A good example of why southern conservatives are not trusted.

[cawacko]

Who you trying to kid? You want to send your kids to a private school, that can discriminate who they will accept and you want to do it on my dime. That's not only racist it's free loading. Don't try to pin that off on some "Liberal" conspiracy you cheap racist bastard!

haha... why can't I be a rich racist bastard?

 

[cawacko]

Bull shit. Why the hell should I subsidize your kids private education? If you want to send your kids to a private school then pony up the money and quit your whining.

The issue is giving choice to students whose only option is their local failing public school. It's not about trying to have someone else pay for my kids private school education if I can already afford it.

If we are talking about compassion and caring and saying the politician in the OP lacked it then providing opportunities for kids who have no other schooling options is about as compassionate and caring as you can get.

It takes a combination of things including changing the way we judge and compensate teachers. Going strictly on a seniority scale and the current difficulty to remove/fire poor/bad teachers only does a disservice to the kids.

We celebrate, and rightly so, those kids who make it through the worst circumstances and earn acceptance into our nations top universities. I belong to a group in SF where we get to hear these kids stories and we donate money to help pay for them to go to school. The sad part is these kids tend to be few and far between.

Both political parties have gropus that are big contributors that they don't want to offend or alienate for fear of losing their support. We all know the teachers union is a powerful group. And this is not to say teachers don't deserve representation. But I think you'll find many people who are big supportors of teachers but believe teachers union wield almost too much power and are obstructionists to almost any change. This is not to say they are the only ones at fault but they definitely play a role.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

you are prepared to subsidize education......what difference does it make to you where it is obtained?......I would have expected you to be pro-"choice"........

I'm very much for private education. If you can afford it, then thats fine. But don't expect the taxpayers to undermine the public education system so that we can subsidize sending your kids to private school. It dont' work that way. You want to send your kids to private school then do so but don't ask me to pay your bill.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

haha... why can't I be a rich racist bastard?

ROTFLMAO!!! Well that's a good point but if your so rich why are you asking me to pay your bills? (or is that how you got rich? LOL)

 

[Mott the Hoople]

The issue is giving choice to students whose only option is their local failing public school. It's not about trying to have someone else pay for my kids private school education if I can already afford it.

If we are talking about compassion and caring and saying the politician in the OP lacked it then providing opportunities for kids who have no other schooling options is about as compassionate and caring as you can get.

It takes a combination of things including changing the way we judge and compensate teachers. Going strictly on a seniority scale and the current difficulty to remove/fire poor/bad teachers only does a disservice to the kids.

We celebrate, and rightly so, those kids who make it through the worst circumstances and earn acceptance into our nations top universities. I belong to a group in SF where we get to hear these kids stories and we donate money to help pay for them to go to school. The sad part is these kids tend to be few and far between.

Both political parties have gropus that are big contributors that they don't want to offend or alienate for fear of losing their support. We all know the teachers union is a powerful group. And this is not to say teachers don't deserve representation. But I think you'll find many people who are big supportors of teachers but believe teachers union wield almost too much power and are obstructionists to almost any change. This is not to say they are the only ones at fault but they definitely play a role.

That's a bogus argument. Most of those schools are failing because they are systematically underfunded and you want to underfund them even more. It's also an issue of fairness. I don't want to pay my money to send your kids to private school while simaltenously undermining our public school systems. It's not only bad for education, it's just patently unfair!

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I'm very much for private education. If you can afford it, then thats fine. But don't expect the taxpayers to undermine the public education system so that we can subsidize sending your kids to private school. It dont' work that way. You want to send your kids to private school then do so but don't ask me to pay your bill.

1) you assume that it costs more to send a kid to private school than public....I sent my kids to private school....cost me $5k each a year in tuition.....the local public schools get over $8k to do the same thing.....yet my kids got a better education....if you gave everyone $5k and had no public schools you would save $3k a year per student.....

2) you assume that this would undermine public schools......why wouldn't it make them better instead?......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

T Most of those schools are failing because they are systematically underfunded and you want to underfund them even more.

False assumption....two of the school systems in this country that are performing the worst (Washington DC and Detroit) are the schools that spend the MOST per student......(both in excess of $11k per student per year).......

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Bull shit. Why the hell should I subsidize your kids private education? If you want to send your kids to a private school then pony up the money and quit your whining.

So why should I have to pony up to send your kids to public school? The money is being spent one way or another. If the government is taking tax dollars to fund a kids education... then let the parents tell the government where their kids funding should be sent. If the government spends $8k per student per year (not sure what the real number is... this is just an example) then that $8k should go towards public or private depending on the parents choice.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

So why should I have to pony up to send your kids to public school? The money is being spent one way or another. If the government is taking tax dollars to fund a kids education... then let the parents tell the government where their kids funding should be sent. If the government spends $8k per student per year (not sure what the real number is... this is just an example) then that $8k should go towards public or private depending on the parents choice.

OK fine, lets get rid of our public education system and see how well that works! LOL

 

[zappasguitar]

Exactly why we need school choice and a change in our public education system. Not more of the same and we need more money.

Ah yes, those magnanimous Republicans and their generosity! Wanting the poor in America to go to the school of their choice!

Except...

What they don't tell you is...all those elite private schools with the good teachers? They won't take kids with poor academic scores! All those elitist private schools will find one reason or another to weed out those they don't really want.

I found one wonderful little private school here in H-town...cream of the crop as far as private schools go...AAAAAAAND they only want $17,500.00 per year to go there. You think that "voucher" you're going to get if school choice is ever passed will be big enough to cover that admission fee?

You want school choice cawacko? Then let's set it up where the POOREST get to choose first when they choose which school they wish to attend.

Otherwise, the rich will still get to go to all the good schools, and the poor will still have to settle for less.

 

[cawacko]

Ah yes, those magnanimous Republicans and their generosity! Wanting the poor in America to go to the school of their choice!

Except...

What they don't tell you is...all those elite private schools with the good teachers? They won't take kids with poor academic scores! All those elitist private schools will find one reason or another to weed out those they don't really want.

I found one wonderful little private school here in H-town...cream of the crop as far as private schools go...AAAAAAAND they only want $17,500.00 per year to go there. You think that "voucher" you're going to get if school choice is ever passed will be big enough to cover that admission fee?

You want school choice cawacko? Then let's set it up where the POOREST get to choose first when they choose which school they wish to attend.

Otherwise, the rich will still get to go to all the good schools, and the poor will still have to settle for less.

How does it work now? If you have money you can move to a city with good public schools or you can send your kid to private school. If you don't have money you are forced to send your kid to your local (probably failing) public school.

The idea is twofold in creating some form of competition to incentivize/force schools to get better. Additionally it offers an opportunity to those who otherwise wouldn't have one. The private school on my street three blocks down in SF costs $28k a year. That's for 1st grade. WTF? How many parents can afford to spend $28k on their kids 1st grade education? Well no one is getting a $28k voucher that's for sure.

The issue Zap isn't about Republican vs. Democrat. It's how do we best serve these kids that are stuck in failing schools. My argument, along with many other people, is that the status quo isn't working. Changes need to be made to the system.

 

[Canceled2]

So why should I have to pony up to send your kids to public school? The money is being spent one way or another. If the government is taking tax dollars to fund a kids education... then let the parents tell the government where their kids funding should be sent. If the government spends $8k per student per year (not sure what the real number is... this is just an example) then that $8k should go towards public or private depending on the parents choice.

Education based on school performance and choice is the best formula for success. In an underperforming public school that shows no improvement from year to year there can be no better solution for parents and fr their kids than to have some sort of power. School choice empowers families to get the best education possible for their kids. Competition between all options creates an environment where the failing schools will fold and the exceptional ones will thrive; this translates into exceptional opportunities for learners!

 

[zappasguitar]

How does it work now? If you have money you can move to a city with good public schools or you can send your kid to private school. If you don't have money you are forced to send your kid to your local (probably failing) public school.

The idea is twofold in creating some form of competition to incentivize/force schools to get better. Additionally it offers an opportunity to those who otherwise wouldn't have one. The private school on my street three blocks down in SF costs $28k a year. That's for 1st grade. WTF? How many parents can afford to spend $28k on their kids 1st grade education? Well no one is getting a $28k voucher that's for sure.

The issue Zap isn't about Republican vs. Democrat. It's how do we best serve these kids that are stuck in failing schools. My argument, along with many other people, is that the status quo isn't working. Changes need to be made to the system.

And I am saying you won't find the well to do pushing for any real change that might help the less fortunate until you put them into the same boat with the poor.

If you want school choice, then there need to be some "no-refusal" clauses in their charters so they don't just take the kids with the richest parents. Let the poorest kids from the worst school districts step to the front of the line for once and when the rich have to wait and settle for what's left after all the "good" schools are full, THEN you'll see some change.

 

[NOVA]

And I am saying you won't find the well to do pushing for any real change that might help the less fortunate until you put them into the same boat with the poor.

If you want school choice, then there need to be some "no-refusal" clauses in their charters so they don't just take the kids with the richest parents. Let the poorest kids from the worst school districts step to the front of the line for once and when the rich have to wait and settle for what's left after all the "good" schools are full, THEN you'll see some change.

You really talk silly..do you think Harvard, Yale and Princeton HAVE to accept some of the brainless just for the sake "fairness" ???

Do you suggest that private schools accept some gang members, druggies, and assholes in general just because they happen to be poor, or for some other unrelated reason to satisfy your social engineering schemes........?

Vouchers will HELP some of those that can't afford higher costs of private school....helping some is better than helping none....

If the 17,000 is too high for you, find one within your means....

It might not be the well to do pushing for any real change that might help the less fortunate, but it IS THE CONSERVATIVES pushing for the change...

 

[NOVA]

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/11/nation/na-vouchers11

Washington Dc
Spending plan kills funding for Washington school vouchers
Barring renewal, 1,700 students could be back in the D.C. public education system in the near future.
March 11, 2009*James Oliphant

WASHINGTON — Congress is poised to do away with one of former President George W. Bush's signature initiatives in education: the taxpayer-funded vouchers that enable students from low-income families in the District of Columbia to attend private schools.

About 1,700 children in kindergarten through 12th grade receive the $7,500 annual scholarships. Four times as many apply.
-------
"It would be really shocking to see 1,700 kids removed from the best schools they have ever known," said Andrew Campanella, a spokesman for the Alliance for School Choice, a pro-voucher group.

The drama is being watched by advocates of the so-called school choice movement across the country.

The Washington program, the only voucher system in the country that uses federal funds, was enacted in 2004 by the Republican-controlled Congress, with some Democratic support.

Its advocates say it gives children in troubled school districts such as Washington's an opportunity to obtain a higher-quality education. Urban school districts in New Orleans, Milwaukee and Cleveland have similar programs that use state money.
======================================================
In case you need some Dem talking points, here they are....

Detractors contend that the program subsidizes private or religious schools that, unlike public school districts, are not held accountable. And they say vouchers drain taxpayer money from public schools that truly need it, to private schools already flush from high tuitions. They also say there is no proof that students perform better in their new schools.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

OK fine, lets get rid of our public education system and see how well that works! LOL

nice strawman.......don't have to give up the public system......some parents may desire their children attend their local public school.....(they don't all suck)......but if the local schools suck and NOBODY wants to send their kids there, maybe it's time to get rid of it.....

 

[Canceled2]

You really talk silly..do you think Harvard, Yale and Princeton HAVE to accept some of the brainless just for the sake "fairness" ???

Do you suggest that private schools accept some gang members, druggies, and assholes in general just because they happen to be poor, or for some other unrelated reason to satisfy your social engineering schemes........?

Vouchers will HELP some of those that can't afford higher costs of private school....helping some is better than helping none....

If the 17,000 is too high for you, find one within your means....

It might not be the well to do pushing for any real change that might help the less fortunate, but it IS THE CONSERVATIVES pushing for the change...

The average cost of private education for primary and secondary schools ranges between 25-45 hundred dollars a year. There are exclusive schools that are cost prohibitive, but they are not the average private school nor do they provide for a better education necessarily.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Education based on school performance and choice is the best formula for success. In an underperforming public school that shows no improvement from year to year there can be no better solution for parents and fr their kids than to have some sort of power. School choice empowers families to get the best education possible for their kids. Competition between all options creates an environment where the failing schools will fold and the exceptional ones will thrive; this translates into exceptional opportunities for learners!

Yea, lay that bullshit on someone else. I've seen first hand how that line of bullshit devastated the public school systems in both South Carolina and Arkansas. If you want to cut your nose off to spite your face and fund other peoples private education then do it with your money and not mine.

If you implement those ideas the same thing will happen in your State that happened in those two. The children of affluent parents will be the only ones who have access to a quality education and it will subsidized by the poor and working people who won't have access to those private schools and who will be, to put it bluntly, fucked cause their grossly underfunded public schools will fail due to a political self full filling prophecy which systematically starves them of the resources they need to succeed.

 

[cawacko]

Yea, lay that bullshit on someone else. I've seen first hand how that line of bullshit devastated the public school systems in both South Carolina and Arkansas. If you want to cut your nose off to spite your face and fund other peoples private education then do it with your money and not mine.

If you implement those ideas the same thing will happen in your State that happened in those two. The children of affluent parents will be the only ones who have access to a quality education and it will subsidized by the poor and working people who won't have access to those private schools and who will be, to put it bluntly, fucked cause their grossly underfunded public schools will fail due to a political self full filling prophecy which systematically starves them of the resources they need to succeed.

What do we have now? Want to come check out my local school systems in Oakland or San Francisco?

The idea behind school choice and vouchers is not to benefit financially those who don't need it. It is to benefit those who have no other options. And its not about sending everyone to private schools. It's about making the overall education system better and more competitive.

 

[Canceled2]

Yea, lay that bullshit on someone else. I've seen first hand how that line of bullshit devastated the public school systems in both South Carolina and Arkansas. If you want to cut your nose off to spite your face and fund other peoples private education then do it with your money and not mine.

If you implement those ideas the same thing will happen in your State that happened in those two. The children of affluent parents will be the only ones who have access to a quality education and it will subsidized by the poor and working people who won't have access to those private schools and who will be, to put it bluntly, fucked cause their grossly underfunded public schools will fail due to a political self full filling prophecy which systematically starves them of the resources they need to succeed.

First off it isn't BS and you have no proof that it is. Vouchers in Florida and DC have been widely embraced and successful, and what I have read about SC they are likewise enjoying the choices they have. Charter schools too have enjoyed much success in the states that allow them. The only real choice though, is to creat a federal voucher system that would truly open the market so that parents could also take advantage of programs like online distance learning. The stupid lame argument of "poor kids" has absolutely NO basis in fact! In DC especially, you had to be fucking poor to participate, wbtw, I think is total BS! As to draining funds from failing public schools? Again, too fucking bad...let 'em fail, They don't deserve our kids or the money that follows them!

And I'd like nothing better than to keep my fucking money and spend it on private education. Instead I have ignorant people like you who keep throwing everyone's money, including mine, at the disaster we call public education which costs MUCH more per student than private education on average!