“I catch your first mistake and do not read 99% of what you write…you are close minded and don’t even understand what I’m saying.”
If I had to provide an example of ‘projection’ to a person writing a psychology text, this is what I’d use.
So you want to keep mandating that everyone pay for the schools, regardless of whether you have a kid going to school, but you want to give the money to parents so that they can pick which school they want to send the kid.
That’s not exactly free enterprise at work, but I agree that is probably the way it should work. K-12 is a private benefit with a public interest attached. Everyone benefits from an educated populace, and I realize how debatable this last opinion is.
Again, the research shows if parents had to pay, and even if they had the tax money in their pockets, they would choose not to send them to school.
You have to realize that if you collect money from everyone for education, the way you would for water and sewer, the view by many that education is a public utility that should stay public is going to be difficult to shake.
I dismissed what this teacher said after I saw the complaint that they aren’t paid enough. In this country we spend far too much on education and get negative returns.
What a dinosaur you are. Yes, it might be difficult to shake, but so was the King George Habit. So was slavery. So was first alcohol, then prohibition, difficult to shake. So what??? Doesn't change the FACT of what I said, that if this was changed, a massive market would emerge rapidly and efficiently. And FTR, people need to stop thinking public money is for anyone OTHER than the children schools serve - meaning having the parents of that child decide where the exact same amount of public resources was going is the only way to go. You are sososososososo 1950s.