Why are public schools scared of vouchers?

[ragtimejoe1]

As a taxpayer, I'm interested in student success not necessarily public school success. If the latter achieves the former, then they will have no problems in a voucher system.

I trust parents to make the best decision for their kids way more than I trust public school beurocrats. The taxpayer money goes to educate kids. If the money pays a private or public entity shouldn't matter.

[laxwyo]

As a taxpayer, I'm interested in student success not necessarily public school success. If the latter achieves the former, then they will have no problems in a voucher system.

I trust parents to make the best decision for their kids way more than I trust public school beurocrats. The taxpayer money goes to educate kids. If the money pays a private or public entity shouldn't matter.

The government is terrible at everything it does, this includes state and local governments. Generally, I favor vouchers over state schools. I imagine a free market where the state provides vouchers to every student for the cost they currently spend $16.3K per year (or even less). The competition for your average student whose family can't afford extra money would be fierce. Then I'd hope a market would open for families could pay a little more, say $2-5k per student more on top of the voucher. I can't see how this would be worse than the status quo. Currently, school districts are a bloated mess of waste. Of course, you'd have to kill the department of ed, literally the most worthless federal bureaucracy of them all. This would allow schools to trim administrative fat and run leaner, pay quality teachers more. "But what about standards, durrrrrr?" I guess we'll find out what the population values most in education. Sure as hell won't be some blue hair weirdo talking to 8 yr olds about masturbation and protected by the worst union in the country.

[NewYooper]

A number of reasons. A lot of them are equity based. Essentially, private schools get to pick who they choose to take. There can be a lot of hidden racism, classism, anti-certain religions buried in their choices. In addition, they will tend to pick the best students (who are also the cheapest to educate) and leave the lesser students and the high maintenance/discipline kids (and more expensive to educate) behind in the public schools. The private schools also have little responsibility. It is easy for them to kick a kid out (for reasons of grades to discipline to…) and then the kid is the responsibility (again) of the public school. This approach allows them to look like they produce a lot of “high achieving kids” when they get rid of anyone that the don’t want (because it will take more effort and cost to educate them). Since many of the private schools are also religious based, it is “freedom of religion” issue. It is your taxpayer money. Are you ok with it going to a different religion? In addition, because of their religious affiliations, many private schools do not need to provide all of the services and protections offered (mandated by the government) that public schools must provide. Lastly, it is the lost funding to the public schools. They often get funding simply based on a per student dollar value. When the cheap to educate kids leave and their money leaves, they have less money and proportionally more expensive kids to educate.

Just my summary of the arguments. Don’t hold it against me.

[ragtimejoe1]

Public schools have already transitioned to mostly tolerating only the democratic party positions. That doesn't seem to much different than a single religious perspective, so, no I don't care if the voucher goes to a religious school.

I know not popular opinion, but I also don't care if the higher achieving students are plucked and provided more opportunity. The current mentality of reducing opportunity or standards for high achievers is stupid, looking at you Oregon.

The current system favors the wealthy. Only they can get their kids out of a failing system. Lower income high quality students benefit the most in a voucher system and I'm ok with that.

AZ will be interesting to watch.

[WYO1016]

Public schools have already transitioned to mostly tolerating only the democratic party positions. That doesn't seem to much different than a single religious perspective, so, no I don't care if the voucher goes to a religious school.

I know not popular opinion, but I also don't care if the higher achieving students are plucked and provided more opportunity. The current mentality of reducing opportunity or standards for high achievers is stupid, looking at you Oregon.

The current system favors the wealthy. Only they can get their kids out of a failing system. Lower income high quality students benefit the most in a voucher system and I'm ok with that.

AZ will be interesting to watch.

Public schools haven't changed. There have been far more attacks on the scientific process from one side of the aisle, though.

[ragtimejoe1]

Public schools have already transitioned to mostly tolerating only the democratic party positions. That doesn't seem to much different than a single religious perspective, so, no I don't care if the voucher goes to a religious school.

I know not popular opinion, but I also don't care if the higher achieving students are plucked and provided more opportunity. The current mentality of reducing opportunity or standards for high achievers is stupid, looking at you Oregon.

The current system favors the wealthy. Only they can get their kids out of a failing system. Lower income high quality students benefit the most in a voucher system and I'm ok with that.

AZ will be interesting to watch.

Public schools haven't changed. There have been far more attacks on the scientific process from one side of the aisle, though.

If you believe that, you have your head in the sand. As far as science goes, both sides bastardize it to fit their agenda. Only 1 side fails to recognize their complete ignorance while claiming superiority.

Back to topic. Let the parents decide or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

[WYO1016]

Public schools haven't changed. There have been far more attacks on the scientific process from one side of the aisle, though.

If you believe that, you have your head in the sand. As far as science goes, both sides bastardize it to fit their agenda. Only 1 side fails to recognize their complete ignorance while claiming superiority.

Back to topic. Let the parents decide or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

This is the dumbest dog-whistle being parroted. Yes, people trained in education know exponentially more than the average parents on how to educate kids. Just like if a teacher came to your office they wouldn't have a clue how to do your job.

Also, doctors know more about medicine and lawyers know more about the law than the average person. Want proof? See any sovereign citizen idiot try to play lawyer and watch them get eviscerated.

[ragtimejoe1]

If you believe that, you have your head in the sand. As far as science goes, both sides bastardize it to fit their agenda. Only 1 side fails to recognize their complete ignorance while claiming superiority.

Back to topic. Let the parents decide or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

This is the dumbest dog-whistle being parroted. Yes, people trained in education know exponentially more than the average parents on how to educate kids. Just like if a teacher came to your office they wouldn't have a clue how to do your job.

Also, doctors know more about medicine and lawyers know more about the law than the average person. Want proof? See any sovereign citizen idiot try to play lawyer and watch them get eviscerated.

Many home schooled kids are more academically advanced than their peers. Yours is a strawman argument. Let's go apples to apples. Can parents decide which doctor to see or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

Your desire to dictate choices to parents is concerning and vweird.

[WYO1016]

This is the dumbest dog-whistle being parroted. Yes, people trained in education know exponentially more than the average parents on how to educate kids. Just like if a teacher came to your office they wouldn't have a clue how to do your job.

Also, doctors know more about medicine and lawyers know more about the law than the average person. Want proof? See any sovereign citizen idiot try to play lawyer and watch them get eviscerated.

Many home schooled kids are more academically advanced than their peers. Yours is a strawman argument. Let's go apples to apples. Can parents decide which doctor to see or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

Your desire to dictate choices to parents is concerning and vweird.

Comparing the decision of what doctor to see to using school vouchers for private school is hardly apples to apples.

Parents are currently free to educate their children in whatever way they see fit. Want to home school? Go for it. Want to send your kids to private school? Knock yourself out. The argument here is that the government should pay to educate children in whichever way the parents see fit. That's not how the world works. If you want free education for your kids you'll get it, but they'll be taught the way the experts deem appropriate. If you want alternatives to public education you pay for it, just like you have to pay to send your kids to a second opinion if you don't like what one doctor had to say.

TL;DR: You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[ragtimejoe1]

Many home schooled kids are more academically advanced than their peers. Yours is a strawman argument. Let's go apples to apples. Can parents decide which doctor to see or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

Your desire to dictate choices to parents is concerning and vweird.

Comparing the decision of what doctor to see to using school vouchers for private school is hardly apples to apples.

Parents are currently free to educate their children in whatever way they see fit. Want to home school? Go for it. Want to send your kids to private school? Knock yourself out. The argument here is that the government should pay to educate children in whichever way the parents see fit. That's not how the world works. If you want free education for your kids you'll get it, but they'll be taught the way the experts deem appropriate. If you want alternatives to public education you pay for it, just like you have to pay to send your kids to a second opinion if you don't like what one doctor had to say.

TL;DR: You can't have your cake and eat it too.

The "experts" are failing and the left wants to force patents in that failing system catering to the democrat base and teacher unions.

If a kid can get a quality education and better education outside of public schools why would you and the left care? Isn't it about helping students succeed or is it about control and unions?

AZ and several others broke the cycle. WY will follow. The dominoes will fall and the education cartel will crumble. The leftist control freaks will lose their grip.

[ragtimejoe1]

Super bright underrepresented kid in failing inner city school. Parents figure out transportation options to private school but can't afford tuition. Twisted and wrong that some people worship the Democrat alter so much that they'd rather leave thebkid doomed for failure rather than use the money more efficiently and give the kid a chance.

Talk about systemic racism.

[ragtimejoe1]

Dp

[ragtimejoe1]

If you want alternatives to public education you pay for it, just like you have to pay to send your kids to a second opinion if you don't like what one doctor had to say.

By the way, the latter isn't true. You can get second opinions and get covered by insurance including insurance subsidized by taxpayers. The subsidized insurance also goes to <gasp> PRIVATE doctors. Whoa!!

The former also has a precedence set in higher education. We already subsidize education at <gasp> PRIVATE universities.

If they public school is the best option, they will have no problem getting enough students/vouchers. It looks to me like the education cartel is scared of competition or democrats are scared of kids getting opposing views. Nothing in the anti-voucher crowd is about student success but more about propping up a failing system.

[WYO1016]

Keep screaming into the void if it makes you feel better, ragtimejoe1. I've got better things to do with my day than argue with a fool on the internet.

[LanderPoke]

Many home schooled kids are more academically advanced than their peers. Yours is a strawman argument. Let's go apples to apples. Can parents decide which doctor to see or do you know what's best for someone else's kid?

Your desire to dictate choices to parents is concerning and vweird.

Comparing the decision of what doctor to see to using school vouchers for private school is hardly apples to apples.

Parents are currently free to educate their children in whatever way they see fit. Want to home school? Go for it. Want to send your kids to private school? Knock yourself out. The argument here is that the government should pay to educate children in whichever way the parents see fit. That's not how the world works. If you want free education for your kids you'll get it, but they'll be taught the way the experts deem appropriate. If you want alternatives to public education you pay for it, just like you have to pay to send your kids to a second opinion if you don't like what one doctor had to say.

TL;DR: You can't have your cake and eat it too.

So basically you are saying one shouldn't get a say in how their tax dollars are spent. OK

[WYO1016]

Tell you what, when either of you are in posession of an IQ higher than the temperature of tap water we can debate education. Until then feel free to keep patting each other on the back.

[ragtimejoe1]

Keep screaming into the void if it makes you feel better, ragtimejoe1. I've got better things to do with my day than argue with a fool on the internet.

What's the count? 14 states with vouchers or strongly considering vouchers? Lots of fool's I guess. Reality is, when pressed, there's not many arguments against vouchers. I'm sorry you place unions and politics above student success. Thankfully you and those like you willose eventually. Just a matter of time.

[laxwyo]

If you want alternatives to public education you pay for it, just like you have to pay to send your kids to a second opinion if you don't like what one doctor had to say.

By the way, the latter isn't true. You can get second opinions and get covered by insurance including insurance subsidized by taxpayers. The subsidized insurance also goes to <gasp> PRIVATE doctors. Whoa!!

The former also has a precedence set in higher education. We already subsidize education at <gasp> PRIVATE universities.

If they public school is the best option, they will have no problem getting enough students/vouchers. It looks to me like the education cartel is scared of competition or democrats are scared of kids getting opposing views. Nothing in the anti-voucher crowd is about student success but more about propping up a failing system.

Imagine being forced to spend food stamps or whatever assistance at some poop government store instead of letting the market compete for the government dollars. We let people choose where to spend except in schools because poop believe whatever poop the public school teacher unions screams. I’d scream too if my livelihood was going to be crushed because we have never been held accountable. People arguing against vouchers are either super stupid or just incredibly naive. We can have public schools that aren’t government schools. The teachers unions and the dept of ed are the biggest reasons why outcomes continue to get worse.

[WestWYOPoke]

If you want alternatives to public education you pay for it, just like you have to pay to send your kids to a second opinion if you don't like what one doctor had to say.

It looks to me like the education cartel is scared of competition or democrats are scared of kids getting opposing views.

Wow, for a conservative to actually think and say this is the definition of a lack of self awareness. Not saying that Democrats don't have some issues with this, but Republicans are magnitudes worse today in regards to being afraid of opposing views in education.

[ragtimejoe1]

It looks to me like the education cartel is scared of competition or democrats are scared of kids getting opposing views.

Wow, for a conservative to actually think and say this is the definition of a lack of self awareness. Not saying that Democrats don't have some issues with this, but Republicans are magnitudes worse today in regards to being afraid of opposing views in education.

Yeah, it's conservatives forcing men in women sports or drag queens reading to kids. You can point to the anti crt movement but for every Florida there are hundreds or thousands of forced crt policies.

Besides, wouldn't that be an argument for pro-vouchers? Again, I'm sorry you care more about unions and politics than student success. Of course, I'm sure you'll default to the liberal rallying cry "there might be racism!"