Coronavirus

[One Brow]

Your other outrage is over teachers being barred from giving pornographic material to children...

I am a little disturbed that you find the material pornographic.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

As long as private schools refuse to serve the entire public, they don't deserve public funding.

That is quite a radical proposal. So you’d deny Harvard, Stanford and other private institutions from federal / state research grant money? You’d advocate barring students attending those universities from receiving federally subsidized student aid or loans?

I think you are wrong. I think educational institutions should be paid for the service of educating, and the government has a vested interest in having an educated workforce. I’d even go so far as to support mothers who homeschool their kids well enough that those kids can pass state proctored competency tests should be able to pay themselves the tax money the government sets aside for the education of those kids.

 

[Sardines]

That is quite a radical proposal. So you’d deny Harvard, Stanford and other private institutions from federal / state research grant money? You’d advocate barring students attending those universities from receiving federally subsidized student aid or loans?

I think you are wrong. I think educational institutions should be paid for the service of educating, and the government has a vested interest in having an educated workforce. I’d even go so far as to support mothers who homeschool their kids well enough that those kids can pass state proctored competency tests should be able to pay themselves the tax money the government sets aside for the education of those kids.

This guy did not take as big a leap as you did in your post.

 

[One Brow]

That is quite a radical proposal. So you’d deny Harvard, Stanford and other private institutions from federal / state research grant money?

Research grant money is earned through a competitive process.

You’d advocate barring students attending those universities from receiving federally subsidized student aid or loans?

Loans and other tuition relief are available to every person, perhaps based on income only.

I think you are wrong. I think educational institutions should be paid for the service of educating, and the government has a vested interest in having an educated workforce. I’d even go so far as to support mothers who homeschool their kids well enough that those kids can pass state proctored competency tests should be able to pay themselves the tax money the government sets aside for the education of those kids.

I'm sure you are fine with the general public supporting schools for the elite.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Research grant money is earned through a competitive process.

It is still public funding going to private schools which you said shouldn't happen, but it is fun to watch you carve exceptions to your earlier ridiculous blanket statement.

I'm sure you are fine with the general public supporting schools for the elite.

I am absolutely fine it. I think all kids should get the same amount regardless of religion, ethnicity, biological sex, or socioeconomic status. If you own property then you pay property tax regardless of having or not having any school-aged kids, and if you have school-aged kids then you get a fixed-rate school voucher for each school-aged kid.

 

[One Brow]

It is still public funding going to private schools which you said shouldn't happen, but it is fun to watch you carve exceptions to your earlier ridiculous blanket statement.

It's more fun watching you twist the discussion completely out of context in order to score points.

I am absolutely fine it. I think all kids should get the same amount regardless of religion, ethnicity, biological sex, or socioeconomic status.

If you live in elite cities, the public schools are already better funded than the poor neighborhoods. What you're proposing is a transfer of funds from one public school system to another. Feel free to "carve out exceptions".

If you own property then you pay property tax regardless of having or not having any school-aged kids, and if you have school-aged kids then you get a fixed-rate school voucher for each school-aged kid.

Which would then go to any school that accept all students (possibly having a lottery if there is overflow).

 

[Al-O-Meter]

If you live in elite cities, the public schools are already better funded than the poor neighborhoods.

Under the system we have now, that is true in may places, and is one of the biggest reason school vouchers are a more equitable solution. The system we have now is funded by local property taxes and the local school district gets the local money. If that school district is in a neighborhood of McMansions then the school district is flush with cash. If the school district is in a shanty town then it is poor. With the voucher system, the school's funding isn't set by local property values but by enrollment.

With a school voucher system, the empty nest oldsters with the big house on the hill will be paying a ton in property taxes but the modest neighborhood with starter homes will have schools flush with cash because that is where the kids are. It is a system of wealth transfer from the childless to the young breeders which happens to be in the nations best interest as well as a more fair way to do things.

 

[One Brow]

With the voucher system, the school's funding isn't set by local property values but by enrollment.

The private schools that admit the elite will get more direct investments from parents, local businesses, etc. Inequality will be exacerbated. This is human nature.

With a school voucher system, the empty nest oldsters with the big house on the hill will be paying a ton in property taxes but the modest neighborhood with starter homes will have schools flush with cash because that is where the kids are. It is a system of wealth transfer from the childless to the young breeders which happens to be in the nations best interest as well as a more fair way to do things.

Unless you are proposing state control of property taxes, the empty nesters will lower their burden, especially if their taxes wind up in urban areas.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Unless you are proposing state control of property taxes, the empty nesters will lower their burden, especially if their taxes wind up in urban areas.

Property taxes are a percentage of the value of the home. If empty nesters move to cheaper housing then they would pay less, and whomever bought the McMansion would be contributing the large share. The expensive houses pay most to the education fund and the areas with starter homes receive most of the proceeds with school vouchers.

It is the current system, which you are advocating for, that property taxes from rich areas stay in the school districts of the rich areas, and areas with starter home have to make due with less because their houses aren't as valuable.

 

[One Brow]

Property taxes are a percentage of the value of the home. If empty nesters move to cheaper housing then they would pay less, and whomever bought the McMansion would be contributing the large share. The expensive houses pay most to the education fund and the areas with starter homes receive most of the proceeds with school vouchers.

Your area doesn't have city-by-city votes on property taxes?

It is the current system, which you are advocating for, that property taxes from rich areas stay in the school districts of the rich areas, and areas with starter home have to make due with less because their houses aren't as valuable.

There is no solution to inequality that can't be sabotaged. I'm against proposals that increase inequality.

 

[Deleted member 365]

This guy did not take as big a leap as you did in your post.

LOL!

He’s so predictable.

It’s almost like he’s a lazy troll.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Your area doesn't have city-by-city votes on property taxes?

Nope. California property taxes are constitutionally limited to 1% of assessed value with a maximum yearly increase of 2% and have been that way since 1978. To change it would require a constitutional amendment.