Some Republican candidate (maybe Ron Paul) suggested the nation and state governments should not fund pre-college education. Agree?
What total bull(*)(*)(*)(*). And, where in the world did you get the idea that public education in the U.S. had even a nodding acquaintance with knowledge. The purpose of public eduction is: A. Protect and enrich the unions and insure their support for socialists. B. Guarantee the votes of the school industry for Democrats. C. Use schools to promote liberal propoganda D. Make sure minorities have no access to a decent education abd will be an underclass. Question: Does fully "fully fund" mean doing what the uniosn dictate with no questions asked fromt those paying the bill?
Get the feds out of the equation. When the feds spend a dollar on primary education we're lucky if 15% gets anywhere near a school. All we get for the other 85% is unfunded mandates and bureaucratic red tape. I can say my local school system was much better when they were more concerned about the education of students as opposed to making sure they've jumped through sufficient hoops to get the .15 from my dollar.
You don't even try to understand people with different opinions from yours, do you? I mean like no effort at all.
It should be a voucher system, but yes. The positive externalities derived from education are truly awesome. I personally believe the government should pay for college/vocational school as well.
Education is a public good so yes, it should be provisioned by the state. Moreover, we really don't want a society segregated by those who can afford to be educated.
The answer to this question was solved almost a century ago. Yes. The only countries that don't provide public education are 3rd world nations. Period.
It should but those (*)(*)(*)(*)ed teachers want to get paid so, guess what, the bill has to be paid but not by Someone. No, Liberals insist it should be paid by SomeoneElse. The same for health care, fire services, and SWAT units hunting down raw milk.
Well, partly by Someone, spread over Someone's entire working life, rather than expected in one lump sum before he's been able to work most effectively.
I voted to oppose until I have my Golf membership paid for every year and my medical bills paid for by the kids under 30. I worked and paid for my kids education and my grandkids education and now its pay back time. Instead of driving a nice camper across the country like my parents did..I get $4 dollar gas.. Instead of selling my house for a profit I get the lowest values in the last 10 years.. I get less and pay for more.. and the kids dont do a thing..HINT I didn't get to be on my parents health care system..or live in their house.. I left San Diego because illegals took over Drywall. Now they control all the labor jobs..and we have no work..Imagine that.
who paid for your k-12 education? and where in the township act was the funding provided for public golf courses?
Education is a state issue and as such each state should decide if they wish to pay for it or not and how they pay (public schools/voucher)
I lived in the same district for 30 years... WE paid for illegals to get a free education..health care ..transportation..and then they repaid us by under cutting wages..working for cash..lowering that standards of labor WE set for a generation before. JUST BEING HERE isn't good enough and Yes I am here NOW ..and I want free Golf..Fair is fair after all.. Buying votes in IOWA for ethanol...Votes from kids promising free health care..Buying eco nut voted by blocking energy development..buying votes from the nanny welfare state by attacking the wealthy.. I want my Golf...Think of the jobs it would create if everyone got free golf...MILLIONS OF JOBS CREATED ! Think positive... FORE...
If liberals hadn't driven the cost of college to insane levels we wouldn't be having this discussion. It wasn't that long ago that you could reasonably work your way through college.
you still can, but it's not going to be Harvard...oh wait it could be Harvard. their tuition is on a sliding scale of household income, and thier finanical assistance office kicks butt. no one is turned away that can get accepted.
Of course not, why should kids from poor families gain an education. *sarcasm mode turned off* It should be 'free' paied by taxation. Everyone deserves and needs a education.
So you want teachers to not be paid? Back in the 1950's we had really good public schools, one of the primary reasons is that bright, capable and educated women were pretty much limited to two professions, both of which were paid low wages on a par with women working in secretarial jobs, those professions were teaching and nursing. That world is long gone (as it should be) and it's not coming back. The vast majority of teachers, even those in Unions, do not make anywhere near what their college classmates make in jobs with the same educational requirements.
that's just a load of crap you cannot prove. I disagree, nothing is free K-12 yes but college no or saved
They kind of all ready do pay for K-12 education. Everyone who lives in a area were there is a school pays for that school in their taxes; both property and sales tax
That is why places were it is a Democrat hotspot have highter failure rates of education then Republicans.
Nothing in life is free. Someone has to pay for it. Conservatives are realists. Liberals have shown time after time that they don't think any further than the tips of their noses. And then the bad stuff starts happening. but it's okay, they say, WE MEANT WELL. Liberalism: Ideas so good they have to be mandated.
From K-12 you cannot be expected to pay for your own education. Your parents should not be the deciding factor as to whether or not you are educated, especially in a nation which is at the point where an education is practically required. We cannot afford to have a more idiotic populace than we already have now. Clearly we need to change the system, but we can't afford to have a population of people who don't have even a basic education.
