School Vouchers

but we live in a world of scarce resources. Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Can't argue with that...AT ALL. And if the school voucher program doesn't rise to the level of proper allocation of funds...so be it.

I would just want to make sure this "use of tax revenue" gets looked at through the same color glasses as any other program...and may the best "use of tax revenue" win...until all of the pieces of the pie are taken.

It does seem like some of the agruments used throughout this thread don't quite comport with such looking glass.

Yes - sometimes entire programs (including staff). Vocational Education, Counseling, etc.

Like "private" universities, if is very hard to find one that isn't taking some govt $ Originally Posted by atlcomedy

LOL!!!!

That reminds me of ages ago when I was young and stupid, as opposed to being old and still pretty dumb, I was angry with a professor while working on my undergrad and commented:

"I'm the one paying your salary with my tuition and I expect better customer service."

He gave me a patient smile and said, "If you check your facts you will find that the tuition you pay actually translates into less than a third of the cost of educating an average student in this program, let alone you Anon, because you are a royal pain in the ass, and I think I deserve a raise for having to deal with you."

But I really think we'll let DG go a few minutes before we have him stop... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

you can stop after Colorado Originally Posted by atlcomedy

I am glad you finally cut him off. Posting all the various laws of all the various states. Going to the same movie twice in one week. We've got to help the guy get some kind of life.

Like I said, even if it was a right, on what basis can anyone say that the right must be provided to you?

Go back to this: We have a right to bear arms. The government does not go out any buy you the firearm of your choice. Originally Posted by ANONONE

I frankly don't think the issue is whether its considered a right or not.

The issue to me is that if we don't have an educated populace, we won't have a strong economy in the future. Or most valuable property now and in the future is technology and invention. We're certainly not going to out manafacture the chinese! If we don't continue to innovate, we will become the followers. Its our descendants who would pay the price.

I frankly don't think the issue is whether its considered a right or not.

The issue to me is that if we don't have an educated populace, we won't have a strong economy in the future. Or most valuable property now and in the future is technology and invention. We're certainly not going to out manafacture the chinese! If we don't continue to innovate, we will become the followers. Its our descendants who would pay the price. Originally Posted by Silverstream

Hmmm. . .sounds like an argument for corporatism. Industry has a vested interest in an educated or vocationally trained populace to draw from, maybe they should take over the schools?

You want a a liberal to scream? Try to float that one out there.

Now before the gnashing of teeth begins to occur, let's think about Japan for a moment. . .

Switching streams for a minute. This past week 2 events took place that can have a major impact on what is included in textbooks in years to come. The school board in Texas is in the process of finalizing what needs to be in social studies textbooks that the state will purchase the next ten years. Since Texas is the largest state that buys textbooks statewide many publishers use the Texas requirements for their textbooks. On a separate front 48 states have agreed on a common standard of what skills children should be capable of and subjects they should have learned in school - the 2 states not participating are Texas and Alaska. Having a common requirement for 48 states could change the balance in terms of textbooks over the next few years.

He gave me a patient smile and said, "If you check your facts you will find that the tuition you pay actually translates into less than a third of the cost of educating an average student in this program, Originally Posted by ANONONE

Apart from knowing the exact numbers for various universities, that is correct. For example. at the university I attended, every grant awarded to a professor went through the reaearch foundation which took 50% of the grant money and diverted it for use by the university. Another large chunk of money came from the Permanent University Fund, which is the fifth largest endowment to universities in the U.S. ($11+ billion).
The tuition and other fees cover only a small part of the educational cost. This is also true at private universities. Harvard's endowment, for example, is $25+ billion, which translates to the interest on about $1.5 million/student towards funding a student's education.

Hmmm. . .sounds like an argument for corporatism. Industry has a vested interest in an educated or vocationally trained populace to draw from, maybe they should take over the schools?

You want a a liberal to scream? Try to float that one out there. Originally Posted by ANONONE

Businesses and corporations do play a part in our schools particularly in the universities and advanced learning environments. They can influence the education system to slant their programs to projects they are interested in or to produce students with more of a skill set they are looking for in future employees. Many businesses helped fund or support their employees who seek advanced degrees.
The k-12 school system sees very little of this since students are receiving a very generic education. The ROI for a business simply would not be there.

If this was supposed to make me scream, I guess I am a bad liberal. I believe in the adage "It takes a village to raise a child" and the idea of businesses becoming more involved in education is not at all frightening.

Businesses and corporations do play a part in our schools particularly in the universities and advanced learning environments. They can influence the education system to slant their programs to projects they are interested in or to produce students with more of a skill set they are looking for in future employees. Originally Posted by Silverstream

That is NOT a good thing. It's very shortsighted and does not benefit the students in the long run. The idea of a univerity education is to get a very broad, general education and learn how to think more abstractly about subjects that require more of a foundation than high school can provide, not replace coporate training for very specific tasks that takes away from a general education. What happens when new technology replaces the specific projects some business wanted employees to work on? (The employees become managers or else become obsolete for lack of the more general education the students should have received.)

As it stands now, the ONLY area of education where the U.S. still excels is in the graduate programs, where the education still emphasizes subjects in a more general and abstract way.