How are Democrats pro-abortion but anti-school voucher?

[NYcarbineer]

Most Americans don't think education should be compulsory?

I don't know, but the fact it is compulsory is part of the problem in my opinion.

Well then by your logic,

the high dropout rate we see in many places would be a good thing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You have the right to choose what school your children go to.

Nope

Don't be obtuse.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You have the right to choose what school your children go to.

That is a straight up lie NY.

Unless you want to fork out the cash for a private school, while still being forced to pay taxes to fund Public Schools you have no choice at all.

You can not even choose which Public School your kid goes to for the most part. I know from Experience. We tried to get our son to be able to go to a school we like(Public) but were told he has to go to another one and we had no choice at all.

Maybe it is different where you live, or maybe you are just full of shit

You proved my point. You have the right to put your child in a private school. You don't have the right to have the government pay for it.

It's no different than if you ship UPS instead of the Post Office. You have the right to do it, but you don't have the right to get money from the government to do it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[How, exactly, do you think that is going to work when most of the money for schools comes form the feds?

You're only off by a smidgeon.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Most Americans don't think education should be compulsory?

I don't know, but the fact it is compulsory is part of the problem in my opinion.

Well then by your logic,

the high dropout rate we see in many places would be a good thing.

In some cases, yes, they are. In some cases, no. The flaw with compulsory education is that every child by law has to at least have attempts made to educate them. This includes all the disruptive kids, the violent kids, the druggies, and basically every problem child that constantly misbehaves and disrupts the education of the dozens of other children around them. not to mention posing a physical threat to those students and even the teachers. The schools aren't allowed to physically discipline anymore and more school boards are too docile to permanently expel children who present a danger to others. There are incidents after incidents of kids bringing weapons to school, assaulting teachers, and even putting students in the hospital who end up with a temporary suspension and then are right back in the classroom again.

If school wasn't compulsory our education quality would drastically improve because you wouldn't have the lower dredges of society dragging down the other kids who aren't causing the trouble. These kids who habitually misbehave more than likely have parents who don't care. These kids don't want to be there; there parents don't care what they do and only send them to school because it's the law. Most of these kids aren't growing up to be productive members of society anyway. All they are doing is draining resources and hurting the educational opportunities of everyone else in the school. They shouldn't be there, period.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You have the right to choose what school your children go to.

Nope

Don't be obtuse.

Pot meet kettle. I'm not the one lying.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

our public school education was pretty darn good 50 years ago, and great 40 years ago as well and pretty darn good overall 30 years ago too...i think the past 20 years it's been heading south in SOME regions, but not ALL....

Test scores in the US have essentially flat-lined since the 50s, while spending has increased steadily. We had "good" schools 50 years ago because the other countries scored lower than us. Since then we have stood still, and they have surpassed us.

I'd be really interested in seeing how much of the spending increase is in special education.

Are you saying that we should not provide an education to special needs students? Or are you going to try and claim that other countries do not do so so any cost estimates have to take that into account? Because I am pretty sure that every country that spends on mandatory education includes those special needs children. If they don't, how do you explain Hawking?

In other words, stop harping on a side issue and deal with the facts.

 

[Care4all]

our public school education was pretty darn good 50 years ago, and great 40 years ago as well and pretty darn good overall 30 years ago too...i think the past 20 years it's been heading south in SOME regions, but not ALL....

Test scores in the US have essentially flat-lined since the 50s, while spending has increased steadily. We had "good" schools 50 years ago because the other countries scored lower than us. Since then we have stood still, and they have surpassed us.

THIS IS a STATE issue and NOT one that should be in Federal hands....you shouldn't get to decide on my schools and i shouldn't get to decide on taking money out of your local schools....the whole thing is a federal over reach....

Funny thing, the problems with schools started about the same time the DoE started passing out money. Maybe we should get the DoE out of education.



How, exactly, do you think that is going to work when most of the money for schools comes form the feds?



Monopolies are never winners. If you doubt that just take a look at your local cable company. Competition makes businesses stronger, a lack of competition makes them complacent, and that means everyone looses, including the business with the monopoly.

my sis is a teacher, and an excellent one, and her school is always competing with their nearby, public schools....they can even go on the internet when their scores come out, to compare how they did....

Good for them, but that is like one KFC competing with another for the most customers, it doesn't mean anything. How does her school compete on test scores, graduation rates, and college placement at prestigious universities with the local, private schools that have less money to spend per student, lower paid teachers, and no bureaucracy?

But maybe not all school teachers in all schools do the same...i dunno? It seems like they would....it's fun to compete....and pushes capabilities.

Or maybe they don't.

Teachers rally in opposition of reform

microsoft did quite well for a while, no?

regardless, schools do not fit the definition of monopoly....if you still disagree, tell me why....

and YES my sister's school compare test scores of the kids compared to the surrounding schools and all schools within the state and with her best friend who teaches in maryland....

tell me, do you know if the catholic private schools, as an example, compete against eachother?

also from what i have gathered, private schools have MORE TEACHERS per student than public schools.....private have smaller class sizes, no?

 

[Polk]

Most are against both compulsory education and gubmint schools.

I'd love to see you support that claim.

You need to heed Carb's rule #29 - anyone who uses the term 'gubmint' is begging not to be taken seriously.

True. He also claims you could fund the entire government without income taxes if it was reduced to 1990 levels (in reality, that wouldn't even cover the DOD's budget).

 

[Polk]

Test scores in the US have essentially flat-lined since the 50s, while spending has increased steadily. We had "good" schools 50 years ago because the other countries scored lower than us. Since then we have stood still, and they have surpassed us.

I'd be really interested in seeing how much of the spending increase is in special education.

Are you saying that we should not provide an education to special needs students? Or are you going to try and claim that other countries do not do so so any cost estimates have to take that into account? Because I am pretty sure that every country that spends on mandatory education includes those special needs children. If they don't, how do you explain Hawking?

In other words, stop harping on a side issue and deal with the facts.

I'm saying we spend far more on those students than other countries do. That's a value judgement on whether or not we should be doing it, only noting that claiming we spend significantly more is misleading.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Nope

Don't be obtuse.

Pot meet kettle. I'm not the one lying.

You have the right to send you children to any school that will take them as an alternative to sending them to your local public school. You even have the right to homeschool them.

What's the problem here?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't know, but the fact it is compulsory is part of the problem in my opinion.

Well then by your logic,

the high dropout rate we see in many places would be a good thing.

In some cases, yes, they are. In some cases, no. The flaw with compulsory education is that every child by law has to at least have attempts made to educate them. This includes all the disruptive kids, the violent kids, the druggies, and basically every problem child that constantly misbehaves and disrupts the education of the dozens of other children around them. not to mention posing a physical threat to those students and even the teachers. The schools aren't allowed to physically discipline anymore and more school boards are too docile to permanently expel children who present a danger to others. There are incidents after incidents of kids bringing weapons to school, assaulting teachers, and even putting students in the hospital who end up with a temporary suspension and then are right back in the classroom again.

If school wasn't compulsory our education quality would drastically improve because you wouldn't have the lower dredges of society dragging down the other kids who aren't causing the trouble. These kids who habitually misbehave more than likely have parents who don't care. These kids don't want to be there; there parents don't care what they do and only send them to school because it's the law. Most of these kids aren't growing up to be productive members of society anyway. All they are doing is draining resources and hurting the educational opportunities of everyone else in the school. They shouldn't be there, period.

That's an odd approach. That's a bit like eliminating all speed limits so we can save on law enforcement costs.

 

[Avatar4321]

Easy. They don't care about choice. They care about abortion.

 

[jeffrockit]

If someone wants to send their child to a private school, they are free to do so. Why should the rest of us be obliged to pay for it though?

You pay for the under achieving public schools, why not fund private schools that are proven to do better than public schools.

Private school students have a five percent higher graduation rate than public schools students and are 1.5 times as likely to apply for entrance to post-secondary education. Private school students are more likely to graduate from college. Roman Catholic school students are twice as likely to graduate from college as public school students, while students of other private schools are 2.5 times as likely to graduate from college. Hispanic and African-American private school students are three times as likely to graduate from college (both Roman Catholic and other private school students).

Roman Catholic school students scored at Proficient in the 1992 NAEP mathematics test at 1.2 to 1.5 times the rate of public schools students (Table #3).(10) Other private schools produced Proficient scores at 1.2 to 2.5 times the rate of public schools.

Private school students scored Proficient in the 1994 NAEP reading test at 1.5 times the rate of public schools students (Table #1).(8) Roman Catholic schools, which can be used as a surrogate for non-elite private schools, produced Proficient scores at 1.4 times or more the rate of public schools

U.S. Public Schools and Private Schools: Performance and Spending Compared

Before posters try to discredit the link, this site's references are from the US dept of Education

 

[rdean]

Democrats are "pro women's rights".

Republicans only want to get the kid born. Then starve it.

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina and a Republican

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Democrats are "pro women's rights".

Republicans only want to get the kid born. Then starve it.

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina and a Republican

You want to kill the child before it is born. If that does not work, you want to stick them in a system that fails to teach them anything.

Got it.

 

[JFK_USA]

1. School Vouchers are not the solution. Just how would you get that straighten out? Every kid gets an equal amount of money or the parents who pay the most get the most? And what about sales tax? Everyone has to keep receipts of everything they buy? Its too much of a hassle and in many states, funding is already cut to low performing schools. And school vouchers do nothing to break up unions. Thats a separate and complete non-issue in our education system.

2. Pro-Choice is better than paying Earned Income Credit. Lets look at this. A woman makes 25K, she gets pregnant. Now lets say we have a federally funded abortion. So bucs read this slow because I know you have reading comprehension problems so lets go:

Abortion: $800

vs.

EIC: $2,500 x 18= 45,000

Average savings per abortion= $44,200 over 18 years

Okay so the government spent 46 Billion dollars managing the program, that means at an average of 25K a year gives 1.84 million people that money. Lets say half took the abortion.

(920,000)(2,500)= 2.3 billion dollars x 18 = 41.4 billion dollars saved.

Its the fiscally conservative way.

 

[Avatar4321]

Democrats are "pro women's rights".

Republicans only want to get the kid born. Then starve it.

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina and a Republican

Women's right eh? Since when? Progressive thought is fairly concrete on the abortion issue. They want to cull the "bad" people out of society. And when Progressive say "bad" they mean black, hispanic, and asians.

That's why the left supports abortion.

 

[Care4all]

Democrats are "pro women's rights".

Republicans only want to get the kid born. Then starve it.

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina and a Republican

Women's right eh? Since when? Progressive thought is fairly concrete on the abortion issue. They want to cull the "bad" people out of society. And when Progressive say "bad" they mean black, hispanic, and asians.

That's why the left supports abortion.

liar and bull crap avatar....shame on you for always saying such crap....search your soul, you are promoting lies...

 

[Ravi]

Democrats are "pro women's rights".

Republicans only want to get the kid born. Then starve it.

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina and a Republican

You want to kill the child before it is born. If that does not work, you want to stick them in a system that fails to teach them anything.

Got it.

Did you go to public school?