Declining support for education in the US

You're missing that there is already a wait list of people ready to spend $20K.

And, that is not enough to cause a new school.

So, no, the demand is not met, even at the $20K level.

Besides, I think you missed that there aren't any for-profit schools. The $20k price point isn't enough to attract quality solutions from for-profit sources.

So, your attempt to apply economics is a fail. That doesn't mean you don't know how economics works. It means you don't know the education marketplace.

 

I didn't say that.

In order to have a meaningful conversation, we need to get beyond this idea that leveling taxes is a crime.

You suggested that, and there really is no way to continue until we can get to the point where we recognize that requiring the public to fund certain activities is not a crime.

I'm not interested in a conversation where each time something actually costs something I get told I'm a criminal.

 

Taking other people's property is wrong, so I'm in favor of anything that can reduce that.

 

I agree. But, it makes more sense to me to have that grouping be done more on the basis of ability and interest in each subject. Attempting to aggregate "losers" and giving them a second class opportunity hits me as a big mistake.

 

OK.

We're done then. I see civilization as a good thing - most likely, an absolutely required thing once earth's population reaches what it is.

 

Using force to take other people's property so you can give it to schools isn't civilized. It's might makes right.

 

60K a year, for a 9 month job and plenty of time off over that. Sorry, they are paid too much!!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/te...-state/ss-AAvwd5y?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCOMMDHP15

Neither are the workers I have to install the system. They certainly are not defined either.

 

If you want to live in a civilization, you have to pay for it. It truly is that simple.

 

The sheriff of Nottingham was not a myth, it is your government at work putting their hands and corruption into your pockets.

 

Again, you welcome the sheriff of Nottingham? I guess you do not believe in Locke? Life, liberty, property.

 

I must admit that I've never met a sheriff I didn't like.

 

And apparently a hunger for other people property either, as well as a distaste for our constitution and basic freedoms.

Just tell us where the 6 most expensive counties and the richest in the USA. Can you do that?

 

Let me help you then, the six counties surrounding Washington DC. Does that give you a clue?

 

Again, civilization isn't free.

Beyond that, the people that say we need education are the employers of America.

The whole reason we HAVE high school is that an 8th grade education that was good enough for an agriculture base was not good enough when we moved to manufacturing.

At one time, anarchists such as you could head off into the hinterlands and we'd all be happy.

But, that really started getting to be impossible a few hundred years ago.

 

If the employers want educated workers, then they should pay to educate their workers. It's not just for them to expect the rest of society to do what they want. It's not right for corporations to privatize their profits but socialize their costs.

 

You want corporations to do grade school in the hopes that those kids may be interested in the work they need done???

Really?

And, corporations always privatize their profits and socialize their costs.

That's a right wing economic principle of how things should work!

 

I just don't agree with your premise that the way to achieve your ends is to initiate aggression against your fellow man.

 

I know.

You're an anarchist.

So, anything related to government, what's good for society, how various actions pay us back, how we make decisions as a group - ALL of that is stuff you don't agree with.

That's why it makes no sense to talk about education.

Obviously, you're thoroughly against it.

 

I'm not thoroughly against education. I love education.

I'm in favor of what's good for society, which means that I don't agree that the way to accomplish one's ends is to initiate aggression against one's fellow man. That's wrong.

 

Right.

No, you are NOT interested in what's good for society.

Society requires taxation. Even just civilization requires taxation.

Society involves groups of people making decisions imposed on others at gunpoint.

You can't possibly be in favor of that. You come on here day after day stating how things done by society, by civilization, by government are to be eliminated.

 

Society doesn't require state schools. We have had society without state schools.

 

You are conflating government with society. Civilization IS free, it is just that government is not. Government isn't good for society. Don't believe me?

Ask the Choctaw.

Ask the people of Iraq.

Ask the citizen of the USSR.

Ask the North Koreans.

No, government isn't good for society. It is Government that has killed and/or infringed upon the rights of more citizens of society than ANYTHING ever created or devised by man. It is government that fuels the machines of war, and war is profit (America has been in a constant state of war for over 93% of its existence).

...and @Longshot isn't an anarchist, but I certainly am. Before you jump to inane conclusions about your fellow forum members, perhaps you should at least make an effort to understand their position otherwise you look the fool.

 

Well, your position is that society deciding to spend money that it takes at gunpoint is a crime. So, I'd say that's the end of that - no question of requirements needs to be discussed.

As for history, the first free public school in America opened in the 1600's.

 

I don't agree that it is a civilization if there is no method of working together in order further the requirements of being a civilization. And, that requires overhead in terms of contribution and cooperation.

Showing that there are bad governments proves nothing. I don't know of anything where there is no bad example of that thing. There are bad religions, bad governments, bad individuals, bad river waters, bad apples, bad philosophies, bad science...

I think Longshot outed himself when he identifies supporting government as being an evil.

I know he equivocates sometimes. But ...

 

Okay, I'm gonna have to ask for some details here because I'm in a pretty liberal part of town and even I can fail students. Granted, I have to document everything, I have to prove I've jumped thru a number of hoops and tried any number of things from re-teaching, teaching using different tactics, moving the kid around, changing his schedule, offering different assessments and assignments, and contacting parents, but I've never had an issue with failing a student if they warranted an F.

Okay; they'll still get moved up a grade since my district believes in social promotion, but failing a kid? Yeah, I can do that. What's going on that she can't, unless the kid is an RSP or SDC student?