TexasCHLforum.com

mr.72 wrote:
Your problem is totally misguided, as far as I can tell. The "I should NOT have to pay for it" is the operative phase. You should not have to pay for it, NO MATTER WHAT.

Of course I shouldn't but since I do...

The problem is that you DO have to pay for it, and SO DO I even if I am not a consumer of it.

So I could just as easily say, I don't want to pay for it if it is NOT different from your standard of scholastic performance or if it does NOT indoctrinate some religion. Since you say "democratic", well as long as I can get a majority to agree with me then you can be sure you will be made to pay for it.

Yes, that is in fact how democracy works. If you get a majority to agree with what you want taught then that is what is taught. But we get to participate in the process, regardless of whether we get the outcome we want. I have a real problem with how most of public school is conducted, and I believe it is a huge waste of money. But the only redeeming feature is that I get for my money a vote on school board members, state legislators etc. It's not much of a redeeming feature, but vouchers do away with even that little tidbit of reasonableness

You don't currently have any say, although you can have an opinion.

No, see above. We elect school board members do we not? We elect our state legislators. I don't get fiat power over the curriculum, unfortunately though.

Maybe your opinion coincides with the opinions of the state education people such that you feel like you are getting what you are paying for. But my opinion deviates from that of the state, so should I have to pay for it?

To the same extent that I do, yes.

The way to make it fair is that nobody pays for it unless they choose to use it.

Yes, that is how to make it more fair, and the way to make it less fair is to have vouchers. See my point?

Again, this is about freedom. I think most Americans don't really believe in freedom. They want freedoms like being able to drink, smoke pot or marry someone of the same gender but they don't want others to have freedom to choose not to subsidize inferior public education with their money. Americans don't want freedom, they want the illusion of freedom. Money is power. No freedom to do what we please with our money means we really don't have any freedom where there is any power.

This deviates from "a right to education", but that question is irrelevant. You don't have a right to use my money for your education. But the state compels me to allow it.

Yep.


And to those that keep bringing up how important education is, I don't think anyone here is disagreeing with that. Around these parts we spend over $8,000 per pupil per year. And the education they get is very much subpar as far as I can tell. It's the lack of a real education that upsets me, and then having to pay for this lack of education. I really think parents would push their kids harder to make the most out of school if they were paying for it.

Kythas wrote: This is exactly why I support school vouchers. I don't know why the liberals, for the most part, don't support this...ok, yes I do. It takes away from maintaining their monopoly on public education and indoctrinating the masses with what they want to teach.

I find it very telling that the same politicians in Washington DC who keep voting down school vouchers by saying we have excellent public education then turn around and send their children to private schools.

I have a big problem with vouchers. If you decide to put your kid in some wacky private school that is inferior to public schools (yes, they do exist) or want to use it for religious indoctrination, I should NOT have to pay for it. If I am going to be taxed to pay for other people's education I should at least get some say through the democratic process as to what is taught and how scholastic performance is measured. Don't like that? Then don't make me pay for it.

Vouchers make about as much sense as the healthcare bill that started this discussion about rights.