It is a good thing you are rational and don't have to resort to name calling. The government has never given more money to the nations schools than it is now. My school system was just fine. Yes, we paid quite a bit in taxes, but it was the community/family support systems that allowed the schools to produce such outstanding graduates. And the quality of schooling doesn't come down to money, as we are seeing under Bush' 'No Child Left Behind' BS. You can't throw money at the problem. Education is a family/community issue. Few without a strong support system around them succeed in their educations. And those that do, realize that it is through hard work and desire that one is able to advance in life (see Thomas Sewell), not by throwing money at a problem, as is the liberal solution to lots of problems.
I'm not a Libertarian, but thanks for playing. Governments sole job is to protect the rights of its' citizens. By doing so, it allows them be responsible for themselves in all aspects of their life. People that share my views have never had a chance to fully enact our principles. Until we do, we cannot be blamed for killing anything. And I'm still waiting for one viable argument from you.
Bush can't throw money for a couple years and expect to fix what has been screwed up by members of his party, including ********s like you, for decades. Again, here are consverative ********s like you who put things in black and white. School is society's problem, that means it's the government's AND the families/communities problem. Everybody has to work together. It doesn't mean get rid of funding and hand it over to a bunch of corporations and turing your kids education onto a ********ing market system. That's where ********s like you confuse people into joining your side of the argument. If everybody works together, that includes the goverment providing the right amount of funding through taxes and the local community coming togther and providing the right environment and support needed, then everything will be better. Privatizing doesn't give more power to individuals, it takes it away from them and at the same time takes away the goverment's responsiblility in this matter and renders the citizen powerless. That's why we had this system invented in the first place!! I swear evertime I see people like you spewing this ****** at meetings and on TV I want to beat you over the head with a baseball bat until there's nothing but a bloody pulp, I really ********ing hate people like you. .
Go ahead and hate us, but the rate at which everything in this country has been liberalizing, this idea (or at least a hybrid of it) may not be far off. And then what will you do? I heard suicide is a good idea.
No most of it is just a fad and it won't last long. They tried to bring it up in my community and it was shot down with the quickness. People like you treat the government like it's a foreign entity inposed on you and for some reason you believe letting international corporations and the stock market run schools is somehow good. The government is the people, by the people, for the people. Your right-wing policies are about to produce a heavy backlash, starting in the next senatorial election.
Maybe if we actually had a congress and president that actually implemented conservative ideas, I'd agree with you What's wrong with making a profit on providing eduaction?
How can people like you be so perverted to think such a thing? What happens somewhere in the future when the market determines that it's more profitable to teach this certain subject this way and to get rid of this and that class? By privatizing, take power away from the people. The conservatives and libertarians have been articulate enough to fool people into thinking the opposite.
But that opens up the market for subjects to be tought another way. Then the parent can choose what style of education they want for their child. I would argue that it gives people more power than they have today. We have this at the university level. What's wrong with having it at the elementary and high school level. Certainly there's more than one way to teach a subject. Out of curiosity, what is your property tax burden?
The parent isn't really supposed to choose the "style" of education. What the hell's wrong with you? If a parent wants an intelligent design "style" then they can go to a religious private school. If they want the 21st century education then they can go to a regular public school. Property taxes are around $1300 and probably going up again because south Florida is getting nailed by goddam real estate bastards jacking everything up over here.
Sketch for me a model in which a new brand of cola, a new line of breakfast cereal or a new toothpaste will compete at the highest levels (ie, find their way into Wal*Mart and Stop&Shop/Acme shelves). If you can do so without running into the barrier to entry caused by the oligopolies that run these products' industries, I'll tear up the HBS cases written on them ad nausem and toss them into the Passaic river. (when it gets warmer)
Says Who? And who is supposed to decide? Who knows better how their child learns then their parent? BTW, $1300 is beans
That depends on where you live and what you earn. I pay that a half on my condo - and that much again per half for my unimproved land (in a vastly cheaper municipality). I make substantially less than the median for my suburb, and - in fact - less than the per capita income. If you include my wife's paltry income from working at Starbucks, we just inch over making half of the median family income. I wish I only had $1300 in property taxes, but I'd still consider that a lot - for me. That said, I know what it pays for, and I'm cool with that. Somewhat ironically, all the rich bastards around here send their kids to private school, despite having unrivaled high school facilities. Of course, this might be the WASP-iest place I've ever lived, full of executives for The Limited.
And parent's can't decide whats best for their children with public funded schools? Was it privitization that enabled school boards to vote for intelligent design? No, it was public schools. But if you privitize schools, parents will have less of a choice. At least in public funded schools parent's had a board taht would enable them to change things, in private schools the only choice parent's would have is to find another school which many parent's who can't afford another type of school won't have that choice. Think McFly, think!
Neo-con's are one brain cell more than the neo-anarchist libertarians. Both's main objective is to get rid of almost all government.
Maybe for the tri-state area where you live, but most other places in America that's about average. And like I said, it's going up again because of the housing market.
But see, that's the point of school choice vouchers. People will be able to afford a different style of education then what they are recieveing. Plus, do you think that private schools exist in a vaccuum. They all have education boards. In fact, I would venture to say that the board of St Peter's Prep School would be far more accessible than the Jersey City School Board. Also, I'm not really sure if you understand what I mean by styles of education. Different people have different ways of learning. I would prefer that my child has a more reality based education with a focus on field trips over book learning. Because of the risk of law suit, public schools are just not as equiped or willing to go on many field trips which I see as a detrement to the growth of the child. Under a school choice program, I can send my child to a school thatfeels the way I do about reality based learning. Yes, there should be a public funding of education. Of course there should. However, I do not agree that the public money necessarily has to go to public shcools. many communities pay local taxes for garbage collection but when the truck comes arund, it usually is a private carter. I welcome your polite response.
why shouldn't a parent choose a style of education? why should they not be allowed to deem which style will be best suited for their child? if the parent wants to send their child to private school, why should they then have to pay for the public schooling of others? our public schools are hardly delivering a '21st century' education. every indicator is showing our students (on average) falling behind their international peers. so is that really a good thing? to be a sounding board for Matt's point, America's university system is far and away the best in the world. why? choice. if you want a large public school that has manageable costs, you can attend Michigan State or Michigan. if you want a research based cirriculum, you can attend MIT or Vanderbilt. if you want a smaller, liberal arts education you can attend Carleton College or Davidson. this competition for students forces (most) universities to focus on the true task at hand: education. our public schools have become more of a handout for teachers and administrators than a service to the students. why not allow competition and choice into the early education cycles?
in the midwest RC Cola has made some in-roads into the market, and is actually profitable. and in the beverage segment, how many micro-brews are out there? how could Nantucket Nectars enter a heavily crowded segment? who would have given UnderArmor a chance in hell against Nike and Adidas? Simple technology that could be easily reproduced by the major players. But they are absolutely killing Nike's similar line. Proctor-Gamble has made something in the neighborhood of 30 acquisitions in the last 4 years, all on a small scale (barring Gillette) to buy brands and products that filled out their line-up. these were all smaller companies. also, when looking at personal products, shops such as Caswell Massey continue to exist on a small scale. a friend of mine just started a company based on high-end personal products for men. he and two of his grad school buddies (all chemists) came up with some interesting stuff (including toothpaste) and they are almost ready to start the sales/marketing process. will they become the next Kimberly-Clark, probably not. but they hope to have one product become successful enough to sell out to somebody like PG or KC. this entrepreneurial spirit is what keeps our economy at the top.
It is no accident that Whole Foods has entered the S&P 500 with the emphasis on such things as Boylans Soda, Kashi Cereal and Toms of Maine toothpaste. Small companies will always have a place to innovate and thrive