?“A child’s ZIP Code in America should never determine their future, and that’s what was happening. So we’re very, very strong on school choice,” Trump continued.
If there’s a fallacy in your logic it's that good schools should exist everywhere. Certainly not that there should be forced bussing . . .But good schools do not exist everywhere, and the only proven way to shape up a public school is to expose it to effective competition. I.e., school choice.
I couldn’t disagree more. Why should I work hard and pay more in taxes for ghetto kids to come to my school?Or am I interpreting this incorrectly?“A child’s ZIP Code in America should never determine their future, and that’s what was happening. So we’re very, very strong on school choice,” Trump continued.
If there’s a fallacy in your logic it's that good schools should exist everywhere. Certainly not that there should be forced bussing . . .But good schools do not exist everywhere, and the only proven way to shape up a public school is to expose it to effective competition. I.e., school choice.
“But good schools do not exist everywhere, and the only proven way to shape up a public school is to expose it to effective competition. I.e., school choice.”
There is nothing wrong with the buildings, books, and teachers of those schools. The shitty students, and their even shittier parents, or most likely parent, keep them from succeeding. No money can fix their terrible culture.
I agree that parental involvement is the sine qua non of education. This does not negate but reinforces the need for parental choice - because if there is a choice there is responsibility.Parents who have a choice but allow the default anyway have themselves to thank for the result. Therefore parental interest logically is increased by school choice.
In any event not every parent is to blame for bad schools; to the contrary the conceit that a good parent should be forced to remain with the failing school and “use her influence to improve the school” is fatuous. Lacking a choice, the parent - however concerned and willing to be involved - also lacks influence. Almost absolutely.
I knew of a case of a parent who - quite atypically in America - actually had a choice, and initially exercised it by directing her child to the school in which she herself worked. And yet the student’s needs were not met. Her morale hit rock bottom. The solution was simply for the child to transfer, as she was entitled to do, to the school most of her childhood classmates had selected anyway. And there, she flourished - athletically and academically.
Given that the first school knew perfectly well of the girl’s potential and her ability to chose a different school you would think that that school would have listened to valid complaints and gotten their act together. But nooooo . . .
Skilled people who are hired to teach young people (say chemistry classes in high school or nursing courses at a community college) COULD have used their human capital to produce immediately-needed consumer goods and services.
They could have been hired -- to research new pharmaceuticals, or provide nursing and rehab services, instead.
The choice is between using human capital (skilled people) to make MORE "human capital" (educate today's young people), or to produce "Consumer goods" (for services that adults and seniors immediately need new drugs, surgeries or therapies to extend and enjoy life).
In short - every biology teacher we hire to each HS microbiology, means one less researcher in a lab, making immediate new commercial discoveries for older consumers who need breakthroughs - NOW.
I am not saying which direction things "should" go -- but I feel the trade off should be driven by voluntary consumer spending decisions - parents, versus older consumers who want that chemist or nurse, NOW, for services needed.
More kids are great -- but, so is a longer life expectancy for those bidding for it, with their dollars....
Hope that makes sense. This is how I explain there is an 'opportunity cost' to "more investment" in K-12 & up Education to my econ students............
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.