School Choice/Vouchers (split from '7 point Drain the Swamp')

[teachercd]

In a competitive utopia market they would not fail.

Explain this mechanism; it is mysterious to me.

Well, in utopia things are supposed to be "perfect" so nothing would fail. It would be dreamland, imaginary or paradise. Dogs and cats would be best friends. Republicans and Democrats would eat lunch together

At least, that is what I think of when I think of my utopia.

 

[teachercd]

There is no purpose in government in schools whatsoever. Running a school is simple and the demand is everywhere and growing. Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended. Trump and Pence are committed to reform. Democrats are opposed. Fight is raging. Hope the democrats lose it. I've been paying private schools bills for over a decade btw. Kid's school operates at below 50% of nat'l average $/kid and score 94 percentile on standardized testing.

Oh, and let me guess...there are real consequences when the students mess up!

 

[knapplc]

Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended.

I have not heard of this. Where would I find out more about the growing opposition to government-run school systems?

Trump and Pence are committed to reform.

I hope, for your sake, Trump is more committed to this than he was to repealing Obamacare, a commitment which didn't survive the first week post-election.

 

[ColoNoCoHusker]

Non-democrats, like me, want OUR MONEY (taxes) spent educating OUR KIDS on schools WE CHOOSE. Bad schools will lose students, and the funding per student, as they should. It's called competition.

Question here, as I'm not versed in this particular issue at all. So I can only go off your description.

When a school fails in this competitive utopia market, loses its funds and goes under -- what happens to the students there?

Is that where they will belong? Are you sure that will never be your kids? How would you prevent it?

In a competitive utopia market they would not fail.

But with that said...if you have ever seen what "bad" schools are like it would almost make more sense to home school if that was an option. With it also being based on competition it would, in theory, mean that more schools would open to replace the bad ones...in theory.

That's a big requirement. The idea that schools can be a competitive open market assumes things like distance from the school are not a factor. For a lot of schools, having a bad principal does as much damage as lack of funding...

There is an area South of me where 3 school districts have pooled together to a "choice-in" structure for middle & high school. It covers 3 different suburbs. Out of the 12 high schools participating, 2 have seen substantial improvement in student performance, 3 have stagnated, and the rest have decreased slightly to substantially. The districts are still trying to figure out why. One of the schools that dropped off the most unexpectedly lost it's principal and the replacement was not up to task.

I honestly don't know the solution to improving public education but I do think this is one of the biggest challenges in this country.

 

[Sargon]

There is no purpose in government in schools whatsoever. Running a school is simple and the demand is everywhere and growing. Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended. Trump and Pence are committed to reform. Democrats are opposed. Fight is raging. Hope the democrats lose it. I've been paying private schools bills for over a decade btw. Kid's school operates at below 50% of nat'l average $/kid and score 94 percentile on standardized testing.

Oh, and let me guess...there are real consequences when the students mess up!

You guess better than knapplc

But, being a slow student/low performer does not get a kid booted. They only get booted for serious rules of conduct breaches. For example bullying and fighting is basically non-existent there. No swearing either! No cell phones during school hours O M G that MUST be a rights violation call the (anti)justice department quick.

 

[Mierin]

The idea of charter schools scares the sh#t out of me.

Really, why is that?
My friend is currently opening one in California.

I imagine a world 100-200 years from now where all the schools are run by corporations and can teach the students whatever they want. I can see Walmart starting charter schools all over the place.

 

[zoogs]

Gosh, I can't believe the Justice Dept. is cracking down on cell phones during school hours. That seems like a grotesque misuse of resources.

On the surface, I don't think I like school choice. I see it this way: for those who have enough resources, they can use them to tilt the scales in their kids' favor already by sending them to self-selecting private schools. I'd be happy for them to save a buck, but I'm more worried about those who don't have resources and their schools failing.

A school going under is not a trivial thing to go through, and competition accelerates this (I'm thinking specifically of charter schools, some of which are great, some of which go belly up to the real detriment of a lot of families who were counting on that not to happen).

Generally, I don't think public policy should be used to help safeguard the domain of those who are already winners, at the expense of the rest of society who will suffer the consequences. I don't see how the natural course will not be an ever-tightening circle of high-cost, high-performing schools, with competition driving the raising of the access bar. De facto this seems to go on enough already, and I don't have great ideas on how to combat it.

 

[teachercd]

There is no purpose in government in schools whatsoever. Running a school is simple and the demand is everywhere and growing. Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended. Trump and Pence are committed to reform. Democrats are opposed. Fight is raging. Hope the democrats lose it. I've been paying private schools bills for over a decade btw. Kid's school operates at below 50% of nat'l average $/kid and score 94 percentile on standardized testing.

Oh, and let me guess...there are real consequences when the students mess up!

You guess better than knapplc

But, being a slow student/low performer does not get a kid booted. They only get booted for serious rules of conduct breaches. For example bullying and fighting is basically non-existent there. No swearing either! No cell phones during school hours O M G that MUST be a rights violation call the (anti)justice department quick.

Well, I kind of know what I am talking about here

 

[Sargon]

Gosh, I can't believe the Justice Dept. is cracking down on cell phones during school hours. That seems like a grotesque misuse of resources.

On the surface, I don't think I like school choice. I see it this way: for those who have enough resources, they can use them to tilt the scales in their kids' favor already by sending them to self-selecting private schools. I'd be happy for them to save a buck, but I'm more worried about those who don't have resources and their schools failing.

A school going under is not a trivial thing to go through, and competition accelerates this (I'm thinking specifically of charter schools, some of which are great, some of which go belly up to the real detriment of a lot of families who were counting on that not to happen).

Generally, I don't think public policy should be used to help safeguard the domain of those who are already winners, at the expense of the rest of society who will suffer the consequences. I don't see how the natural course will not be an ever-tightening circle of high-cost, high-performing schools, with competition driving the raising of the access bar. De facto this seems to go on enough already, and I don't have great ideas on how to combat it.

All D's "don't like school choice." Is there any prominent D who likes it? Government rule school is the D reality and commitment and most R's and some libertarians and independents want choice. Like I said I hope the D's lose this fight (been losing it a bit...but extremely slowly, for decades).

Winners? Low IQ kids are not EVER going to be rocket surgeons you do know this right? Potential rocket surgeon kids (IQ 125+) SHOULD do MOST of their schooling with other high IQ kids studying at a pace that lower IQ kids can NOT handle. AP classes. AP schools. Socialist Germany even knows this.

Safeguards? Provide a safeguard for those who need it, fine. Do 90% of American students need government D's providing them an education safeguard? 60%? 25%? How about in Millard, NE? What percent of the kids there do you think NEED a D government safeguard? Millard is not downtown Detroit. Millard kids do NOT have the same needs. And frankly if there were no government schools at all in Millard the mostly intelligent and committed parents would be served ONLY by schools that perform. There's no market for bad schools so market forces wouldn't let any of them survive. Government forces keep them running for generations.

What percentage of American k-12 students need government "safeguards" because their parents are too lazy or stupid to get them into an appropriate school?

 

[zoogs]

Low IQ kids are not EVER going to be rocket surgeons you do know this right? Potential rocket surgeon kids (IQ 125+) SHOULD do MOST of their schooling with other high IQ kids studying at a pace that lower IQ kids can NOT handle. AP classes. AP schools. Socialist Germany even knows this.

What are low IQ kids? How is this decided? What happens to the low IQ kids?

I was taught that hard work trumps all, and that potential is fostered, not innate. This line of thinking smacks of government policy that deprives us of individual agency -- it doesn't sound very conservative.

Also, rockets, being inert, do not require surgeons.

What percentage of American k-12 students need government "safeguards" because their parents are too lazy or stupid to get them into an appropriate school?

So here's a question. What percentage of American parents will be too "lazy/stupid" in a purely competitive schools market, and again, what happens to their kids and all those enrolled in the schools that are allowed to collapse because of competition? Is that an acceptable result for society, and does it have any social costs?

 

[BigRedBuster]

There is no purpose in government in schools whatsoever. Running a school is simple and the demand is everywhere and growing. Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended. Trump and Pence are committed to reform. Democrats are opposed. Fight is raging. Hope the democrats lose it. I've been paying private schools bills for over a decade btw. Kid's school operates at below 50% of nat'l average $/kid and score 94 percentile on standardized testing.

Really???? Trump is going to go away with public schools?

Interesting.

 

[QMany]

There is no purpose in government in schools whatsoever. Running a school is simple and the demand is everywhere and growing. Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended. Trump and Pence are committed to reform. Democrats are opposed. Fight is raging. Hope the democrats lose it. I've been paying private schools bills for over a decade btw. Kid's school operates at below 50% of nat'l average $/kid and score 94 percentile on standardized testing.

I'm curious, do you want a "credit" to be able to applied to the school of your choice or for everyone to foot the bill for their kids' school and the government (and taxes) to be kept out of schools altogether? I have no children.

 

[Sargon]

There is no purpose in government in schools whatsoever. Running a school is simple and the demand is everywhere and growing. Forced monopoly k-12 is idiotic and a majority of taxpayers know it and want it ended. Trump and Pence are committed to reform. Democrats are opposed. Fight is raging. Hope the democrats lose it. I've been paying private schools bills for over a decade btw. Kid's school operates at below 50% of nat'l average $/kid and score 94 percentile on standardized testing.

I'm curious, do you want a "credit" to be able to applied to the school of your choice or for everyone to foot the bill for their kids' school and the government (and taxes) to be kept out of schools altogether? I have no children.

Definitely not otherwise (insert Dem govt power person name here) will tell schools the money isn't going to be delivered because they don't allow men to use the girls bathroom. Anyway that is a process question and there's no point worrying about process when it's still not even agreed upon that non-government schools should receive equal tax revenue per head. Or said another way...taxpayer me/you...should be allowed to DECIDE WHICH school is getting my tax money. Me...I can tell you I would not EVER vote to give my tax money to a democrat run school. But I don't have that choice so democrat run schools have always gotten my tax money for 20 years running. Process question answer anyway....vouchers are fine in general. Lawyers, government workers, and various other scammers and idiots can screw up anything however so it ain't just what is done, it's also who is doing it. The devil is in the (no...not that) PEOPLE.

School choice analysis is uber simple.

Does the government have a constitutional requirement to tax for and provide non-market government owned k-12 schooling? No

Is goverment schooling performing well...results and cost? No. No.

Is schooling extremely complicated or requiring of national security consideration. No. No.

Are there non-government workers and investors and benefactors willing and able to provide good schools? Yes

Is the market for non-government schools big enough that they would seem to have a decent chance to survive and thrive? Yes

/endanalysis

Any system that should work can (will) be made to function poorly / too expensively when government (democrats, overpaid zero value lawyers) wants to kill it or suck blood from it. Obamacare is about healthcare I guess right? How many tax collectors were hired to provide us with better country "health". If you want more health don't hire any lawyers or tax collectors hire only nutritionists, doctors, trainers, and nurses.

Schools...back to that ha

US spending is at or near the highest in the world per government school student, while average student performance is at or near the bottom, right? We have the data and it's undeniable.

We spend too much and

our results stink.

Therefore...

STOP doing what we are doing.

POSITIVE, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE....few rules

1. terminate the failed bosses. Fired. Out. Don't call back. (drain the swamp...btw)

2. new management throws old "strategic plan" in the garbage.

3. new management makes a NEW plan...strategies tactics metrics culture people technologies

4. new management executes new plan (some forced employee turnover, some product/services terminated, new product/services rolled out.

Consider school books....

Most are paper printed, still. That is idiotic. Most should be digital being therefore MUCH cheaper and kids no longer need 40 lb backpacks. Save the planet, too! I can already hear idiot arguments like kids don't have computers. OMG shut the h up before you even type that. What is the cost of one decent tablet compared to the cost of 10 thick paper texts? The answer is....get rid of paper books already duh.

Dems rule the paper book business and they like ruling it (because they like ruling every single thing they can...it's what they live for...ruling)

If kids all used e-books as a norm then all new would be e-book authors have LOW barriers to entry into the market. Bad for the power Dems who own the business today which is about 2 things money being only one. The other is propaganda (polite word is bias). Schools given real choice would dump roughly half of the books being purchased today because the competition (both content and price) would QUICKLY provide options that are preferable to many teachers and admins.

e-books..continued....e-books can be loaded with video too right? Hey right and that is like what...like a lecture right? So like my primary lecturer could actually be the same person as 1 million other students too right? Hey yeah that's right I never thought of that. So like I don't really need many local teachers around doing "lecturing" when I can have awesome lecturer X embedded in my book and he/she only costs my parents like $10? Wow neat let's try that.

No...the democrats (teachers union, Obama...all of them) will list a string of 100 reasons why having a brilliant lecturer's lectures available to you is actually a terrible idea because (insert the 100 lies and stupid arguments) .

 

[NM11046]

I am interested to see how this thread evolves regarding education ... I have no children either, and honestly struggle a great deal when it comes to my city raising my taxes over and over again to pay for schools when there are other things that benefit the overall community that are in greater need.

 

[zoogs]

OMG shut the h up before you even type that. What is the cost of one decent tablet compared to the cost of 10 thick paper texts? The answer is....get rid of paper books already duh.

Do you think perhaps technology adaption (and not the existence of public K-12) is a reason for nondigital textbooks or the continued existence of teachers instead of prerecorded video lectures? I mean, I do love the idea of using taxpayer money to buy iPads for public schools.

That's an epic rant there.

To go back to what QMany said about school choice, do people without children get to not pay any taxes for schools? How would that affect cost? Since you say you do believe taxpayers should be allowed to choose which school system their money goes, it's not clear to me what your leading "Definitely not" refers to.

Regarding Obamacare, do you actually think the federal government could have hired more nurses and doctors to improve public health? How would that work in terms of delivering care?