> On Mar 16, 2008, at 6:58 AM, Byron Jeff wrote:
>
> Missed the point. DINKs have no kids. Why should they have to pay  
> taxes for
> education at all?
>
>>
>>> The public school funds are for the benefit of the entire  
>>> society, not
>>> just
>>> specifically for you. So paying them are orthogonal to paying for  
>>> tuition.
>
The theory of public schools ( PS ) benefiting society is a nice  
one.  In practice it does not happen.  Public schools do not educate  
poor students, they shuffle them from grade to grade until they can  
vomit them out.  Bright students excel whether they are in public,  
private or no schools.  Average students are dumbed down by public  
schools.  I have taught GED students, known a great many teachers and  
I do not buy the myth of the underpaid teacher.  By and large they  
teach because that is what maximizes their paycheck and enjoyment.   
Most PS teachers would not make as much in the private sector as they  
do in the public.  They really don't have the skills to compete for  
the same salary in the private sector.

> We need to work to find a solution that benefits the greatest  
> number of
> children.
Yes, and pretending that all children can be pushed through the same  
system is obviously ludicrous.  Better to handle average students  
more competently than is done now. And keep trying to come up with  
something for the disruptive 5%.
>
> Vouchers are not it.
>
>
I agree with that.  And the federal government is not the answer.

cc
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist