I doubt that seriously. Name the state and we can find some of the other residents to confirm that assertion.
Maybe there is some screwy accounting going on,that might be part of the problem.
No doubt about it. For one thing, when public schools publish their "cost per pupil" numbers, they conveniently leave out some very large expenses -- like capital costs for facilities.
As far as separating school and state,that all sounds good,but I don't think I would consider the idea of everyone having access to a quality education unreasonable.
Well, if that is your goal, then you should be the first person in line to abort the public school system. There is no question that quality education is the last thing we are getting out of government schools.
If education was left up to the free enterprise system,alot of the people who really need to improve themselves would be unable to do that for lack of funds.
That is the assertion that socialists make, but it is patently false. The free market consistently delivers a better product at a better price. Every time. People who value education will always do what it takes to afford one, unless the government makes that impossible. Have you considered that there are other, even more essential needs, that aren't socialized yet? What about food, clothing, transportation, medical care, love, etc.? Should the government maintain a monopoly on those commodities like it does on education, just to ensure that everyone has equal access to quality? I tend to think not. But, I'm a laissez-faire capitalist, so I wouldn't.
Call me a bleeding heart.Maybe this is inconsistent with individual rights.But I think we are better off supporting education as it exists now.
I don't think you are a bleeding heart. I just think you haven't thought it through. The one thing we know for an absolute fact is that we are paying an extremely high price for a product that is an abject failure right now. We would be better off with NO school system than we are with what we have today.