As Progressive Education fails the Tide Turns

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

There are private schools all over the country.

You are not forced to go to public school. You are only forced, up until the age of 15-16, to attend a school even if it's at home.

you are definitly forced to go to public school in the sense the government has already forcefully appropriated money you could have spent on private school. so you have already distorted what a voluntary system of education would look like...you cant be like "give the state 8k in property taxes for school and then you can choose whatever school you want!"

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

I am assuming this is another right-wing bashing of democrats/liberals thread...so i'll just say:

No child left behind failed miserably.

The way to fix schools is to hold the states accountable...hold the schools accountable...hold the people employed by the schools accountable. There should be absolutely NO DIFFERENCE in level of education between a private school and a public school. There should be NO CHARGE for education. Period. From grade school to the end of college. (3 or 4 year STANDARD degree) One should only pay when going for specialized degrees or anything above a bachelors. Stop wasting money in bullshit, like Iraq for example, put that money towards schools. On top of that, start holding people accountable for their actions. Problem solved.

my thoughts are, why should education be provided by the state? for example, food which is literally required by to live day-to-day, is still provide by the private sector. what happens when its provided by the state? see russian bread lines

so I'd like to hear exactly why the state should provide education, and these arguments shoudl overcome the fact they severly restrict things like allowing children to pray in school, and in general cause arguments because as they are taxpayer fudned people object to many things. in a free market you would be free to pack up and leave

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by TheScatman

you are definitly forced to go to public school in the sense the government has already forcefully appropriated money you could have spent on private school. so you have already distorted what a voluntary system of education would look like...you cant be like "give the state 8k in property taxes for school and then you can choose whatever school you want!"

You're also forced to drive on government roads, and you are forced to pay for a military even if you are a complete pascifist

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by TheScatman

my thoughts are, why should education be provided by the state? for example, food which is literally required by to live day-to-day, is still provide by the private sector. what happens when its provided by the state? see russian bread lines

so I'd like to hear exactly why the state should provide education, and these arguments shoudl overcome the fact they severly restrict things like allowing children to pray in school, and in general cause arguments because as they are taxpayer fudned people object to many things. in a free market you would be free to pack up and leave

1) because it's worked, kids in this country are significantly smarter than their grandparents/parents were at their age

2) school prayer is the dumbest thing I've ever heard, even at a religious school you will only pray several times a day, if a child is that idiotic that he can not pray quietly during the many breaks he is given, before, after and during school, then they belong in a special school

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

if a child is that idiotic that he can not pray quietly during the many breaks he is given, before, after and during school, then they belong in a special school

I would have to agree there. I disagree with the notion that it's working though. Just because we're smarter than our grandparents doesn't mean we're not falling behind on the global scale. There is much needed room for improvement. American educations are getting beaten by our competitors overseas.

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

1) because it's worked, kids in this country are significantly smarter than their grandparents/parents were at their age

2) school prayer is the dumbest thing I've ever heard, even at a religious school you will only pray several times a day, if a child is that idiotic that he can not pray quietly during the many breaks he is given, before, after and during school, then they belong in a special school

so you think the only reason kids now are smarter than their parents/grandparents is a state run education system? how about the fact that the economy has developed to the point where kids are no longer needed on the farm and productivity has increased to the point where kids have actual free time to go to school.

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by JaJae

I would have to agree there. I disagree with the notion that it's working though. Just because we're smarter than our grandparents doesn't mean we're not falling behind on the global scale. There is much needed room for improvement. American educations are getting beaten by our competitors overseas.

you could substitute school prayer with just about any other controversy in public school. evolution, homosexuality acceptance, etc.

the point is competing school is the private sector will lose their clients if they dont cater to their needs. in public schools they just ram down the kdis throats whatever the school board says...because as I've shown above people are double paying so they cannot afford private shcool

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by TheScatman

so you think the only reason kids now are smarter than their parents/grandparents is a state run education system? how about the fact that the economy has developed to the point where kids are no longer needed on the farm and productivity has increased to the point where kids have actual free time to go to school.

I'm not talking about the 1807 versus 2007, I am talking about a situation like 1977 versus 1997

Ofcourse, I never actually defeat the argument of "oh, yeah, well, the government had nothing to do with it, theres some other factor that could possibly have affected it"

Just like I can always go "Oh, the free-market and deregulation never helped anyone or anything, it was Jesus and Santa Claus" there is no way to disprove that argument either

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by TheScatman

you could substitute school prayer with just about any other controversy in public school. evolution, homosexuality acceptance, etc.

the point is competing school is the private sector will lose their clients if they dont cater to their needs. in public schools they just ram down the kdis throats whatever the school board says...because as I've shown above people are double paying so they cannot afford private shcool

Yes, let's not teach our children evolution so they are almost forced to fail their first college biology course when it covers evolutionary biology

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Yes, let's not teach our children evolution so they are almost forced to fail their first college biology course when it covers evolutionary biology

Not only that, it's just wrong not to teach. Even if you disagree for whatever reason with evolution, it is still a theory and a very popularized subject. Not teaching our children evolution is a disservice to their education. If you don't want your child to learn about evolution you're free to send them to whatever school you want and let them learn whatever you choose. Or you have the option to homeschool.

And if you can't afford private school because you're paying for public school you're SOL. Your child will get the generic education. Special treatment comes at a special price. People aren't double paying. Everyone who owns land and pays state taxes pays for education, even if they have no children. We can't let people opt out of paying their community fees because they don't want access to what the town is offering. I can't say, I'm not paying $100 in taxes this year and the police don't have to respond to my phone calls. Nor can I say, I'm not paying $50 this year, if my house catches fire just let it burn down. There are expenses to owning land. Your property taxes typically go towards your community. If you don't like the amount your town spends on education go somewhere else. That is the power of the free market libertarians so strongly preach.

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I'm not talking about the 1807 versus 2007, I am talking about a situation like 1977 versus 1997

Ofcourse, I never actually defeat the argument of "oh, yeah, well, the government had nothing to do with it, theres some other factor that could possibly have affected it"

Just like I can always go "Oh, the free-market and deregulation never helped anyone or anything, it was Jesus and Santa Claus" there is no way to disprove that argument either

no, your argument is a classic post hoc fallacy, just because academic achievement has gone up while using state run schools doesnt mean they actually caused. in fact, one could argue achievement would have gone up even more during 70's - now without them. see my argument is just an "after this therefore because of this" fallacy...

my argument:

P1) competing entities in any sector must offer the best service at the lowest cost or risk losing customer to a competitor

P2) A system of competing free market, private schools would offer a system where schools must attract students to their school. thus they have to offer a high quality education at an affordable price of risk going out of business.

C) a free market education system would provide high achievement at a lower cost than state run schools

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Yes, let's not teach our children evolution so they are almost forced to fail their first college biology course when it covers evolutionary biology

seriously what dont you get about a system of voiluntary cooperation and exchange? if somebody wants to teach their kid creationism or enroll their kid in a school that does, you have no right to tell them not to (or extract tuition payment through taxes, which essentially dissuades them from avoiding the school you support). I dont understand why you or any other central planner thinks they know the key to a happy life or what to force kids to learn

if a non-evolution education is a pointless/worthless as you say it is, then market participants will realize that and starting demanding the education that you claim is so "valuable". if it is so worthwhile why not let it stand on it own in the marketplace?

[Thorgrim]

If I were arguing post hoc then you are arguing ad ignorantium

I myself claim to be innocent because I was arguing against the myth that public schools are hurting our children via lower SAT scores, etc by showing that if you combine all factors and context, we've actually seen big improvements as opposed to people who say our children are less educated than the previous generation

however, your argument is simply free market > *

I argue against that by saying the best public schools in America have beaten free-market "charter schools" in both academics and services...not to mention local approval

Until charter schools clearly dominate over all public schools, on all measurements (aka don't kick out kids in wheelchairs to save money and then brag about how you've cut costs) your argument has failed the test

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

If I were arguing post hoc then you are arguing ad ignorantium

I myself claim to be innocent because I was arguing against the myth that public schools are hurting our children via lower SAT scores, etc by showing that if you combine all factors and context, we've actually seen big improvements as opposed to people who say our children are less educated than the previous generation

however, your argument is simply free market > *

I argue against that by saying the best public schools in America have beaten free-market "charter schools" in both academics and services...not to mention local approval

Until charter schools clearly dominate over all public schools, on all measurements (aka don't kick out kids in wheelchairs to save money and then brag about how you've cut costs) your argument has failed the test

1) But at what cost? Its not fair to compare a public school that is beating a charter school by 20 points on the SAT if it costs say 50% more per pupil than the charter school. See this isnt just about achievement, but about achievement and cost.

2) So because it hasnt happened, it wont? are these charter schools really free market or do they still have to comply with complex and overburdening regulation? are they free to expieriment with ways of teaching kids?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by TheScatman

you are definitly forced to go to public school in the sense the government has already forcefully appropriated money you could have spent on private school. so you have already distorted what a voluntary system of education would look like...you cant be like "give the state 8k in property taxes for school and then you can choose whatever school you want!"

You profit from an educated society, even if your kids are attending a private school or you have no children.

You are not paying for your kids to go to school directly. You are paying for an education system you use every day.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Not only that, it's just wrong not to teach. Even if you disagree for whatever reason with evolution, it is still a theory and a very popularized subject. Not teaching our children evolution is a disservice to their education. If you don't want your child to learn about evolution you're free to send them to whatever school you want and let them learn whatever you choose. Or you have the option to homeschool.

And if you can't afford private school because you're paying for public school you're SOL. Your child will get the generic education. Special treatment comes at a special price. People aren't double paying. Everyone who owns land and pays state taxes pays for education, even if they have no children. We can't let people opt out of paying their community fees because they don't want access to what the town is offering. I can't say, I'm not paying $100 in taxes this year and the police don't have to respond to my phone calls. Nor can I say, I'm not paying $50 this year, if my house catches fire just let it burn down. There are expenses to owning land. Your property taxes typically go towards your community. If you don't like the amount your town spends on education go somewhere else. That is the power of the free market libertarians so strongly preach.

[Thorgrim]

Hey, there is nobody here saying we should ban charter schools from america, we are just saying don't dismantle our public school system, which is not broken (see millions of americans making 6 figures who went to public and private schools and didn't see a difference)

"free to experiment" what a way to put it, can the police "experiment" with public safety by putting all their officers in one neighborhood for the night and leaving the rest of the city defenseless

It's about achievement and cost TO YOU, many COMMUNITIES and STATES are willing to sacrifice money to get those extra 20 points and a nice shiny new gym, new pool, big air conditioned class rooms, etc

You have no right to step into another state and demand they do things on the cheap at the detriment of their children

[TheScatman]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You profit from an educated society, even if your kids are attending a private school or you have no children.

You are not paying for your kids to go to school directly. You are paying for an education system you use every day.

Ah, Milton Friedman's neighborhood effects argument. Ill respond to this next time Im on, its super bowl party time now