Only federally funded voucher program has negative effect on student achievement

Nov 2005
7,081
1,735
California
#11
Why shouldn't the money allocated for the child's education follow them to the school of their choice?
At least you learned inbetween posts that there was a choice. Now you want other people to pay for that choice... :lol:


The money isn't allocated "for the child's education".
It's allocated for the public school.

And why should my tax money be used for a socialist approach to pay for somebody else's kid which denies my input for how that money should be spent?
The parent's money should pay for the parent's choice.


And if you're now admitting (in another post) that this is not about providing a superior education, then how the %@$# can this be justified?
You can't whine about "failing education system" and then completely ignore the fact that we proved this plan is not providing a superior alternative...
 
Likes: 3 people
Dec 2013
30,349
18,419
Beware of watermelons
#12
At least you learned inbetween posts that there was a choice. Now you want other people to pay for that choice... :lol:


The money isn't allocated "for the child's education".
It's allocated for the public school.

And why should my tax money be used for a socialist approach to pay for somebody else's kid which denies my input for how that money should be spent?
The parent's money should pay for the parent's choice.


And if you're now admitting (in another post) that this is not about providing a superior education, then how the %@$# can this be justified?
You can't whine about "failing education system" and then completely ignore the fact that we proved this plan is not providing a superior alternative...


What "other post" are you talking about pumpkin?
 
Sep 2015
12,929
4,843
Brown Township, Ohio
#13
At least you learned inbetween posts that there was a choice. Now you want other people to pay for that choice... :lol:


The money isn't allocated "for the child's education".
It's allocated for the public school.

And why should my tax money be used for a socialist approach to pay for somebody else's kid which denies my input for how that money should be spent?
The parent's money should pay for the parent's choice.


And if you're now admitting (in another post) that this is not about providing a superior education, then how the %@$# can this be justified?
You can't whine about "failing education system" and then completely ignore the fact that we proved this plan is not providing a superior alternative...
I like the phrase Superior Alternative. Excellent Alternative is better and Outstanding Alternative is the best. I use Occam's Razor.
 
Dec 2013
30,349
18,419
Beware of watermelons
#14
Because the money isn't allocated for a particular child.
You build a school, and operate it, just because there is one less student, it doesn't cost any less to build or operate.
...and this is why you guys should not be allowed anyplace near healthcare.

"We don't care about the patients, the money is for the hospital."


This is the most ridiculous statment I have seen on here for some time.

Are you trying to say that the same money is budgeted for a school of 500 as for a school of 1000?
 
Dec 2013
30,349
18,419
Beware of watermelons
#15
How about this. I don't want MY tax dollars funding a private RELIGIOUS school ???

And if that school doesn't out perform the public system, why divert funds from the public system ?? The WHOLE POINT of the voucher program was that private schools would drastically out perform all those "failing public schools" . If they don't then we are simply allowing corporate America and churches access to the public treasury.
If they are not meeting the needs of the students and the parents then why would the parents continue to send the children there?

As to the religious argument i agree but if they can pass standardized tests I guess I don't care. People should not be made to pay for something twice.

I don't think that people should be given a blank check to take to whatever school they want but should be able to deduct the number off of their taxes.

Say that $10,000 a year is the number that is agreed upon for the cost of education. If you choose to send your kid outside of the public school system and have paid $10,000 or more for the schooling you get to deduct that 10k from your taxes at the end of the year.
 
Likes: 1 person
Sep 2015
12,929
4,843
Brown Township, Ohio
#16
If they are not meeting the needs of the students and the parents then why would the parents continue to send the children there?

As to the religious argument i agree but if they can pass standardized tests I guess I don't care. People should not be made to pay for something twice.

I don't think that people should be given a blank check to take to whatever school they want but should be able to deduct the number off of their taxes.

Say that $10,000 a year is the number that is agreed upon for the cost of education. If you choose to send your kid outside of the public school system and have paid $10,000 or more for the schooling you get to deduct that 10k from your taxes at the end of the year.
Property Tax pays for public schools and it is a high and dirty tax. My property tax is bookoo bucks and have no children in school. I pay it because there is no other option unless I sell out and move to the big city which is not an option.
 
Likes: 1 person
Dec 2013
30,349
18,419
Beware of watermelons
#17
Property Tax pays for public schools and it is a high and dirty tax. My property tax is bookoo bucks and have no children in school. I pay it because there is no other option unless I sell out and move to the big city which is not an option.
Trust me, property tax is plenty high in the city.
 
Likes: 1 person
Nov 2005
7,081
1,735
California
#18
...and this is why you guys should not be allowed anyplace near healthcare.
"We don't care about the patients, the money is for the hospital."
You're wrong about apples. Because oranges.
:wacko:

With a patient, it's the patient who pays for the bill.
HIS bill.
Right?
If he wants to have a tummy tuck, he doesn't pay the hospital for the sake of the hospital.
He pays for the procedure.
And if he wants to add a face lift, then he pays for the face lift as an addition.
He doesn't pay for the sake of the hospital, but he is paying for two chosen procedures.

School is nowhere near the same.


This is the most ridiculous statment I have seen on here for some time.
Are you trying to say that the same money is budgeted for a school of 500 as for a school of 1000?
If a hospital is maintained and it houses 500 or 1000, does that mean they budget the same?
:wacko:

You ask the most pointless questions which beg the question.

Suppose a teacher teaches 25 kids.
Now let's add one child to the classroom.
Does the teacher get paid more?
:huh:


Property Tax pays for public schools and it is a high and dirty tax. My property tax is bookoo bucks and have no children in school. I pay it because there is no other option unless I sell out and move to the big city which is not an option.
Predictably, your point was ignored...
People like Sabcat want us to pay in and get no choice as to where our tax dollars go. All for a socialist approach which embraces paying a parent just cause they popped out a kid.


If they are not meeting the needs of the students and the parents then why would the parents continue to send the children there?
If that's the way they feel they have the choice to send them elsewhere.
They don't have a right to taxpayer money to fund that choice...


I don't think that people should be given a blank check to take to whatever school they want but should be able to deduct the number off of their taxes.
In a similar manner, should I be able to deduct my lack of children from my taxes and stop paying for other people's kids?
Why should they be able to deduct their choice but I can't deduct mine?

The taxes for schools are something that the taxpayers get to provide input into.
If somebody chooses not to partake in that, why do they get to somehow remove funds from the system?

Let's take your ill-gotten "hospital" idea.
Suppose the hospital were funded by the government, but I decided not to go there.
Should I get a refund because I choose to abstain?
 
Last edited:
Sep 2015
12,929
4,843
Brown Township, Ohio
#19
Trust me, property tax is plenty high in the city.
I beg to differ because I have relatives who live in the big city and their property taxs are much lower compared to mine and their houses are newer. The Big City is trying to force farmers out of Brown Township by offering lower property taxes but thanks to the Brown Township Trustees, that ain't gonna happen. No stores, apartments, mobile homes or churches allowed in Brown Township. If you want to build a house in Brown Township it has to be on 5 acres if you find someone willing to sell you five acres and approved by the Brown Township Trustees. A five acre undeveloped lot in Brown Township costs a little under 200k. I had to live in the Big City for most of my working life and it left a bad taste in my mouth.
 
Dec 2013
30,349
18,419
Beware of watermelons
#20
You're wrong about apples. Because oranges.
:wacko:

With a patient, it's the patient who pays for the bill.
HIS bill.
Right?
If he wants to have a tummy tuck, he doesn't pay the hospital for the sake of the hospital.
He pays for the procedure.
And if he wants to add a face lift, then he pays for the face lift as an addition.
He doesn't pay for the sake of the hospital, but he is paying for two chosen procedures.

School is nowhere near the same.



I am talking about "the healthcare for all" dream

If a hospital is maintained and it houses 500 or 1000, does that mean they budget the same?
:wacko:

You ask the most pointless questions which beg the question.

Suppose a teacher teaches 25 kids.
Now let's add one child to the classroom.
Does the teacher get paid more?
:huh:

first you guys are talking about the school as a whole and now you want to break it down to the teacher. A bit disingenuous don't you think?

Apples to ball gages

Predictably, your point was ignored...
People like Sabcat want us to pay in and get no choice as to where our tax dollars go. All for a socialist approach which embraces paying a parent just cause they popped out a kid.

In reality I would prefer to completely do away w/ the department of education. You are being a bit presumptuous here pumpkin.

You just seem to be dancing around w/ accusations and strawmen here. Skipping over posts that address your questions.
 
Likes: 1 person

Similar Discussions