public school choice - the only sane approach

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
My position on choice is totally honest.

Parents have the same choice in education as in buying health insurance for their kids, as in buying a car to transport the kids, as in buying sneakers for their kids.

This type of choice is the American choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. Middle income families have their choice restricted since they're already squeezed by taxes to pay for public schools. Lower-middle-income families are really the worst off in this regard, since many of them could afford private schools if not for the tax load. Lower income families don't have much of a tax load, but can't afford private schools anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
So, I reject your communistic and socialist alleged fix of my post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given that the money is already being stolen from the taxpayers, the "fix" is no more communistic or socialistic than the current situation.

[MtSmalls]

Some time around the turn of the century, it became the accepted norm that education, through the 12th grade, was a public good. That is, it falls into the same categories as roads, police and fire squads, jails and courts etc.

I pay taxes that subsidize a wide variety of things I don't use. I pay taxes into school districts that I don't use, as I don't have kids. I pay taxes that subsidized a new baseball stadium that I don't visit,etc, etc etc.

A stunningly large percentage of the school districts in this country are underfunded to being with. Start taking out 'voucher' funds from schools for kids that transfer, how much more underfunded are they going to be?

If you want a better school system, start at the top and reduce the salaries paid to state level administrators and start paying teachers more. Start attracting real talent into the school systems instead of bashing them.

[Analyst]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of greater concern to me, and something that I've almost never seen discussed, is the impact of vouchers on the price of private schooling. Does anyone doubt that private schools, at least in areas such as mine where demand is high, would raise their prices in response to the widespread availability of vouchers?

In the short term, at least, demand would increase while supply remained constant, and prices would of necessity increase. Rich people will get a break, some middle-income people who had been on the margin will now be able to afford private schooling, but I suspect that lower-income families will remain, for the most part, shut out.

Long term is potentially a different story, depending on how the supply of (hopefully high quality, but perhaps not) private schooling can increase.

[/ QUOTE ]


You can't assume that economic theory will work in the short term and not assume the same for the long term. What about the, or which of the required resources used to supply a school makes you believe those resources would be limited in the longterm in any significant or noteworthy way?

Perhaps this is why it is not being discussed.

[/ QUOTE ]

My last sentence commented on the long term, though the focus was on the inevitable short-term issues. In the long term (5 years? 10 years?), the supply of private schooling would of course increase in response to vouchers. What I don't know is by how much (quite dependent upon the size and availability of the vouchers), and therefore what the market price of that education would be. This would determine how effective the vouchers are in bringing "choice" to the majority of people.

There can be no question that those currently running private schools and those sending their children there would enjoy a tremendous economic benefit from vouchers.

[Analyst]

[ QUOTE ]
Private school vouchers are used in Ireland, Denmark, HK, and a variety of other countries. Private schools educate a majority of kids. In all of those cases the private market moved in to provide the necessary facilities. And there was no shortage of schools with tuitions exactly equal to the voucher. I mean, think of the market for a school with that price. It jsut makes economic sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

The availability of voucher-priced private schooling would depend on the size of the vouchers. How big are we talking here?

[ACPlayer]

So, get rid of the tax load. I have no problem with dismantling the public school system and returning the money to the tax payers to do as they see fit.

I agree that tax payer funded schooling is a socialist idea. Vouchers does not change that.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Of greater concern to me, and something that I've almost never seen discussed, is the impact of vouchers on the price of private schooling. Does anyone doubt that private schools, at least in areas such as mine where demand is high, would raise their prices in response to the widespread availability of vouchers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a guy who understand macro pricing theory.

Note that the cost of education in colleges has spiraled, part of the reason is, staring withe the GI Bill and on to Sallie Mae and other low cost financing sources.

You cannot inject tax payer funded incentives into private markets without creating severe distortions in the pricing. Capitalism works on the principle of unfettered markets and laissez-faire economics (I had so hoped that 6M would have jumped in here).

Now, as a society we need to decide -- do we want public education or do we want free market education. If we want tax payer funded public education, the money should stay in the public schools. Otherwise we go for the private sector approach - perhaps just perhaps with some support for a very, very small segment of the population.

Schoot vouchers are a horrific idea. Kill the idea NOW.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
So, get rid of the tax load. I have no problem with dismantling the public school system and returning the money to the tax payers to do as they see fit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good to me.

[ACPlayer]

If this is what America wants then this is the correct way. Strangling the public schools with vouchers and in the process meddling with the private school system with govt sponsored vouchers is idiotic. It is the cowards way of killing public schools by avoiding the real debate or the real hard work of fixing the public school system.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
It is the cowards way of killing public schools by avoiding the real debate or the real hard work of fixing the public school system.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Fixing" something suggests that once it was not broken, but now is; and that it can be repaired.

Was the public school system ever "not broken"?

Can the public school system be "fixed" or repaired?

These may be more than merely idle questions.

[ACPlayer]

Dunno on whether it was ever fixed or even if it is presently broken.

I do know the following for sure:

1. School vouchers are a bad idea
2. Those who advocate school vouchers are really wanting the get rid of public schools, but are unable to say so for political reasons. However, they are not looking at the impact on private schools.
3. If there are no public schools then illiteracy in America will rise, but perhaps median literacy will rise as well.

I suspect that if the control of the schools was truly local. Many schoold districts would operate better, be more responsive to local issues and concerns. I also suspect that they will be able to reduce their costs.