Can the Bush fans explain this to me?

[chess9]

Schools are an anachronism, or they should be. Vouchers are a waste of time. Soon all the private schools will have the same problems you find in the public schools. Education needs to be home centered, particularly for young kids. With computers, television, books (remember them?), and videos every kid can get a great education through the 8th grade. High school students benefit more from the interaction with peers and specialized faculty, so I would support public high schools for the near future.

This vouchers idea simply shows how backward Bush and the Republicans really are. They are hopelessly mired in the 19th Century. So who is surprised?

 

[jjm]

Who says I oppose vouchers? I oppose partial subsidies. If we are going to have vouchers, they should cover 100% or nearly 100%, just like Sweden. Anything substantially less excludes nearly all low income families because they can't pay the difference.

Excuses like "gee, we have to do this incrementally," or "gee, that's all those ba$tard liberals will allow" are just bull. The fact is there is no way to assert that partial subsidies benefit anyone other than those who can already afford private school.

If you are a supporter of vouchers, and really believe that they promote competition and choice, only full subsidies get you to the promised land.

EDIT: fixed typo

 

[Russ]

<< Sorry to say this Russ, but time and time again, I've noticed that you're the dumb one here. Sure, you whip put witty one-liners.
But you never lay out the logic of your arguments, which leads me to conclude that you rarely think critically. I am sorry that you didn't have a decent experience from your public education. >>



Pennstate,

You're so full of crap. My experience in MY public education was excellent. I went to school at a time when teachers still cared; when they weren't handcuffed by piles and piles of red tape; when the unions were not FAR more interested in their political agenda than the actual welfare of the kids.

It is my experience since, in dealing with thousands of examples of the product produced by a failing system that tells me exactly what kind of shape it's in. Read that word; THOUSANDS.

I cannot count how many times I've interviewed highschool graduates who had to take the job application home and have their mother fill it out; how many times I've interviewed kids who could not do simple multiplication; who completely lacked any ability to reason a problem on their own.

You think because I don't run around here crapping my guts out all over this forum like most, that I haven't dealt with the same issues and problems? I'll guarantee you that I have a hell of a lot more experience dealing with the problems in the public school system then you, college boy.

I spent 5 years on the LIT (Learning Improvement Team) for our local elementary school. I spent two years as a mentor in one of the programs at our junior high dealing with some of the worst examples of the &quot;product&quot;. For three years running, I ran the major fund-raising auction for the local PTA and raised more money for them then anyone in history.

Tell me, sonny, just what have YOU done? From whence do you draw your vast experience?

The system is a disaster, and if it isn't fixed, and fixed soon, you, and all of the rest of the apologists, are going to wake up one day and find that you are living in a third world country.

Russ, NCNE

 

[JellyBaby]

Smackdown.

 

[Shantanu]

boo-yeah

 

[Tripleshot]

Congratulations Russ. We are proud of your acomplishments.

 

[JellyBaby]

<< Since we did such a poor job or parernting how can we expect our children to be much better as parents they had us as role models. >>

Red, admission is the first step. Still, every kid at some point is responsible for his own actions. But if at least one parent could stay home and, well, parent the kids, teaching them responsibility and instilling values we may not be in the rut we're in today.

Yep when Gen-X and Gen-Y starting having offspring, Heaven help us all. We've two choices: destroy the nuclear familiy once and for all and let Big Gubment raise all children. Or, restore the nuclear/extended family structure and get parents parenting again. This half-assed approach is working half-assed.

 

[Wingznut]

&quot;I cannot count how many times I've interviewed highschool graduates who had to take the job application home and have their mother fill it out; how many times I've interviewed kids who could not do simple multiplication; who completely lacked any ability to reason a problem on their own.&quot;

Those kids had parents who didn't care about their education. You offer vouchers to these parents, do you really think this will improve the kids? Since the vouchers won't cover enough of the expense, these parents still won't pay for private schooling, because they don't care.

It's so easy to blame the teachers, to blame the system. It's not the system. It's the parents. I went to my kid's &quot;square dancing&quot; program a couple weeks ago. It was very sad, seeing how few parents showed up. My wife volunteered to help out for a class project. She was the only one.

Parents are too concerned about themselves. Their career. Their accomplishments.

(Ok, I'm depressed now.)

Anyway, vouchers aren't going to fix that. Vouchers will only benefit the people already using private school, and those on the borderline of being able to afford it. Certainly not the majority of kids. And arguably, barely a few of the kids that really need help.

 

[jjm]

Wingznut makes a decent point. The excuse that there are too many two-earner faimilies and that they are the root of the problem is a crock. Parents who want to get involved can get involved, regardless of who stays home or who doesn't. Whether the government should try to promote that is a much tougher issue. Should government provide tax credits for volunteerism? Should it mandate time off for school support? Either stinks of the type of government intrusion that the right so loves to attack.

Vouchers are too often touted as a silver bullet. The wishy-washy partial subsidy plan is as bad as any other incremental approach one might like to criticize. And holding vouchers up as a method of promoting competition is hokum. The only possible explanation to support partial subsidies is to benefit wealthier families and private schools (which are mostly affiliated with religious groups). And either the full subsidy or partial subsidy smacks of social redistribution of wealth, so anyone trying to criticize using that aspect loses on both plans. The 100% plan is far more justified IF the goal is to promote higher standards via competition. Of course, to do that, the $1.6 trillion tax cut evaporates. Ahh, choices, choices. Where are the real priorities?

 

[Russ]

<< Vouchers are too often touted as a silver bullet. >>



They are not a silver bullet, but they are a start. If we are going to even begin to solve the problem, we have to stop sacrificing the good on the altar of the perfect. Perfect does not exist.

Russ, NCNE

 

[jjm]

Damn double post.

 

[jjm]

&quot;Perfect does not exist.&quot;

I agree; perfectly. But your point speaks volumes as to why the subsidy needs to be 100%, not half. Half accomplishes nothing, so it's not even a start.

 

[Wingznut]

&quot;...but they are a start. &quot;

There's no &quot;starting&quot; something like this. If you go in half-@ssed, that's the best result you can get... A half-@ssed one.

Cosmo's post was an excellent one. If GW wanted to try something as drastic as that, I'd support it.


&quot;The excuse that there are too many two-earner faimilies and that they are the root of the problem is a crock.&quot;

I'll have to disagree with you on this one. If both parents aren't home, how can they parent their child. If for the majority of the child's waking day the parents aren't around, who is really raising the child? The babysitter? You'll never convince me that the babysitter (no matter how good this person is) will have the same vestment into the child. As for school age kids... It's a certain fact that kids get into more trouble in that window of opportunity after school and before the parents get home.

I could get into much more on this subject... But it's probably further off topic.

 

[Phatty]

heh heh heh, bush fans