Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (16529)	7/3/2002 11:54:40 AM
From: Constant Reader	Respond to of 21057

Perhaps you are right. Unfortunately, the power politics and the money behind it turns all efforts into nationalized crusades where everything is painted black or white. There are many possible solutions to the problems of education in our nation. Some may work in one region or locality and not another, but we will never know because of this need by ideologues to forcefully impose a standard template upon the nation.

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (16529)	7/3/2002 1:21:09 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

Yet it strikes me that the outcome produced by that system would likely not be much different than what we have today.....the rich can already buy slots in the best schools by either moving to expensive school districts or sending their kids to expensive private schools. The poor don't have those options, and they have to settle for the less desirable schools. That's precisely what I was going to say. The fact that the current system produces this outcome can hardly be considered a reason to keep it if it is undesirable. Perhaps the voucher system would still help, by motivating the truly awful schools to improve or shut their doors for lack of students. But the gaping inequality of the system would remain. I am not talking about inequality of outcomes (which I view as inevitable and not necessarily undesirable) but inequality of opportunity. A bright child in a bad school is not going to be able to meet her potential as she proceeds to higher levels in the educational system and in the world. And that is precisely the result of the current system so it can hardly be considered a mark in its favor. What we can hope to achieve is (1) bad schools die, instead of being kept afloat in the current communist system. (2) the teachers unions are destroyed, freeing the system from its worst element. (3) efficiency increases because to do so increases profits (4) and the above implies the death of the current bloated, stifling bureaucracy. (5) competition spurs a drive to better educate the students. This clearly depends on parents insisting on that outcome. But under the current state system, they can insist all they want and not get because some politician doesn't need their votes. In this system they can walk and the school operator can't stop them. (6) And (5) may negate many of your objections. Inequality? Inequality is a fact of life. You're a dog; I'm a human; that makes me alpha. Tough. When the Founders promised equality, they meant IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, not in fact. Now is that a big enough bone for you? And I would prefer that the best students get the best schools, rather than the richest students. Requiring that by law will inevitably be a disaster. Soon enough, politics, not ability, will be the only coin thar counts.

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (16529)	7/5/2002 11:08:48 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

siliconinvestor.com Sorry. Stumbled across that and COULDN'T CONTROL MYSELF!

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (16529)	7/6/2002 12:18:00 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

The Devil made me do it! Message 17700128

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (16529)	7/6/2002 1:49:07 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

I haven't followed the voucher conversation (I've turned into an SI dipper-into), but had a thought I'm running past you. What if parents of children in public schools that are in districts in which the schools aren't the best (the most serious effects of insufficient funding I can think of are too few teachers per student, and inadequately trained teachers, not physical plant or curriculum limitations) want to get vouchers not to look for some cheap private school or partially pay for an expensive one, but to upgrade their local public school? If your public school has features classes of 35 and the private one you can't afford even with a voucher features classes of 20, mightn't it feel like "parent choice" to you to say, "Why give my Muslim (for example) neighbors checks toward a better education for their children in Muslim schools, and not give me a check toward a better education for my child in P.S. 100?" Am I wrong in my impression that vouchers can't be taken to the local public school to be used to improve teacher-student ratio, for example? (I've also turned into a newspaper dipper-into; time is pressing recently; if this is a dumb question, sorry.)