Prager: Single Payer Healthcare

His point is that tax dollars are restricted to public schools; thus, limit real choice.

 

I just didn't know who he was railing at, as the rant seemed to come out of nowhere.

I hope vouchers work out for the best, and we won't know until it is tried. I just worry it will end up hurting the poor.

 

And? Can you prove that it has always bee that rate? Its rhetorical. No, so dont even try.

Watch the video, study the theories and make up your own mind about what you "know"
or dont know. These are all secular ideas, theories and sources.

I am not here to debate this stuff. Study it yourself and make of it what you will.

 

LOL

Worry about the smallest minority -the individual. The central government has no business in charity (to paraphrase James Madison). It has no real business in local education but if its going to give and take tax money then I am for vouchers in principal but am skeptical that it work in practice.

I am not worried about the "poor," a nebulous concept that leads to class distinctions and class warfare.

I am worried about interference in curriculum and tuition inflation. These affect all individuals not just the "poor."

Really if we are ever going to "fix" this country we are going to have to jettison group/identity politics and return to the ideas of individual freedom restrained by the Judeo-Christian ethos.

 

You mean the public pays for public schools and private interests pay for private schools? That seems pretty obvious concept to follow. Tenny has been harping on this "liberals denying parents the right to choose" argument for a while, yet no one actually opposes him sending his kids to wherever he so desires.

 

Excellent. I look forward to the money following the child.

We still talking about the same thing, and in agreement?

 

I can't fathom why anyone associated with public education wouldn't be all for school vouchers, even if only for the smaller classroom size and one-on-one attention it will allow for.

 

This is precisely what I'm talking about, and he knows it.

And it's exactly what SCOTUS' ruling aimed to overturn, and prevent.

I'd love to hear some guesses as to why a school voucher program still hasn't been rolled out, years after their ruling. Anyone?

 

How I See vouchers playing out

1. Good selective private schools will be good selective private schools (until some lawsuit when a kid gets rejected because federal funds are involved)

2. Crap private schools who only care about funding will continue to be crap private schools.

3. Good public schools will continue to be good public schools.

4. Crap private schools will be private schools.

5. More crap schools will pop up in an attempt to take advantage of this federal money.

 

Except that public education isn't an enumerated power/function making the obvious argument less forceful in my opinion. Many of us pay into the system and are denied the funds for our children. It seems that there would be nothing wrong with allocating the funds to the individual child to be spent wherever.

Any constitutional argument is hollow when public funding of education is not an enumerated power delegated to the central government.

I am not familiar with the case but Tenny says SCOTUS has already ruled in favor of vouchers and all that is left is the will to do it.

 

It is the politics of liberalism and special interest. Liberals want to continue to shape curriculum and social engineer while teachers protect their turf.

 

So, you're saying that the Supreme Court has ruled vouchers ok, so, therefore, in the interest of "personal freedom" and "choice", public funds should be applied to individuals pursuing these rights? Does this include something, like, say, abortion?

 

I am in 100% agreement with this assessment from my vantage point in this whole discussion.

 

How much Federal money is spent on schools vs local money? I guess vouchers will just be Federal Dollars, so it will not completely pay for a Private school? If vouchers are made, will there even be Public Schools, or will, by the very nature of the deal, basically make them Private schools in all but name?

I know nothing about how this will work vs current form, so would like to educate myself on it.

 

If public funds were allocated to abortion specifically and some private provider was precluded or absurdly some catholic abortion provider was denied funds then your argument would be analogous. Abortion is considered a controversial subject and so public funding in general is denied. Never mind the fact that murdering babies and education are not equivalent in any other way either.

 

You will have 50 flavors minimum.

 

Vouchers are controversial, too. And, your personal opinion on the morality of abortion is immaterial in the vein of reasoning proffered by Tenny that, since it is constitutional by rule of the Supreme Court, then allowances for the funding of abortions by private entities should be given.

 

Just because liberals don't like them doesn't make vouchers controversial. Morality will not be the argument that finally dooms abortion. It will be the concept of personhood. Roe will find itself obsolete based on its original guidelines and, the god of liberals, science itself will strike it down.

Nothing prevent the funding of abortion but the will of the people via their legislature. Its your original premise that is flawed. That it is not funded is not a denial of rights. That something is funded and certain classes are excluded is an argument that rights are being denied. If gubmint got out of the education biz then Tenny has no argument either.

 

Yes.

I'm the guy who wanted abortion kiosks in every Wal-Mart, and for not only using tax dollars to fund them, but to also cover the cost of handing out free lotto tickets to anyone who partakes of their services.

I wish Mountain Dew would come out with a Melon-craze Morning After Energy Drink.

But, even if I didn't personally espouse that belief, it still wouldn't save your argument in opposing school vouchers.

 

Not sure, but you may have one point of my argument wrong - public education, unlike abortion, is already federally / publicly funded. The debate is over who controls those educational funds, already allocated.