Indiana vouchers prompt thousands to change schools (1 Viewer)

[Grim17]

I hope other states will follow Indiana's lead and offer kids an alternative like this.

Ind. vouchers prompt thousands to change schools
August 28, 2011|Tom Coyne, Associated Press

Weeks after Indiana began the nation’s broadest school voucher program, thousands of students have transferred from public to private schools, causing a spike in enrollment at some Catholic institutions that were only recently on the brink of closing for lack of pupils.

It’s a scenario public school advocates have long feared: Students fleeing local districts in large numbers, taking with them vital tax dollars that often end up at parochial schools. Opponents say the practice violates the separation of church and state.

In at least one district, public school principals have been pleading with parents not to move their children.

Ind. vouchers prompt thousands to change schools - Boston.com

 

[Helix]

Indiana cut more than 300 million from education, fired a lot of dedicated teachers, and then moaned about "failing schools" and yoonyuns.

Indiana then sold the toll road to a foreign country, blew through most of the money in three or four years, and still claimed a balanced budget.

personally, education is about the last thing i'd cut, and i have no problem with teachers making a decent wage. apparently, most don't agree with me. those who support gutting education should step up and take new low-paying teaching jobs with little to no job security so that they can show that they walk the walk.

 

[Jetboogieman]

apparently, most don't agree with me.

This is incorrect.

Most people do agree with you.

Just so happens those that don't agree with you seem to be able to shout louder and get what they want.

 

[Grim17]

I don't understand why anyone, with the exception of public school teachers and the unions, would be opposed to allowing parents to decide how the tax money for their children's education should be used? Do some of you have a problem with parents wanting a better education for their children?

It comes down to this... You either think it's best for parents to make the educational choices for their children, or you think the government knows what's best for our children and they should control how they're educated... If you're not sure which to choose, just evaluate which one fits better with the American principals of freedom and liberty, and which seems more aligned with a monarchy or dictatorship.

 

[AdamT]

I think the anti-voucher argument goes like this: there is a limited pot of money for public education. When you give vouchers it will result in dollars going towards better performing schools, which tend to be in wealthier areas, and take money away from less well performing schools, which tend to be in poorer areas. The upshot is that it takes funds away from the schools that need them the most and redistributes them to the schools that need them the least.

Not saying I support that argument -- I haven't really researched it -- but I think that is the counter argument.

 

[cpwill]

it is the counter argument - what it ignores is that as the schools get less money, they are also getting less students to support with that money - because those students have escaped and are now receiving superior educations.

it's an argument that prioritizes the school over the students.

 

[Ikari]

I don't understand why anyone, with the exception of public school teachers and the unions, would be opposed to allowing parents to decide how the tax money for their children's education should be used? Do some of you have a problem with parents wanting a better education for their children?

I don't have children, would you be ok with my not paying any taxes which go towards schools?

 

[Ikari]

it is the counter argument - what it ignores is that as the schools get less money, they are also getting less students to support with that money - because those students have escaped and are now receiving superior educations.

it's an argument that prioritizes the school over the students.

yeah, till the inner city kids start turning up in suburban schools. Then we'll see an end to it right quickly.

 

[AdamT]

yeah, till the inner city kids start turning up in suburban schools. Then we'll see an end to it right quickly.

Right, and that points out the other problem. Now, instead of being able to go to a so-so school in their own neighborhood, these kids are going to have to ride busses for an hour and a half to go to another school.

 

[DashingAmerican]

I love the idea of the voucher program, but the amount the voucher is worth should not exceed the amount of tax a person pays towards schools.

 

[Grim17]

yeah, till the inner city kids start turning up in suburban schools. Then we'll see an end to it right quickly.

I need a clarification please...

Did you just pull the "race card", "class warfare card", or was that attack of yours a combination of the two? What ever the case, it was still a pretty lame attempt to avoid dealing with the actual substance of the issue.

 

[Ikari]

I need a clarification please...

Did you just pull the "race card", "class warfare card", or was that attack of yours a combination of the two? What ever the case, it was still a pretty lame attempt to avoid dealing with the actual substance of the issue.

It's whatever you want. Are you more afraid of black people or poor people? The fact is when these inner city kids take their inner city problems to private schools or suburban schools previously free from these problems, the natives will not like the result. It won't stand. In the meantime you've essentially defunded inner city schools.

As I said, would you be ok with people with no children not paying taxes which support public schools? Or do you still want me to pay for your kids?

 

[DashingAmerican]

It's whatever you want. Are you more afraid of black people or poor people? The fact is when these inner city kids take their inner city problems to private schools or suburban schools, the locals will not like the result. It won't stand. In the meantime you've essentially defunded inner city schools.

As I said, would you be ok with people with no children not paying taxes which support public schools? Or do you still want me to pay for your kids?

I'm not afraid of either.
I don't think it'll be a problem. If the kid gets into a private school and starts showing his ass, they'll kick him out and guess what, he'll be back in public schools.

And no, just because you don't have kids, doesn't mean you didn't go to public school on someone else's tax payer money that also didn't have kids.

 

[Ikari]

I'm not afraid of either.
I don't think it'll be a problem. If the kid gets into a private school and starts showing his ass, they'll kick him out and guess what, he'll be back in public schools.

What if there are no more inner city schools? Indiana in this case had made deep cuts into public education (and was one reason they had to use vouchers to cover the short fall). The fact is that you will not get just one dude showing up with his ass hanging out. It will be a sudden jump in number and change in demographic. You'll get a lot of kids and not with just their asses hanging out. There are drastic problems with the way we handle public school funding and the quality of our inner city schools. Those problems will be outsourced to the private school sector. Perhaps they can handle, perhaps when the first shooting happens parents will be demanding that these voucher kids not be allowed in their school. What do you think is more likely?

And no, just because you don't have kids, doesn't mean you didn't go to public school on someone else's tax payer money that also didn't have kids.

My parents had kids, they paid taxes. Also I went to Catholic school before there were "vouchers". Why is it that you can freely spend my money where you wish, but I cannot withhold it? You're taking my money and then giving it to private schools so that the government doesn't have to maintain its own public school system; but why should I be paying for private school? My parents didn't get a check from you jerks, why should you get one from me? Why should i be forced to subsidize your kids. You had them, not me. I wasn't involved in that decision.

 

[RiverDad]

I don't have children, would you be ok with my not paying any taxes which go towards schools?

The childless would do well to keep their heads down when the issue of social welfare transfer policies is raised.

 

[RiverDad]

Conservatives are Pro-Choice. Liberals are Anti-Choice, as a general rule.

 

[Ikari]

The childless would do well to keep their heads down when the issue of social welfare transfer policies is raised.

No. Married people with children are given all sorts of benefits, subsidized through single folk with no kids. It's high time they realize the subsidies they are given in raising their kids and perhaps give a little bit of a thank you.

Regardless, the point of asking is that if you're going to demand from me money to fund public schools, I can buy into it. Education is important. But then if you take that money and instead give it to private schools so that the government can shirk its responsibilities to maintain proper public schools which are open to everyone; that's a different story. I'll pay for a fundamental, open, and public school system (though we currently fund and run our schools like retards, we should really reform our public school system). I'm not paying to send little Johnny to Catholic school. That ****'s expensive. If you want your kid to go to private school; pay for it. Otherwise, public schools should be maintained and reformed such that they best serve the students.

 

[DashingAmerican]

What if there are no more inner city schools? Indiana in this case had made deep cuts into public education (and was one reason they had to use vouchers to cover the short fall). The fact is that you will not get just one dude showing up with his ass hanging out. It will be a sudden jump in number and change in demographic. You'll get a lot of kids and not with just their asses hanging out. There are drastic problems with the way we handle public school funding and the quality of our inner city schools. Those problems will be outsourced to the private school sector. Perhaps they can handle, perhaps when the first shooting happens parents will be demanding that these voucher kids not be allowed in their school. What do you think is more likely?



My parents had kids, they paid taxes. Also I went to Catholic school before there were "vouchers". Why is it that you can freely spend my money where you wish, but I cannot withhold it? You're taking my money and then giving it to private schools so that the government doesn't have to maintain its own public school system; but why should I be paying for private school? My parents didn't get a check from you jerks, why should you get one from me? Why should i be forced to subsidize your kids. You had them, not me. I wasn't involved in that decision.

I think what I said is most likely. If the private schools have a 0 tolerance policy then the problem will not exist. Whether or not there isn't any more inner city schools is not the private schools problem. It is the parents problem.

Also, if there is going to be any tax reform it should not take place till the next generation.

Also, if I can keep it civil you can certainly at least try to.

And I hope your parents didn't get any of my money. It's likely I didn't have a job at the time.

That is all.

 

[Ikari]

I think what I said is most likely. If the private schools have a 0 tolerance policy then the problem will not exist. Whether or not there isn't any more inner city schools is not the private schools problem. It is the parents problem.

Many inner city schools have 0 tolerance policy. So nothing bad happens there?

Also, if there is going to be any tax reform it should not take place till the next generation.

Gotta take place sometime. No time like the present; particularly where our educational system is concerned.

Also, if I can keep it civil you can certainly at least try to.

There was nothing uncivil about what I wrote. If you believe so, then you imagined it.

And I hope your parents didn't get any of my money. It's likely I didn't have a job at the time.

That is all.

They got no one's money. There was no voucher system. They paid into the public schools via taxes and private ones with their own money.

 

[DashingAmerican]

Many inner city schools have 0 tolerance policy. So nothing bad happens there?



Gotta take place sometime. No time like the present; particularly where our educational system is concerned.



There was nothing uncivil about what I wrote. If you believe so, then you imagined it.



They got no one's money. There was no voucher system. They paid into the public schools via taxes and private ones with their own money.

If the inner city school has a true 0 tolerence policy then when something bad happens, the person does not do the same thing in the same school. He/she is expelled and sent to a different school.

 

[Ikari]

If the inner city school has a true 0 tolerence policy then when something bad happens, the person does not do the same thing in the same school. He/she is expelled and sent to a different school.

Out of sight out of mind eh? That's not the real point. That one dude is gone, but there are others there. It will just take one incident, one gang related beating or shooting or stabbing or riot on or near campus and the rest of the parents will be clamoring for the removal of ALL voucher kids.

 

[DashingAmerican]

Out of sight out of mind eh? That's not the real point. That one dude is gone, but there are others there. It will just take one incident, one gang related beating or shooting or stabbing or riot on or near campus and the rest of the parents will be clamoring for the removal of ALL voucher kids.

Then I guess it's a good thing America doesn't pander to the masses.

 

[RiverDad]

No. Married people with children are given all sorts of benefits, subsidized through single folk with no kids. It's high time they realize the subsidies they are given in raising their kids and perhaps give a little bit of a thank you.

That is true, but the point still remains that single people come out ahead and here's why - our retirement systems are not actuarially sound and younger generations actually have to subsidize the retirement income and especially the cost of medical care for seniors. The retirement system we have is, in big picture terms, a compact between parents and kids, where the kids help kick in to pay for the retirement of their parents, because the parents, over their lifetimes, DO NOT PAY ENOUGH IN FICA TAXES to self-fund their own retirement expenses.

For single people, the cost that they pay for school taxes and the other programs which aid parents with families, do not come close to the amount that they're going to be receiving from other people's children during their retirements. The last figure I saw for just Medicare subsidy was on the order of $250,000 more in benefits than people have paid in over their lives. That's just one program for the elderly.

Childless people are reneging on the implicit basis of the generational social contract - they're not providing society with kids who society will tax to help care for their parents later in life.

Regardless, the point of asking is that if you're going to demand from me money to fund public schools, I can buy into it. Education is important. But then if you take that money and instead give it to private schools so that the government can shirk its responsibilities to maintain proper public schools which are open to everyone; that's a different story. I'll pay for a fundamental, open, and public school system (though we currently fund and run our schools like retards, we should really reform our public school system). I'm not paying to send little Johnny to Catholic school. That ****'s expensive. If you want your kid to go to private school; pay for it. Otherwise, public schools should be maintained and reformed such that they best serve the students.

The point is to fund the education of the children, not a particular type of education in a particular ideology in a particular location. You don't have to pay to send little Johnny to Catholic School, all you have to pay is a tax, a portion of which is allocated equally to every child. If Catholic School costs more than the state grant, then the parents can choose to supplement the grant with their own money, find a cheaper school or direct the grant to a public school.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

it is the counter argument - what it ignores is that as the schools get less money, they are also getting less students to support with that money - because those students have escaped and are now receiving superior educations.

it's an argument that prioritizes the school over the students.

With such an influx of students - will that education remain superior?

Is it even superior to begin with? :shrug: Now that their state government is covering these vouchers - it's really 'private education by proxy of the government' and will become privy to regulations and restrictions - and flush.

I don't think it'll take very long for this 'superior education' to fall apart.

I also don't think states should be funding such education at all - they should FIX their broken **** with the money.

 

[Ikari]

Then I guess it's a good thing America doesn't pander to the masses.

Not too much, but this specific one would blow up huge.