Prager: Single Payer Healthcare

I can't argue with any of this, at all.

I will add my own 6th & 7th belief, as to what school vouchers will do:

6. Parents have the right to determine the best educational setting for their individual child. If that ceases to be the best option, parents will be empowered to seek an alternative which is.

7. Failing schools & teachers will go away. Successful schools & teachers will endure, and thrive. When previously successful schools & teachers start to fail, they too will go away, and new schools & teachers will have the opportunity to be successful.

 

Actually, when a group of people disagree with a policy, that does make it controversial, unless you are arguing liberal opposition doesn't carry the same weight as conservative opposition. And, as long as women get pregnant, abortion will remain a relevant issue.

Otherwise, the argument that the government is obligated to pay for private education when it provides a public education to each person in this country lacks credibility. This is in addition to the fact that vouchers, in a practical sense, provide no real benefit or value to improving education in this country.

 

I do wonder if the McCallie's, Webb's, MBA's, and MUS's of the world will even accept vouchers. My guess is no.

I also wonder what will happen with faith based schools, and what they will/won't be allowed to teach now/down the road because of the federal fundal attached to it.

I generally like to keep the feds out as much as I can, as there is always a catch to it, no matter how it is origially intended.

 

This is spoken like someone who has little to no concept in how these things work in a practical sense. My argument works better because of experience on the ground as to how this stuff really operates, in addition to the idea of who should pay for what. In reality, these voucher programs are already operating in certain areas with neutral to, often, negative effects. They're just another plan to gut public education and treat education like a private enterprise, which is the supposed panacea for all professions.

Now, I do agree that the vouchers will be coming at a higher rate in the coming years, but that doesn't make them a good or desirable avenue for education in the least. For my part, I'm used to it. I've seen plenty of outside forces come into this field and laying down their magic plan to fix education only to fail like the others, further eroding the schools and educational system.

 

If I am on welfare, am I not allowed to give any of that money to my church?

 

Yes, but I also know that nonprofits that get federal funding cannot use that money to prosletyze/promote beliefs.

Given that (in theory***) the reason most private Christian/other religous school exist is to promote/teach their belief system, I have to wonder.

***- Schools such as Brentwood Academy and Grace Christian of course are football

 

No its liberals vs the rest of society on vouchers. Liberals oppose it because its strips away uniformity and decentralizes power. Those are two things needed for radical egalitarianism for the true believer and denudes the leftist politician of power.

Abortion is considered "wrong" by many who support a womens "right" to use it.

Your second paragraph probably doesn't take into consideration viewpoint discrimination and SCOTUS. Your last sentence is an opinion devoid of data.

 

Actually, you are completely incorrect on a number of points here. One, my last sentence absolutely has data to support it. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/dismal-results-from-vouchers-surprise-researchers-as-devos-era-begins.html?_r=0

Second of all, you do not show an understanding of the word controversial, not to mention who supports and does not support them. http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/education/2017/02/13/teachers-union-poll-says-tennesseans-dont-want-school-vouchers/97863122/

Finally, your characterization of liberal opposition is merely self-serving to your own agenda on the matter. Point of fact is that liberals such as myself oppose it because it is ineffective, wasteful and redirects money away from where it is needed in the public school system. It's merely another "free market" solution that doesn't really address the underlying problems in education and merely attempts to fix the symptoms of the problems while assigning blame to (And, cut down) opposing political entities like teacher's unions.

 

What do we do about students who ended in up in failing private schools that shutter mid semester after already causing the student to lose a critical year or two of education?

that's not a hypothetical, it is happening in states with vouchers. The voucher system victimizes children who have parents that don't know a school from their own ass, with no one held accountable. No big bad administrators or teachers left around to blame.

 

I can pretty much guarantee the Baylor's, McCallie's, Webb's, Ensworth's etc will laugh at vouchers. They don't want or need them to operate.

I prefer the federal government stay away.

 

One of my friends in college went to McCallie and said his high school was harder than college. He was basically going through the motions on an electrical engineering degree.

 

1. Children have a right to be educated.
2. The state and federal governments now fund public schools to accomplish this.

Vouchers will only change one of those things, and it ain't #1.

 

You completely miss the crux of my point, which is that parents are best suited and most deserving of determining the best educational course for their child - not the government - and they should be allowed to use those funds which are already allocated to that end, and in a manner they so choose (within reasonable boundaries, of course).

 

I don't see how children can have a right to be educated while simultaneously parents have a right to give them a substandard and inadequate education, as is the case with some for profit schools. One of those two things is the real right.

 

What'll we do if we can't find enough crowbars to remove the "Whites Only" signs from the drinking fountains?

What if we can't print enough ballots for women to be able to cast a vote?

Anything can go wrong, IP, and those things will need to be remedied when they occur or can be foreseen.

Why do you seem to believe that public schools won't remain perfectly available for anyone who wishes to use them, including those who fear a private school may close in the middle of a semester, and those parents who "don't know a school from their ass." Why won't public schools continue to be perfectly viable options?

 

I had a guy down the hall who was home-schooled and then went to some private school. He couldn't do shit and flunked out. Obviously not the rule, but then neither is your anecdote.

 

Now, they stand immediately and purposefully in the way.

Welcome to the pro-voucher club.

 

Why can't children be educated and parents be given the option as to how best to accomplish this?

 

A couple of my son's classmates experienced the same - left for private school for a year and came back the next, because the private school curriculum was too lax.

Fortunately, those with the financial means have that option, but not all do.

That's wrong.

 

We tear them down.

We accept late ballots.

So what do you do when a student gets a year or more behind because of the shitty for-profit voucher-grabbing popup school?

I know how the conservative game is played. Funding will be curtailed until the public schools can't function, and self-sabotaging policies will be enacted that private schools will not be subject to.

A public school being available doesn't catch the student up to their age level, so I'm not sure how that is a solution.

And I'm not afraid of private schools, I have no problem with the option being out there. I don't think public money should go to religious institutions or institutions that don't follow policies and standards set by the public providing the funds. Traditionally, private schools exceed the standards of public schools. In places with voucher programs, that is not the case.