Watch ABC's 20/20 About American Schools On Friday The 13th! (1 Viewer)

[aquapub]

On Friday the 13th, 2006, on ABC’s 20/20, a compelling case will be made for deregulation by the sharpest libertarian voice in America, John Stossel.

His special is about America’s high schools being far, far behind South Korea and other 2nd world nations that spend nowhere near as much as we do on education per student-because their system intelligently relies on competition instead of government monopolies.

I have never in my life seen anyone make such an overwhelming and compelling case for why the private sector does everything better as I did in his book, “Give Me A Break.”

As he did in his book, he will most certainly be highlighting the egregious damage done to our educational system by unaccountable teacher’s unions who, for instance, make it take tens of thousands of dollars (and years) to fire incompetent teachers.

And he will inevitably also follow that up by pointing out that even the states NOT being sodomized by unions are still run by government bureaucracies, which makes them only slightly better.

Look at public schools, public housing, BMVs, and so on. Then look at private schools, private housing, and private ANYTHING else. Private is always better. And it isn’t because they are better funded. Usually the private sector operates far cheaper and more efficiently than its dysfunctional counterpart. Washington D.C. schools, for example, are the most over-funded schools in the country, yet they are a total disaster.

The difference is competition.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with Libertarians or with the way John Stossel lays out a case, it should be a real treat. His work has changed my way of thinking many times over.

 

[aquapub]

Oh yeah, it airs at 10pm.

 

[Navy Pride]

On Friday the 13th, 2006, on ABC’s 20/20, a compelling case will be made for deregulation by the sharpest libertarian voice in America, John Stossel.

His special is about America’s high schools being far, far behind South Korea and other 2nd world nations that spend nowhere near as much as we do on education per student-because their system intelligently relies on competition instead of government monopolies.

I have never in my life seen anyone make such an overwhelming and compelling case for why the private sector does everything better as I did in his book, “Give Me A Break.”

As he did in his book, he will most certainly be highlighting the egregious damage done to our educational system by unaccountable teacher’s unions who, for instance, make it take tens of thousands of dollars (and years) to fire incompetent teachers.

And he will inevitably also follow that up by pointing out that even the states NOT being sodomized by unions are still run by government bureaucracies, which makes them only slightly better.

Look at public schools, public housing, BMVs, and so on. Then look at private schools, private housing, and private ANYTHING else. Private is always better. And it isn’t because they are better funded. Usually the private sector operates far cheaper and more efficiently than its dysfunctional counterpart. Washington D.C. schools, for example, are the most over-funded schools in the country, yet they are a total disaster.

The difference is competition.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with Libertarians or with the way John Stossel lays out a case, it should be a real treat. His work has changed my way of thinking many times over.

Thank you..........I have already told some of the members about this program tonight.......We have been having and ongoing battle on what I consider is a failed public school system in this country........I hope everyone will watch this program.........

 

[Deegan]

Exactly what the Bush "No Child Left Behind Act" was trying to address, but met with much resistence from these Unions, it's really a shame. I will be interested in watching this, as I often respect Stossel, and his fair reporting. I am surprised ABC allowed such a program to be aired, they usually seem to side with the Unions on everything, I guess they can no longer ignore the problem.

 

[Navy Pride]

Exactly what the Bush "No Child Left Behind Act" was trying to address, but met with much resistence from these Unions, it's really a shame. I will be interested in watching this, as I often respect Stossel, and his fair reporting. I am surprised ABC allowed such a program to be aired, they usually seem to side with the Unions on everything, I guess they can no longer ignore the problem.

20/20 is a very highly rated show and Stossel is his own man.........

Things are slowly starting to change with the stranglehold the NEA has on democrats, especially here in Washington State...........There are a lot of Republicans and Conservatives here who are teachers and resent the dues they pay being given to the democrats.........Stay tuned, it should be interesting.......

 

[Engimo]

Thank you..........I have already told some of the members about this program tonight.......We have been having and ongoing battle on what I consider is a failed public school system in this country........I hope everyone will watch this program.........

The program compares American schools to European schools, which are much better than ours.

The problem with the libertarian argument of "If only we privatized our schools, they'd be so much better! Public schooling has failed!" is that Europe has vastly greater amounts of standardization and socialized schooling. Europe has even less privatization than we do.

 

[shuamort]

I'll tivo the program, the one part that sets up an immediate red flag for me is this:

His special is about America’s high schools being far, far behind South Korea and other 2nd world nations that spend nowhere near as much as we do on education per student-because their system intelligently relies on competition instead of government monopolies.

Why doesn't he compare privatized schools in America to public schools. If making everything privatized is the answer, we should have some base figures in the US right now. Otherwise, the argument becomes apples and oranges. (And maybe my viewpoint/understanding of his point will change after watching the show too).

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I'll tivo the program, the one part that sets up an immediate red flag for me is this:

Why doesn't he compare privatized schools in America to public schools. If making everything privatized is the answer, we should have some base figures in the US right now. Otherwise, the argument becomes apples and oranges. (And maybe my viewpoint/understanding of his point will change after watching the show too).

The problem is not Public Schools, its parents who dont give a ****. Privatized Public Schools have done no better than their fully public counter parts. Catholic Schools do better, but only because problem kids are thrown out.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

On Friday the 13th, 2006, on ABC’s 20/20, a compelling case will be made for deregulation by the sharpest libertarian voice in America, John Stossel.

His special is about America’s high schools being far, far behind South Korea and other 2nd world nations that spend nowhere near as much as we do on education per student-because their system intelligently relies on competition instead of government monopolies.

I have never in my life seen anyone make such an overwhelming and compelling case for why the private sector does everything better as I did in his book, “Give Me A Break.”

As he did in his book, he will most certainly be highlighting the egregious damage done to our educational system by unaccountable teacher’s unions who, for instance, make it take tens of thousands of dollars (and years) to fire incompetent teachers.

And he will inevitably also follow that up by pointing out that even the states NOT being sodomized by unions are still run by government bureaucracies, which makes them only slightly better.

Look at public schools, public housing, BMVs, and so on. Then look at private schools, private housing, and private ANYTHING else. Private is always better. And it isn’t because they are better funded. Usually the private sector operates far cheaper and more efficiently than its dysfunctional counterpart. Washington D.C. schools, for example, are the most over-funded schools in the country, yet they are a total disaster.

The difference is competition.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with Libertarians or with the way John Stossel lays out a case, it should be a real treat. His work has changed my way of thinking many times over.

Privatized Public Schools have statistically faired no better than their public counterparts. The problem is the parents not the schools.

Cuba has the highest literacy rate in the world. The former Soviet Union consistently out performed American Public schools, and that was communism.

You can tout the privatization horn all you want as the solution to all of societies ills, but until you get the parents in these underperforming schools to start giving a damn, nothing is going to change.

 

[Navy Pride]

The problem is not Public Schools, its parents who dont give a ****. Privatized Public Schools have done no better than their fully public counter parts. Catholic Schools do better, but only because problem kids are thrown out.

Problem children are thrown out of the public schools too.........

 

[Navy Pride]

Privatized Public Schools have statistically faired no better than their public counterparts. The problem is the parents not the schools.

Cuba has the highest literacy rate in the world. The former Soviet Union consistently out performed American Public schools, and that was communism.

You can tout the privatization horn all you want as the solution to all of societies ills, but until you get the parents in these underperforming schools to start giving a damn, nothing is going to change.

When in doubt don't blame it on the educators, blame it on the parents...........sad.........

 

[Cremaster77]

Privatized Public Schools have statistically faired no better than their public counterparts. The problem is the parents not the schools.

Cuba has the highest literacy rate in the world. The former Soviet Union consistently out performed American Public schools, and that was communism.

You can tout the privatization horn all you want as the solution to all of societies ills, but until you get the parents in these underperforming schools to start giving a damn, nothing is going to change.

You are 100% correct. Saying that Asian kids perform better in school is because of competition is like saying the sun came up because I brushed my teeth this morning. Just because both things occur doesn't mean one caused the other. If you've ever been to Asian countries (and I have several times), you quickly realize the importance those socities place on education. Then you come home to America and are embarrassed by how little emphasize American society places on it. Until you change societal priorities, American kids won't be doing any better in the world market.

 

[Inuyasha]

Our education system is suffering and has been for a long time. But before I go and compare it with other systems I want to look at what it once was. Until the 1960's we had one of the best education systems in the world. Our kids were near the top in things like math and science. We studied both American history and world history and kids in rural areas all knew that France was the name of a country and Paris wasn't. Every kid knew the capitol of his or her state.

We had well equipped schools with biology facilities, chemistry labs and the like. We had bands and orchestras and if a kid didn't have the money to buy an instrument the school furnished one for him. By the time we reached our first year in high school we all knew who Robert Frost or Carl Sandberg were even if we didn't care about them. By you senior year you had been introduced to William Shakespeare and Washington Irving. We had civics class and we had some idea about how our system worked.

We didn't have a athletic field but we did have an area where the teams could practice. The games were played in public park facilities. We had a pretty good gym and a swimming pool. I went to a school in upstate New York. The school drew from mostly Italian and black kids. They were not wealthy by any means bit they could read and write and a few went to college.

In New York State we had the Regents system. It was tough and you had to know your stuff. Later I went to California for my last year in HS. After new York's Regents system it was a breeze and I finished on the honor role every marking period but still the California system was harder then than it is today.

Teachers were allowed to take disciplinary measures when they had to. Parents never fought with teachers. If parents had to show up at school it was the kid who caught hell and not the teacher. On the athletic field coach was king and parents didn't argue or fight with him. There was no sports rage from the parents. My dad had been a professional baseball player and he helped me a lot but if i tried to pit him against the coach he sad the coach was my manager and he wouldn't interfere.

So......What the hell happened?

 

[Stinger]

The program compares American schools to European schools, which are much better than ours.

The problem with the libertarian argument of "If only we privatized our schools, they'd be so much better! Public schooling has failed!" is that Europe has vastly greater amounts of standardization and socialized schooling. Europe has even less privatization than we do.

'

Actually one of the highlights of his program, as he discussed on the promo's, is that that is not the case in successful European schools, money is given to the student, it follows the student into either public or PRIVATE schools, they all compete for the money.

 

[Stinger]

The problem is not Public Schools, its parents who dont give a ****. Privatized Public Schools have done no better than their fully public counter parts. Catholic Schools do better, but only because problem kids are thrown out.

Where on earth do you get the idea that Catholic schools are better because they throw out problems kids as opposed to public school not doing the same?

As the author of the piece puts it, imagine if the government set up public grocery stores and you had to shop at the one you were assigned to. How fast do you think the quality of the food and service would drop. And no matter how much more you paid the employees and managers it would only get worse. It's the competition that drives improvement and even parental involvement.

 

[Stinger]

Privatized Public Schools have statistically faired no better than their public counterparts. The problem is the parents not the schools.

Cuba has the highest literacy rate in the world. The former Soviet Union consistently out performed American Public schools, and that was communism.

You can tout the privatization horn all you want as the solution to all of societies ills, but until you get the parents in these underperforming schools to start giving a damn, nothing is going to change.

The difference is we have a unionized public system. In Cuba or the Soviet Union you either performed as a socialist teacher or you were out in the field digging potatoes or in prison. Her you work in a monopoly system with union protection. You keep saying it's the parents, well one reason parents aren't involved is because they are powerless versus the system and the teachers unions. Private schools do outperform public schools on average and what is more important educating the child or maintaining the teachers unions? I say the kids and we should try everything even vouchers to improve a broken system.

 

[Navy Pride]

Our education system is suffering and has been for a long time. But before I go and compare it with other systems I want to look at what it once was. Until the 1960's we had one of the best education systems in the world. Our kids were near the top in things like math and science. We studied both American history and world history and kids in rural areas all knew that France was the name of a country and Paris wasn't. Every kid knew the capitol of his or her state.

We had well equipped schools with biology facilities, chemistry labs and the like. We had bands and orchestras and if a kid didn't have the money to buy an instrument the school furnished one for him. By the time we reached our first year in high school we all knew who Robert Frost or Carl Sandberg were even if we didn't care about them. By you senior year you had been introduced to William Shakespeare and Washington Irving. We had civics class and we had some idea about how our system worked.

We didn't have a athletic field but we did have an area where the teams could practice. The games were played in public park facilities. We had a pretty good gym and a swimming pool. I went to a school in upstate New York. The school drew from mostly Italian and black kids. They were not wealthy by any means bit they could read and write and a few went to college.

In New York State we had the Regents system. It was tough and you had to know your stuff. Later I went to California for my last year in HS. After new York's Regents system it was a breeze and I finished on the honor role every marking period but still the California system was harder then than it is today.

Teachers were allowed to take disciplinary measures when they had to. Parents never fought with teachers. If parents had to show up at school it was the kid who caught hell and not the teacher. On the athletic field coach was king and parents didn't argue or fight with him. There was no sports rage from the parents. My dad had been a professional baseball player and he helped me a lot but if i tried to pit him against the coach he sad the coach was my manager and he wouldn't interfere.

So......What the hell happened?

The sixties and liberalism and the "Feel Good Do it" mantra, as well as the end to corporal punishment in the school system...........Kids have no fear of their teachers...........

 

[Paladin]

...well one reason parents aren't involved is because they are powerless versus the system and the teachers unions.

Parents hold all the power.
They don't like a student's grade in a teacher's class? The student is switched to another teacher's class.
A large male student physically threatens a smaller female teacher? He is suspended out of school for three days and gets to come back to the same class. Because mommy and daddy say their little darling didn't mean it.
Mommy and daddy don't think their sweet angel would ever use drugs, even though he was caught high and in possession? The teacher has to apologize for making that outrageous accusation.

Problem children are thrown out of the public schools too.........

Only in the most extreme circumstances. And usually the kid is only transferred to another school within the same district. Unless there was a gun involved.
ted

 

[Navy Pride]

I forgot about the show but I did get to watch the last 10 minutes and the talk about vouchers, charter schools and getting the unions out of the business was very interesting..........

 

[tecoyah]

I watched it.....lots of pertinent information, but it made me so very glad we homeschool our kids.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

The difference is we have a unionized public system. In Cuba or the Soviet Union you either performed as a socialist teacher or you were out in the field digging potatoes or in prison. Her you work in a monopoly system with union protection. You keep saying it's the parents, well one reason parents aren't involved is because they are powerless versus the system and the teachers unions. Private schools do outperform public schools on average and what is more important educating the child or maintaining the teachers unions? I say the kids and we should try everything even vouchers to improve a broken system.

Parents aren’t totally powerless. They just focus on the wrong things.

• Fundamentalist and evangelical parents spend more time at school board meetings worrying about not teaching evolution in school and what books are in the school library, than actual issues on how their children are performing in that school.

• Inner city parents bitch about the teachers and how their children are not learning, but they fail to realize that most of the responsibility lies with the parents.

I may have learned the basics of reading in first grade, but I learned to like reading at home. If I got a paddled at school, then I got wore out when I got home. We went to the library often. If someone’s child is barely reading at the age of 12, that is more the fault of the parents than the school. Because I will tell you right now, I don’t care where my son went to school, he would learn to read. If he did not learn to at school, he would learn to at home. I grew up poor, my mom and dad divorced when I was 8 years old and my brother was 5. After that my mom worked two or more jobs to support us. When we went to a bad rural public school, my mom just worked that much harder so we could go to Catholic School. These parents don’t need some voucher hand out, they need to get off their ass and take an interest in their child’s education. Besides, do you honestly think that a decent private school is going to take some crack dealers 5 kids? Of course not. Everywhere they have tried vouchers so far all it has amounted to is a taxpayer handout to rich white suburban communities where the public schools were good anyway. Just a way for Joe Fundamentalist to send his kids to some Fundamentalist Anti-Science Private School on the taxpayer’s dime. All this “blame the teachers crap”, you know there are sorry teachers out there, but there are a lot more sorry parents than worthless teachers. How can you blame teacher for a kid not performing when the kid’s mother has never worked a day in her life and sits around peddling crack? You think privatization is going to fix that?

 

[libertarian_knight]

'

Actually one of the highlights of his program, as he discussed on the promo's, is that that is not the case in successful European schools, money is given to the student, it follows the student into either public or PRIVATE schools, they all compete for the money.

close. Not "given" to the student, but attached to them.

So, if say a monopolized public school looses a student, they loose that money too, but it's OK, since they don't have to teach the student. If they want that money, so they can buy state of the art administration buildings, then they MUST attract student and parents, otherwise, they don't get it.

Attaching money to the kids is ALL that is necessary, that way rich, poor, smart, athletic, artistic or anything, all kids have the money they need to go to school, and the choice necessary to improve our system.

Some argue that choice isn't enough, it is. It's not going to create a perfect or utopian education system. It's not going to be devoid of corruption, greed, waste or maliciousness from teachers. We know that; the problem is monopolized schools don't, they think the perfect education comes from THIER education. All people who advocated what I advocate is a BETTER system, not a perfect one.

Full funding for students, choice in schools, competition, equality, equity, all these are achieved, not to mention, EDUCATION.

 

[libertarian_knight]

Parents aren’t totally powerless. They just focus on the wrong things.

• Fundamentalist and evangelical parents spend more time at school board meetings worrying about not teaching evolution in school and what books are in the school library, than actual issues on how their children are performing in that school.

• Inner city parents bitch about the teachers and how their children are not learning, but they fail to realize that most of the responsibility lies with the parents.

I may have learned the basics of reading in first grade, but I learned to like reading at home. If I got a paddled at school, then I got wore out when I got home. We went to the library often. If someone’s child is barely reading at the age of 12, that is more the fault of the parents than the school. Because I will tell you right now, I don’t care where my son went to school, he would learn to read. If he did not learn to at school, he would learn to at home. I grew up poor, my mom and dad divorced when I was 8 years old and my brother was 5. After that my mom worked two or more jobs to support us. When we went to a bad rural public school, my mom just worked that much harder so we could go to Catholic School. These parents don’t need some voucher hand out, they need to get off their ass and take an interest in their child’s education. Besides, do you honestly think that a decent private school is going to take some crack dealers 5 kids? Of course not. Everywhere they have tried vouchers so far all it has amounted to is a taxpayer handout to rich white suburban communities where the public schools were good anyway. Just a way for Joe Fundamentalist to send his kids to some Fundamentalist Anti-Science Private School on the taxpayer’s dime. All this “blame the teachers crap”, you know there are sorry teachers out there, but there are a lot more sorry parents than worthless teachers. How can you blame teacher for a kid not performing when the kid’s mother has never worked a day in her life and sits around peddling crack? You think privatization is going to fix that?

Well, remember, parents think there child's school system is doing well. In Stossel's 20/20 the vast majority of parents rated schools A or B. The problem is not the parents, because most parents are not teachers. Most parents will try, but if they try and fail then what?

Should most parents make their own children's clothes? SHould most parent's farm, raise and slaughter their own children's food? No. See teachers are SPECIALISTS, and division of labor and specialization note that specialist are way more qualified that parents. Which is what parents are, novice educators.

We don't pay farmers and automakers to do what we can do already for ourselves and better. We pay them because they do it better than we do.

If normal Parents are educating children better than the specialist the SPECIALISTS SUCK.

Furthmore, personal info here. My step-father dropped out of highschool to go to vietnam, underage. My mother dropped out of highschool to have me. My Father dropped out to work, to support my mother and me, though they divorced three years later. They were very involved in my education until I went to highschool, at which point, even though they had some highschool, I surpassed them. What help could they have been to me in chemistry, biology, physics, calculus, spanish, CAD/Mechanical drafting? these were more core subjects in HS and I graduated with four AP creidts, that's four college level course credits, and in subjects my parents had barely seen. (My mother later went on to become a Regustered Nurse.)

The point of my mini-bio was that my parents could not have helped me in highschool. Yes, they fostered and environemnt and helped me learn to read. But as you all know now, I am super intelligent and all that :lol: so it was easy for me, and thus for them. If i were a normal kid, i'd've been lost I am sure.

I have a younger brother, fortunately another smart kid. He's 10 years old, and I am teaching him highschool and collegel level material already, becuase I can do for him, what my parents could not do for me.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Well, remember, parents think there child's school system is doing well. In Stossel's 20/20 the vast majority of parents rated schools A or B. The problem is not the parents, because most parents are not teachers. Most parents will try, but if they try and fail then what?

Should most parents make their own children's clothes? SHould most parent's farm, raise and slaughter their own children's food? No. See teachers are SPECIALISTS, and division of labor and specialization note that specialist are way more qualified that parents. Which is what parents are, novice educators.

We don't pay farmers and automakers to do what we can do already for ourselves and better. We pay them because they do it better than we do.

If normal Parents are educating children better than the specialist the SPECIALISTS SUCK.

Furthmore, personal info here. My step-father dropped out of highschool to go to vietnam, underage. My mother dropped out of highschool to have me. My Father dropped out to work, to support my mother and me, though they divorced three years later. They were very involved in my education until I went to highschool, at which point, even though they had some highschool, I surpassed them. What help could they have been to me in chemistry, biology, physics, calculus, spanish, CAD/Mechanical drafting? these were more core subjects in HS and I graduated with four AP creidts, that's four college level course credits, and in subjects my parents had barely seen. (My mother later went on to become a Regustered Nurse.)

The point of my mini-bio was that my parents could not have helped me in highschool. Yes, they fostered and environemnt and helped me learn to read. But as you all know now, I am super intelligent and all that :lol:so it was easy for me, and thus for them. If i were a normal kid, i'd've been lost I am sure.

I have a younger brother, fortunately another smart kid. He's 10 years old, and I am teaching him highschool and collegel level material already, becuase I can do for him, what my parents could not do for me.

I live in the Kansas City metro. We have lived up here for about 6 years. We have a 5 year old child. For the first five years, we lived in midtown Kansas City. We have sent our son to Montessori school since he was one year old. However, because the Kansas City public school district is one of the worst in the nation, we decided last spring to buy a home just outside of Kansas City, Missouri in Johnson County, Kansas. Johnson County has some of the best public schools in the state of Kansas. Now, why are the schools so bad in Kansas City, yet so much better in the suburbs? It’s not because the Kansas City schools spend less. It’s not because the suburban schools have necessarily better teachers. It’s because the parents out here are more involved in their children’s education. We have teachers unions out here. Yet we have better schools. The problem and the solution lies almost solely with the parents. They tried the vouchers in Ohio and in other areas. In every scenario, few private schools would accept inner city students. Vouchers were used by the wealthy white students out in the suburbs to get a private education subsidized on the taxpayer’s dime.

This whole voucher crap is nothing but an invention of the religious right designed to get the taxpayer to pay for their kids to go to some evangelical school. We have plenty of good Public Schools in this country. Our good Public Schools are on par with any public school system in the world. Our problem is that we have some very, very, bad public schools as well. However, the only difference between those really bad public schools and the really good ones is the parents. What the government ought to do is just lay the problem at their feet, and then those parents in the underperforming school districts will have to take some responsibility for their child’s education instead of expecting society to fix it for them. If they want to send their children to a private school, then fine. I can’t say that I would blame them at all. If we stayed in Kansas City, you can bet that our son would have attended a private school. However, they need to send their kids to a private school on their dime. If they have to shell out the money for their kid’s education, you can bet they are going to have vested interest in their kid performing well. If the taxpayer picks up the tab for it, then they will have no more of a vested interest than they would if their kid just continued to attend a public school.

 

[Navy Pride]

I watched it.....lots of pertinent information, but it made me so very glad we homeschool our kids.

Thank you, as I have been saying the public school system is broken and just pouring more money into is not the answer.............Vouchers and charter schools need to be looked at.............The NEA needs to get out of the picture and the democrats need quit worshiping at their altar.......In addition Merit pay needs to be installed and teachers that can't hack it need to be fired not given pay raises.....

It was outrageous when they said that teachers that abused children could not be fired because of union interference........