how can someone be against school vouchers?

Personally, I believe the opposite would happen. Private schools would attempt to match their prices to the amount of the voucher in order to attract more business.

I don't think you understand economics. When there is more money floating around that people want to spend on service or good X - all other things being equal - the price of service or good X will go up. its simply supply and demand.

This is exactly what happened with the increased availability of college loans and grants - college tuition skyrocketed.

My grandfather drove a school bus for a living and could afford to send both his kids to private primary and high schools and to pay their entire tuition at LSU - without taking out loans. This isn't the case anymore.
 
Personally, I believe the opposite would happen. Private schools would attempt to match their prices to the amount of the voucher in order to attract more business.

I don't think you understand economics. When there is more money floating around that people want to spend on service or good X - all other things being equal - the price of service or good X will go up. its simply supply and demand.

This is exactly what happened with the increased availability of college loans and grants - college tuition skyrocketed.

My grandfather drove a school bus for a living and could afford to send both his kids to private primary and high schools and to pay their entire tuition at LSU - without taking out loans. This isn't the case anymore.

Of course but in this instance supply could also skyrocket and that would drive the prices back down because there would be many more people that could go to a private school that cannot now. Nobody actually knows where the price will go but it could go both ways as well. As you say, the current schools may raise their prices knowing that the parents attending there could afford more and at the same time new schools may pop up to take advantage of the larger customer base that would charge less. There are still colleges that you can attend that are quite affordable, just not the cream of the crop. I believe that the largest factor in setting prices may very well be the fact that under a voucher system where you could send your children to a public school the private schools would have to compete with all public schools in that aria. I know that when I was going to my first high school my parents sent me to a Lutheran private school because the local high school that I was required to attend had a very high murder rate and I was the wrong race. Had the option been available, I would have been sent to another public school a few miles out as it was actually far better than the private options in the aria. The private school there did not have to be any good to get business because people like me were stuck going there or going to a school where you were not likely to last.
 
Of course but in this instance supply could also skyrocket and that would drive the prices back down because there would be many more people that could go to a private school that cannot now.

And the Saints could go to the Superbowl

wait

bad argument

Supply could skyrocket, I guess, if thousands of schools opened overnight.

Nobody actually knows where the price will go but it could go both ways as well.
??? No - it can't go both ways. It will either go up or down.

There are still colleges that you can attend that are quite affordable,

Name a single tier I university that someone making 12.50 an hour can send their kids to without taking out a loan.
 
Only democrat politicians are against school vouchers. It doesn't matter if the next Einstein lives in a poor neighborhood--goes to a failing school--democrat politicians will keep them there, simply because of their zip code.
 
I teach in parochial school. I doubt vouchers would increase or decrease our enrollment numbers. I really don't think they'd be appropriate either, since very good public schools are readily available.

However in areas with failing or dangerous public schools? I can see a reason and the success potential has already been demonstrated in Wisconsin and DC. In both cases were confined to areas with failing/dangerous schools and limited to the 'poor.'

Using my own school district and the school I teach at for numbers, the system works like this:

public school=$7500 per child k-8
private school=$4100 per child k-8
voucher=$3000

So parents either come up with the difference, which in most private schools can be made in monthly payments or some sort of 'volunteer' or 'fund-raising' activities.

I don't think vouchers should go to parents able to pay for private schools, but when the public schools are not performing and there are not enough alternatives, seems this would be the area where 'leveling the opportunities' could come into play.
 
Only democrat politicians are against school vouchers. It doesn't matter if the next Einstein lives in a poor neighborhood--goes to a failing school--democrat politicians will keep them there, simply because of their zip code.

So your solution is to give Einstein's parents a $2500 voucher to send him to private school in a city where the cheapest private school is $3500? Brilliant plan.

CHARTER SCHOOLS
 
public school=$7500 per child k-8
private school=$4100 per child k-8

Just curious - does your private school accommodate the disabled for the same tuition? For instance - if there was a severely physically disabled student who required a personal nurse throughout the school day - would the school pay for that, without charging the student's parents anymore tuition - or would the parents have to eat that cost?

What about poorly behaved students? Can you just expel them - or, like the public schools, are you required by law to find SOME way to educate them?

What about applicants whose parents show absolutely no desire whatsoever to be involved in their child's education? you can simply deny them entry - whereas the public school cannot.

there's a reason private school cost per student is lower than public - private schools get to pick and choose their students and students' parents - public schools do not.
 
Only democrat politicians are against school vouchers. It doesn't matter if the next Einstein lives in a poor neighborhood--goes to a failing school--democrat politicians will keep them there, simply because of their zip code.

So your solution is to give Einstein's parents a $2500 voucher to send him to private school in a city where the cheapest private school is $3500? Brilliant plan.

CHARTER SCHOOLS

As I said, there are ways to pay off the balance. $1000 divided by 12=$83 per month.
Can volunteer, participate in fundraisers, etc. Most of our parents do just that for over $1000 because the $4000+ is too much.

I'm all for Charter schools too, just not enough to handle the kids whose parents would be willing to sacrifice time and/or money to get them the best education they could. Once again, I don't think this should be available in areas of successful, safe schools or to parents whose incomes allow for alternatives.
 
Only democrat politicians are against school vouchers. It doesn't matter if the next Einstein lives in a poor neighborhood--goes to a failing school--democrat politicians will keep them there, simply because of their zip code.

So your solution is to give Einstein's parents a $2500 voucher to send him to private school in a city where the cheapest private school is $3500? Brilliant plan.

CHARTER SCHOOLS

As I said, there are ways to pay off the balance. $1000 divided by 12=$83 per month.
Can volunteer, participate in fundraisers, etc. Most of our parents do just that for over $1000 because the $4000+ is too much.

:clap2: Brilliant plan. We'll give the poor who don't have money vouchers that aren't enough to pay for school, and then expect them to have money. Where did you come up with that?

Vouchers are a crock of shit. Charter schools are the way to go. Once the charter schools start putting old-fashioned public schools out of business - maybe the old-fashioned public schools will start to shape up. They may not be for-profit enterprises but teachers sure want to keep their jobs.
 
public school=$7500 per child k-8
private school=$4100 per child k-8

Just curious - does your private school accommodate the disabled for the same tuition? For instance - if there was a severely physically disabled student who required a personal nurse throughout the school day - would the school pay for that, without charging the student's parents anymore tuition - or would the parents have to eat that cost?

What about poorly behaved students? Can you just expel them - or, like the public schools, are you required by law to find SOME way to educate them?

What about applicants whose parents show absolutely no desire whatsoever to be involved in their child's education? you can simply deny them entry - whereas the public school cannot.

there's a reason private school cost per student is lower than public - private schools get to pick and choose their students and students' parents - public schools do not.

Severely? Such as brain damaged on ventilator as I worked with in public schools over 10 years ago? No. Then again, that one child cost tens of thousands per year, while the supposed $7500 per child was drained by those that are 'severely handicapped.' That money for a full time aid and a full time nurse, since the child was at risk of cardiac arrest and lung collapse, should not IMO be coming out of school funds, but it is or rather was.

However, autism? Yes, if educable. Dyslexia? Yes. Childhood arthritis? Yes. Mild Cerebral Palsy? Yes. Behavior disordered, again if educable in what would be a mainstream setting? Yes.

Parents who are not interested in their children's education usually do not start at private schools. However, we often end up with them when they are older and acting out. While the 'threat' of being expelled is there, hasn't happened in the 11 years I've been working there. You wouldn't believe the number of children who entered the school in preschool or kindergarten and by 2nd/3rd grade the parents have split up and the kids are getting neglected. They stay, even when the parents no longer are making tuition payments.
 
That money for a full time aid and a full time nurse, since the child was at risk of cardiac arrest and lung collapse, should not IMO be coming out of school funds, but it is or rather was.

So if their parents are too poor - then no education for them?

You wouldn't believe the number of children who entered the school in preschool or kindergarten and by 2nd/3rd grade the parents have split up and the kids are getting neglected. They stay, even when the parents no longer are making tuition payments.

My parents divorced when I was still in school. They didn't neglect me though. I know plenty of people with parents who never divorced who gave less a crap about their education than mine.

But if your school is allowing students to continue w.o paying tuition that's pretty sweet.

The private school I attended would not have been so merciful. And plenty of people were expelled all the time. I can remember less than one fist fight per year while I was there, since getting in a fight almost guaranteed expulsion.




Alls I'm saying is the comparison of private school tuition vs. public school cost simply is not fair - its apples and oranges. It like comparing the cleanliness of your private bathroom to a public bathroom in a football stadium.
 
That money for a full time aid and a full time nurse, since the child was at risk of cardiac arrest and lung collapse, should not IMO be coming out of school funds, but it is or rather was.

So if their parents are too poor - then no education for them? There was no education, the child was basically in a vegetative state. It was 'babysitting,' even that is a misnomer, as the child didn't move, just moaned. There was a nurse for that. BTW, that child would be expected to pass for NCLB, not going to happen. In many of the severe cases the child is sent to 'school' because of mandates and parents needing a break. Seems the money shouldn't be coming out of education funds just because the disabled is of school age, but it is.

You wouldn't believe the number of children who entered the school in preschool or kindergarten and by 2nd/3rd grade the parents have split up and the kids are getting neglected. They stay, even when the parents no longer are making tuition payments.

My parents divorced when I was still in school. They didn't neglect me though. I know plenty of people with parents who never divorced who gave less a crap about their education than mine.

But if your school is allowing students to continue w.o paying tuition that's pretty sweet. Such is the case in most parochial schools, IF they can. That's a function of the church being able to pick up the costs. They couldn't do it for all, obviously. However even with a serious shortfall this year, we've 10 children from 4 families that are unable to pay tuition, for one reason or another. Grades 3-8, one kindergardener, but he's a sibling of older student.

The private school I attended would not have been so merciful. And plenty of people were expelled all the time. I can remember less than one fist fight per year while I was there, since getting in a fight almost guaranteed expulsion.

The only child 'expelled' had been enrolled from a group home into the 7th grade. 3rd day of school he decked a second grader. I forgot about him earlier. He was placed in residential school by public schools, they wouldn't put him in regular class, even BD either.


Alls I'm saying is the comparison of private school tuition vs. public school cost simply is not fair - its apples and oranges. It like comparing the cleanliness of your private bathroom to a public bathroom in a football stadium.

I understand your point. I'm looking at what is more fair for those without many if any choices. Hell most of us on messageboards could home school our kids if necessity warranted, granted some might be short in math or history or something, but could still do better than many urban and even poor rural/suburban schools. I think some alternatives deserve to be considered, as those lower grades are much more likely to color the academic world of some poor kid, than a free ride to college with inadequate basic education.
 
That money for a full time aid and a full time nurse, since the child was at risk of cardiac arrest and lung collapse, should not IMO be coming out of school funds, but it is or rather was.

So if their parents are too poor - then no education for them? There was no education, the child was basically in a vegetative state. It was 'babysitting,' even that is a misnomer, as the child didn't move, just moaned. There was a nurse for that. BTW, that child would be expected to pass for NCLB, not going to happen. In many of the severe cases the child is sent to 'school' because of mandates and parents needing a break. Seems the money shouldn't be coming out of education funds just because the disabled is of school age, but it is.

You wouldn't believe the number of children who entered the school in preschool or kindergarten and by 2nd/3rd grade the parents have split up and the kids are getting neglected. They stay, even when the parents no longer are making tuition payments.

My parents divorced when I was still in school. They didn't neglect me though. I know plenty of people with parents who never divorced who gave less a crap about their education than mine.

But if your school is allowing students to continue w.o paying tuition that's pretty sweet. Such is the case in most parochial schools, IF they can. That's a function of the church being able to pick up the costs. They couldn't do it for all, obviously. However even with a serious shortfall this year, we've 10 children from 4 families that are unable to pay tuition, for one reason or another. Grades 3-8, one kindergardener, but he's a sibling of older student.

The private school I attended would not have been so merciful. And plenty of people were expelled all the time. I can remember less than one fist fight per year while I was there, since getting in a fight almost guaranteed expulsion.

The only child 'expelled' had been enrolled from a group home into the 7th grade. 3rd day of school he decked a second grader. I forgot about him earlier. He was placed in residential school by public schools, they wouldn't put him in regular class, even BD either.


Alls I'm saying is the comparison of private school tuition vs. public school cost simply is not fair - its apples and oranges. It like comparing the cleanliness of your private bathroom to a public bathroom in a football stadium.

I understand your point. I'm looking at what is more fair for those without many if any choices. Hell most of us on messageboards could home school our kids if necessity warranted, granted some might be short in math or history or something, but could still do better than many urban and even poor rural/suburban schools. I think some alternatives deserve to be considered, as those lower grades are much more likely to color the academic world of some poor kid, than a free ride to college with inadequate basic education.


I'm guessing you guys are debating the efficacy of vouchers for parents with Special Needs Kids?

I'm not sure why these kids would not suffer the same problems with vouchers that any other kids would? The voucher system would simply raise the cost of private schools (as someone noted Demand Elasticity of Economics), and would only make schools competitive if all kids had an equal opportunity to be transported to any school they wished to attend. I'm not certain how the latter could possibly be logistically attainable. This logistical dilemma would be true whether or not the kid had Special Needs
 

Forum List

Back
Top