Deficit Denial?

[Dragonlady]

But feel free to explain to us how public school teachers innovate, operate efficiently, and produce results their customers demand. What choice do those customers have if they're not rich enough to afford the choice private education offers?

The fact remains that the government monopoly on affordable education has produced crappy results and skyrocketing costs, just like any centrally controlled market. Sorry if that doesn't fit your agenda.

You can't compare educating children to producing products people want, because parents are the worst possible people to be deciding school cirriculum. Schools need to produce graduates with the knowledge and skills which will make them marketable to corporations in a highly scientific global economy. Sending your child to a Christian school where they will be taught the earth is 6000 years old and science is a hoax, will not be helpful to their potential or their future.

Every country where teachers salaries are comparable to other professions with a similar level of education, has better outcomes than the US, and yet the US has more non-public schools than any other nation. Buying the education you want for your child is foolish. Having the public sector provide a quality education for everyone, regardless of income and place of residence should be the gold standard in US education.

Right now where you are born and grow up determines what kind of public education you receive. Children in low income areas have about as much chance of making it in life as someone who is taken out in a row boat, has rocks tied to their ankles, and is thrown overboard with instructions to swim to shore.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Although, market forces arnt a particularly good metric to measure educational targets by either,

 

[eflatminor]

But feel free to explain to us how public school teachers innovate, operate efficiently, and produce results their customers demand. What choice do those customers have if they're not rich enough to afford the choice private education offers?

The fact remains that the government monopoly on affordable education has produced crappy results and skyrocketing costs, just like any centrally controlled market. Sorry if that doesn't fit your agenda.

You can't compare educating children to producing products people want, because parents are the worst possible people to be deciding school cirriculum.

Right, because you know what's best for other people's children...

Pass.

 

[eflatminor]

It's not the teacher's fault. It's the central planners fault.

Its clear republicans are bad at planning

Yea, THAT'S who runs the schools.

OVERWHELMING bias.

 

[eflatminor]

Although, market forces arnt a particularly good metric to measure educational targets by either

Because we can't what people making voluntary choices about what's best for their needs. No way!

 

[Underhill]

Private school results are evidence as is the common sense notion that without competition, there is NO WAY to foster innovation and superior results.

Again, I don't understand why you would stand against consumer choice. Any other markets in which you think a government monopoly would be preferred? Just imagine if government produced everything we need in life, from toilet paper to televisions. How's that worked out throughout history?

If you value education, the LAST place it should be entrusted is the hands of bureaucrats with no incentive to thrive and no impetus to keep costs competitive.

Private schools are evidence of nothing. They cater to kids whose parents pay for them to attend so of course they will be much better than the norm.

I'm asking a simple question. What is the evidence that nationwide private schools can do better with all kids?

You are making an awful lot of assumptions.

Where the private sector sucks is where they have to serve everyone. The profitable, and those difficult cases that are not profitable. Schools are nothing like making TV's.

It requires attention to all children, regardless of ability and background. It requires that they put aside the profit motive when a kid needs additional help. And private enterprise sucks at that.

I'm sure they could do it cheaper. I'm sure it would be fine for the average child. But when a child requires hundreds of thousands in additional help over the course of his school career, the profit motive means those children will be left out in the cold. And we have hundreds of thousands of those kids.

It's the same reason private enterprise sucks at health care. It's the same problem.

 

[Deepbluediver]

I have not read through the entire thread; I'll go back and try to skim the rest. But after reading the first page, I wanted to respond with this:

I believe that one of the biggest problems with the government's deficit is that the politicians don't have a lot of skin in the game, personally. They like to be able to say "oh yes I voted to give millions of dollars of aid or tax relief to some group or some organization" but it's not really their money they are giving away.
So I would propose the following change. For every 100 billion dollars of deficit spending, all members of the federal government (President, Congress, even the Supreme Court) have their personal income tax rate increased by 1%. In other words, if the politicians think they spending they are voting for is so vital, then let them put their money where their mouth is.

 

[eflatminor]

Private school results are evidence as is the common sense notion that without competition, there is NO WAY to foster innovation and superior results.

Again, I don't understand why you would stand against consumer choice. Any other markets in which you think a government monopoly would be preferred? Just imagine if government produced everything we need in life, from toilet paper to televisions. How's that worked out throughout history?

If you value education, the LAST place it should be entrusted is the hands of bureaucrats with no incentive to thrive and no impetus to keep costs competitive.

Private schools are evidence of nothing.

Right, what does vastly superior results with a lower overhead really mean anyway. Why should we want to emulate that???

They cater to kids whose parents pay for them to attend so of course they will be much better than the norm.

Parents with kids in public schools don't pay for them to attend? Hmm...

I'm asking a simple question. What is the evidence that nationwide private schools can do better with all kids?

Since we've never had such a system, we must rely on logic and reason. The evidence lies in the crappy results and skyrocketing costs of the status quo compared to what we know happens when competitive forces drive prices down and improve results. Again, if the consumer has no choice, there is no motivation for the supplier to excel.

Common sense.

You are making an awful lot of assumptions.

No, just rational observations of the failure of top-down planning in markets.

Where the private sector sucks is where they have to serve everyone.

Nobody in a free market HAS to do anything. If a business in the private sector sucks, the consumers will make an alternative choice.

Business 101, really.

Schools are nothing like making TV's.

Sure they are. The consumer decides if the TV is priced within their means, if it provides the features and quality they demand, and if it's provided by a supplier they like to do business with.

No different than any other product or service, including the market for education.

It requires attention to all children, regardless of ability and background.

Why exactly would businesses in the education market not supply their service when a demand exists? OF COURSE they would! Schools for bright kids, schools for slow learners, mixed schools, expensive schools for rich kids, schools focused on minority communities, schools for rural kids, suburban kids, urban kids...where there's a demand, businesses will compete to supply a service.

If a businesses doesn't pay attention to a child, they'll loose that child's business. Simple.

It requires that they put aside the profit motive when a kid needs additional help. And private enterprise sucks at that.

No, it requires that the business EARN THAT CHILD'S tuition dollar or loose it to a competitor. Private enterprise is GREAT at that...or they quickly go out of business to a superior offering.

I'm sure they could do it cheaper. I'm sure it would be fine for the average child.

Businesses specialize to meet all kinds of demand. Where there's profit to be made, there will be a business to meet the demand, for "average" consumers or unique ones.

But when a child requires hundreds of thousands in additional help over the course of his school career, the profit motive means those children will be left out in the cold. And we have hundreds of thousands of those kids.

Hundreds of thousands? What are you talking about? Dollars?

If a kid, I'm assuming a severely handicap person, requires such extraordinary measures to get them through the day of learning, there will be businesses that specialize in that. There already are!

You do realize we're not talking about how poor people might pay for their children's tuition, right? If you want to levy a tax to redistribute money to poor people for the purpose of paying for their kids's school, have at it. Your state, or your local community, is free to engage in such. What we're talking about however, is ending the government CONTROL of schools, not who pays for it.

It's the same reason private enterprise sucks at health care. It's the same problem.

Thank you for making my point. What are the two markets in which costs are skyrocketing most in excess of the overall rate of inflation while producing every worsening results?

Why it's the same to markets in which government meddles most! Education and healthcare.

Starting to see a connection?

 

[Dragonlady]

Thank you for making my point. What are the two markets in which costs are skyrocketing most in excess of the overall rate of inflation while producing every worsening results?

Why it's the same to markets in which government meddles most! Education and healthcare.

Starting to see a connection?

Yes, I see a connection and here it is. The US has the most free market education and health care of any country in the world. You have more private schools, charter schools and religious schools than any country in the world, and homes schooling, and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

Parents are buying whatever eduction they believe is best for their child. And if that school denies science, teaches creationism and other teaching based on what the parents want their child to learn, well then the consumers got what they paid for.

But what about the kids? Are they learning what they need to compete in a world driven by science, math and technology. How can they solve the problems associated with climate change if they don't believe it exists.

The free market has given the US the most expensive health care in the world. But the cost of health care is behind half of all personal bankruptcies. Health care costs are rising far faster the either the GDP or inflation, and the model isn't sustainable.

You are completely incapable of acknowledging that there are SOME things that government does better than private market and health care is one of them. Every other health care system in the first world costs less and gets more done for the $$$ expended than US health care. The US has a lower life expectancy than countries which spend sustantially less on health care.

Ditto education. The US is one of the top spenders in the world when it comes to education, but it's ranking is low in relation to the $$$ spent.

Perhaps if there was a standard cirriculum, and all schools had enough text books, computers, and teacher were well enough paid that the career attracted bright people, the quality of education wouldn't be dropping like a stone. But then parents wouldn't be able to decide what their kids learn.

 

[eflatminor]

The US has the most free market education and health care of any country in the world.

We USED to have a free market for healthcare, whose inventions and advancements benefited health providers the world over. That's coming to an end.

To state that we have a free market for AFFORDABLE education is laughable. This being the clean zone, we'll leave it at that.

 

[Deepbluediver]

Yes, I see a connection and here it is. The US has the most free market education and health care of any country in the world. You have more private schools, charter schools and religious schools than any country in the world, and homes schooling, and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME

This piece by Time Magazine seems to come to the conclusion that private schools, particularly religious ones, impart a greater benefit to their students then public schools. So if there are problems with the education system, then it doesn't lie in the private-school sector.

 

[Dragonlady]

Yes, I see a connection and here it is. The US has the most free market education and health care of any country in the world. You have more private schools, charter schools and religious schools than any country in the world, and homes schooling, and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME

This piece by Time Magazine seems to come to the conclusion that private schools, particularly religious ones, impart a greater benefit to their students then public schools. So if there are problems with the education system, then it doesn't lie in the private-school sector.

That's not what the study said at all. It said that public schools only do better because they parents are more engaged and have more money to enrich their child's education. Taking out that variable meant that private school kids would do well at whatever school they attended. The exception was the Jesuit schools, which taught critical thinking better than public schools.

A friend who taught at Upper Canada College years ago told me what a pleasure it was to teach kids who were expected to run the country one day - how engaged both the students and the parents were, how the resources the children had at the school and at home were top notch, and if he told a parent Johnny was having a problem, such information got results. Although he added that having to tell the Prime Minister of Canada that his son needed to pull up his socks in science class was a daunting thing to do.

That doesn't happen in public schools, not across the board. For some families, yes, but not all.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Special Report: Class Struggle - How charter schools get students they want | Reuters

 

[FA_Q2]

and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

This is ONLY true of the public education system. People come from all over the world to study at the private institutions here. We have the best schools in the world bar none. Our universities are excellent. The problem is wholly in the public education system.

 

[ReallyMeow]

and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

This is ONLY true of the public education system. People come from all over the world to study at the private institutions here. We have the best schools in the world bar none. Our universities are excellent. The problem is wholly in the public education system.

only by being selective.

 

[Dragonlady]

and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

This is ONLY true of the public education system. People come from all over the world to study at the private institutions here. We have the best schools in the world bar none. Our universities are excellent. The problem is wholly in the public education system.

The problem is recent, ever since charter schools and home schooling became the new way for parents to segregate their children from the world. It hasn't made its way up to the university level yet, but the kids are in high school so it won't be long now. As soon as home schooling because acceptable, and charter schools started getting vouchers, the public school system has been starved for cash. The US teachers have some of the lowest pay, in relation to other professions, in the first world. The result is there is little incentive for smart people to become teachers. With the every rising cost of tuition, becoming a teacher is a poor investment.

The dumbing down of American has begun. Teaching children that science is a fraud, there is no global warning, and there's lots of oil, along with failure to invest in renewal energy sources is leaving your economy is the dust. But keep on believing that the Republicans got it right. If crashing the world economy isn't enough evidence that the Republicans couldn't possibly have gotten it MORE WRONG, I don't know what is.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

and yet your world-wide education scores are falling.

This is ONLY true of the public education system. People come from all over the world to study at the private institutions here. We have the best schools in the world bar none. Our universities are excellent. The problem is wholly in the public education system.

The problem is recent, ever since charter schools and home schooling became the new way for parents to segregate their children from the world. It hasn't made its way up to the university level yet, but the kids are in high school so it won't be long now.

The dumbing down of American has begun. Teaching children that science is a fraud, there is no global warning, and there's lots of oil, along with failure to invest in renewal energy sources is leaving your economy is the dust. But keep on believing that the Republicans got it right. If crashing the world economy isn't enough evidence that the Republicans couldn't possibly have gotten it MORE WRONG, I don't know what is.

Teaching children that science is a fraud, there is no global warning, and there's lots of oil, along with failure to invest in renewal energy sources is leaving your economy is the dust.

Science isn't a fraud. Just look at the strides we've made in GMO. Of course idiot lefties don't like that science.
As far as global warming, I'm all for it.
Just a short 11,000 or so years ago, my Chicago home was under 1 mile of ice.
I'm thankful the globe warmed since then.
Not lots of oil? Don't tell the US oil industry because they're busy making huge strides in increased production.
Feel free to invest in "renewal [sic] energy sources", just do it with your own damn money, not tax dollars.

Here's a little light reading for you.....

U.S. oil production grew more in 2012 than in any year in the history of the domestic industry, which began in 1859, and is set to surge even more in 2013.

Daily crude output averaged 6.4 million barrels a day last year, up a record 779,000 barrels a day from 2011 and hitting a 15-year high, according to the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group.

It is the biggest annual jump in production since Edwin Drake drilled the first commercial oil well in Titusville, Pa., two years before the Civil War began.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts 2013 will be an even bigger year, with average daily production expected to jump by 900,000 barrels a day.

U.S. Oil-Production Rise Is Fastest Ever - WSJ.com

 

[Dragonlady]

The world is moving to renewable energy. Those who don't embrace these technologies, will be like horse and buggy builders of the 19th century.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The world is moving to renewable energy. Those who don't embrace these technologies, will be like horse and buggy builders of the 19th century.

LOL!

That's why Solyndra did so well.

 

[Dragonlady]

That's why Solyndra did so well.

One business out of thousands worldwide. US infrastructure is aging and Americans don't want to invest. The US started the internet, yet the US has fallen behind in wiring the nation for high speed internet because it was left to the private sector to do it and the upgrade isn't profitable.

Roads and bridges are crumbling. $$$ currently spent on maintaining military bases around the world would be better spent on investment in education and infrastructure at home.

Germany was the powerhouse European economy of the latter half of the 20th century precisely because its infrastructure was destroyed in the war and the completely rebuilt and modernized after. Factories were rebuilt with all of the latest technology.

US automakers lost world-wide markets because they didn't adapt to worldwide emissions standards, under protection of US law. You are in danger of falling behind the rest of the world yet again.