I sure can, go there all the time.Alexanderthegrape wrote:
Can somebody say firing squad?
http://www.firingsquad.com/
Pages: 1 2
I sure can, go there all the time.Alexanderthegrape wrote:
Can somebody say firing squad?
This is the way schools are funded in every part of the US I have been. School A is given say $1.3 million for the school year. If they only spend $1.299 million of that money in a school year then there budget is DECREASED say 3% the following year. Now if School A spends all $1.3 million then there budget will remain intact and be eligible for a budget increase the following year.TeamZephyr wrote:
Your first sentence in your post perfectly sums up why privatization of important state services such as education will not work. Privatization of schools won't work because it will and DOES cause individuals to use them for personal profit. The public system needs to be improved, we can't just sell of our resources to private hands, we need to improve on the public system and direct funds where they need to go.Major_Spittle wrote:
Well, If schools were privatized I probably wouldn't send my kid to one that was incompetent. Right now I can only send my kid to public schools that are incompetent. Also the only people who can afford private schools in America right now are the wealthy and that is where they go to school. $8k-$12k a year per child can buy one hell of an education. Hell I have 2 kids, give me the $24k that the government spends on them and my wife can afford to stay home and raise/school them. They would learn more and have a happier more supervised childhood. The Median income in Oregon is only around 44k a year for god sakes.
I started another post earlier about Liberalism requiring Ignorance, are you liberal???
In Australia the federal government gives way more money to private schools with a 1:3 ratio in favor of the privatized ones, all this does is create an economic elite and heaps of disenfranchised kids in the public system. The amount of money you have SHOULD NOT equal the level of education you recieve. Because of this 1:3 ratio you see working class parents try and shell out thousands to send their kids to places they can't afford to send them. All this does is create another economically struggling family, when they could have easier put their child into a well funded public school.
With your liberalism comment, its irrelevant what side of the political fence you choose to sit on, everyone has their own beliefs and no one's beliefts should be categorized. But since you asked I'm a Socialist who borders on communism. I believe that we need to take much of our money out of the hands of a "social elite", we need to fund health care and education more than we fund military and that we need to nationalize important national things such as banks, mines, schools and hospitals.
Liberalism doesn't require ignorance, by saying that your just making a cheap swipe at people who don't agree with you, no political belief requires ignorance, they all appeal to people because people have different motivators, whether its personal greed or world wellbeing.
I agree to put something into effect to promote better education, but doing it because you think this country is turning socialist isn't so much of a good reason....PuckMercury wrote:
personally I agree that the school system should be privatized. If not completely privatized then at least multiple state run choices to inspire some measure of competition. That idea has been put into place in some measure at various locations, but not in any wide spread manner.
Pages: 1 2