patrick.net

Lots and lots of over-the-top discussions back and forth just so that some people can in some lame way try and discount public schools because they want others to think that just because a school might have "Public" in front of it and oh-no- we can't have any government intervention in our schools because it interferes with a sort of narrow sighted belief that schools shouldn't be public because "gubermint" that it must be by default bad.

Let me inject some reality into the discussion. So let's be clear: The US public school system isn't perfect. Last time I checked I believe Finland was the Number one ranked country in regards to their schools ( which are public as well BTW). But the argument that "Public" schools are bad just because they are... "Public" is a stupid one. The model itself is totally fine. Its about the curriculum, the funding, and the physical schools themselves. In many states funds that were supposed to be set aside for education are constantly being used for other purposes which in turn puts a strain on the system.

But let's talk about government funding in general. For those who constantly go "Rah Rah Rah!, Government -run anything is Bad!" well... what do you think would happen if everything were instead funded by private individuals and business? You would get "Old Europe" in a bag, that's what. We would go right back to having a rather large, grossly uneducated peasantry with a very small, highly educated elite at the top lording over everything. The whole reason that government plays a role in.... well- "governing" is to in parts ensure that everyone has at least a chance at the pie. Take that power away and put it into the hands of individuals and that pie shrinks dramatically. That is what a democratic system is basically all about in a nutshell. We live in a democratic country and part of that means we pay taxes and those taxes are used to fund public and social functions. If you don't like that then too bad. That's the country we live in and how it was founded.

Lastly, I come from a very long line of teachers. I am one of the first in my family to not become a teacher myself. But all I can say is that me, my brother, and basically my entire family ALL received public school educations. We all do fairly well financially and have been successful in life. So I take issue with people who run around yacking about public schools and how they should be privatized or whatnot when its clear they lack even the basic facts to present a valid arguments and instead let ideology get in the way of reality.

edvard2 says

The whole reason that government plays a role in.... well- "governing" is to in
parts ensure that everyone has at least a chance at the pie. Take that power
away and put it into the hands of individuals and that pie shrinks dramatically.
That is what a democratic system is basically all about in a nutshell.

Well put sir.

One of the main reasons that our academic system is struggling is because children don't want to learn. They don't apply themselves 100%, it's not even close. Their slacking is an abomination. They don't seem to understand that studying/writing papers/working on projects is their job and a "fair share" contribution to the family unit. And many parents are responsible for this, for not imparting this fact/belief to their offspring.

dublin hillz says

And many parents are responsible for this, for not imparting this fact/belief to
their offspring.

Many parents don't have the time. They're working three shitty McJobs just to provide food and shelter for their offspring.

freak80 says

dublin hillz says

And many parents are responsible for this, for not imparting this fact/belief to
their offspring.

Many parents don't have the time. They're working three shitty McJobs just to provide food and shelter for their offspring.

I think this issue cuts across all social strata in society. There are plenty of kid/teenage slackers in the middle/upper class and those tend to have the worst snotty attitude when they refuse to apply themselves.

dublin hillz says

There are plenty of kid/teenage slackers in the middle/upper class and those
tend to have the worst snotty attitude when they refuse to apply themselves.

Good point.

edvard2 says

But all I can say is that me, my brother, and basically my entire family ALL received public school educations. We all do fairly well financially and have been successful in life.

Yet there are millions of graduates of public schools that are functionally illiterate. What does that say? Di you and your brother and your entire family get the most important aspect of education from the family, or just public schools? Don't be shy.

BTW, it is erroneous to take a static view of public schools: "ours is not perfect" and "Finland is #1" are all transient observations, just like once upon a time the Prussian System was thought of as the best as it pumped out literally soldiers for the militaristic state of Prussia. The problem with "public" is in its monopolistic nature: you pay for it regardless whether you want to buy its service or not. Over time, bureaucratic monopolies attract mediocrity and time stampers. It always happens after a few decades (typically 60 years or so, a seculum). That's when the consumers have to have the right to make an alternative choice. That's the real value in preserving private education and home schooling: alternative choice.

edvard2 says

what do you think would happen if everything were instead funded by private individuals and business? You would get "Old Europe" in a bag, that's what. We would go right back to having a rather large, grossly uneducated peasantry with a very small, highly educated elite at the top lording over everything. The whole reason that government plays a role in.... well- "governing" is to in parts ensure that everyone has at least a chance at the pie.

hmm, the "Old Europe" was very much governed, and over-governed. That's why many Europeans came to America, in order to escape the governments of Old Europe.

Take that power away and put it into the hands of individuals and that pie shrinks dramatically.

That is a very strange economic theory, running exactly in contrary to the very tenet of Wealth of Nations: it is the mutually willing exchanges by free individuals that create wealth, not coercion and looting. Education does involve economy of scale. The private sector is quite capable of gauging the right economy of scale, instead of letting politicians and teachers unions tell us how large the class room should be.

That is what a democratic system is basically all about in a nutshell. We live in a democratic country and part of that means we pay taxes and those taxes are used to fund public and social functions. If you don't like that then too bad. That's the country we live in and how it was founded.

This country was founded as a Republic. The most direct reason for American Revolution was a drive to avoid paying taxes levied by the British crown to fund "public and social functions." Apparently, your public school education didn't work as well as you thought.

Reality says

The problem with "public" is in its monopolistic nature: you pay for it
regardless whether you want to buy its service or not. Over time, bureaucratic
monopolies attract mediocrity and time stampers. It always happens after a few
decades (typically 60 years or so, a seculum). That's when the consumers have to
have the right to make an alternative choice. That's the real value in
preserving private education and home schooling: alternative choice.

And yet there are plenty of examples where parents dropped tens of thousands of dollars on private school education where the return on investment turned out to be absolute zero because their precious offspring imploded during teenage hood. Talk about a kick in the stomach!

Reality says

The most direct reason for American Revolution was a drive to avoid paying taxes levied by the British crown to fund "public and social functions."

The most direct reason for the American Revolution was to avoid paying taxes passed without representation in the law making process. The tax itself, which was very low, was never the main issue, it was the passing of the tax without input into the process by the American colonies that people objected to most.

Apparently, your private school education didn't work as well as you thought. They taught "No taxation without representation" in 7th grade in my public school.

bob2356 says

The most direct reason for the American Revolution was to avoid paying taxes passed without representation in the law making process.

The tax laws were passed with "virtual representation" as was standard practice in the British House of Commons at the time. Then after the colonists objected, real representation was offered to the colonists but rejected.

The tax itself, which was very low, was never the main issue, it was the passing of the tax without input into the process by the American colonies that people objected to most.

You are dreaming. The real issue was taxation. "Without representation" was the excuse, as the offer of representation was rejected.

Apparently, your private school education didn't work as well as you thought. They taught "No taxation without representation" in 7th grade in my public school.

Obviously your public school did not dig deeper than the sloganeering. Did you happen to know that the British government was trying to tighten money supply after the French-Indian War? In other words, the banning of colonial credit money printing and taxation were all part and parcel of an Austerity measure. That was what caused the revolt against what was essentially Bank of England's monetary policy. Read up on Bejamin Franklin's writings on the economic condition of the time.

Reality says

Yet there are millions of graduates of public schools that are functionally illiterate. What does that say? Di you and your brother and your entire family get the most important aspect of education from the family, or just public schools? Don't be shy.

There are also a perhaps equally large number of students who are also illiterate who go to private schools. I can say that the same as you made your statement since you lack any data to backup that claims.Reality says

BTW, it is erroneous to take a static view of public schools: "ours is not perfect" and "Finland is #1" are all transient observations, just like once upon a time the Prussian System was thought of as the best as it pumped

You need to understand the definition of Past and Present. I wasn't talking about the past and the prussians. I was talking about present day. Hence the remainder of your response to that point is moot.Reality says

hmm, the "Old Europe" was very much governed, and over-governed. That's why many Europeans came to America, in order to escape the governments of Old Europe.

Most of " Old Europe" was not Democratic. Many of the countrys there were either still being overlorded by either monarcy, the church, or both. Hence why masses moved to the US where we ultimately adopted a representative-based democratic form of government, separated from the church. So just like your previous point, you have made none so far that have any validity since they aren't historically correct.Reality says

That is a very strange economic theory, running exactly in contrary to the very tenet of Wealth of Nations: it is the mutually willing exchanges by free individuals that create wealth, not coercion and looting

You were the one who mentioned "Looting", not I. Exactly how did you jump to that conclusion? Strange because our system uses a form of taxation. The revolution-contrary to a lot of what conservatives want everyone to believe, was not over taxes for the sake of taxes. It was over taxation without representation.

Like I said before, we are a democratic country that was founded on the principle of a shared society- meaning yes- we all pay taxes for the benefit of the whole. That's the way its always been so why this could be a surprise is confusing.

edvard2 says

There are also a perhaps equally large number of students who are also illiterate who go to private schools. I can say that the same as you made your statement since you lack any data to backup that claims.

A satement like that only goes to show your ignorance. Just because a statement is grammatically correct doesn't mean its content has any factual basis.

You need to understand the definition of Past and Present. I wasn't talking about the past and the prussians. I was talking about present day. hence the remainder of your response to that point is moot

Past is all the guide we have to the future. The standards we use today for measuring schools may well look as silly in the future as we today think of the "standards" that made Prussian System look great. Side note: IMHO, the penchant for standard test results that many other countries excel at may well soon prove to be highly detrimental to the molding of flexible and productive new members of society.

Most of " Old Europe" was not Democratic. Many of the countrys there were either still being overlorded by either monarcy, the church, or both. Hence why masses moved to the US where we ultimately adopted a representative-based democratic form of government, separated from the church. So just like your previous point, you have made none so far that have any validity since they aren't historically

Democracy and Tyranny of the Majority were nothing new to the Old Europe. The founding fathers explicitly warned against Democracy per se.

You were the one who mentioned "Looting", not I. Exactly how did you jump to that conclusion?

Taxation and regulation fundamentally are looting and coercion.

The revolution-contrary to a lot of what conservatives want everyone to believe, was not over taxes for the sake of taxes. It was over taxation without representation

Another string match idiot. Is that what they teach in public schools nowadays? The colonists were offered representation but rejected. "Without representation" was simply an excuse for the slogan. The real objection was to taxation.

Like I said before, we are a democratic country that was founded on the principle of a shared society- meaning yes- we all pay taxes for the benefit of the whole.

Now we are talking about a new religion here. "We all pay taxes for the benefit of the whole" sounds like something King George III would have told the colonists.