MrJonno wrote:If people in a community want their kids to go to school and become educated, as every non dependent-class parent does, then they will find a way to fund their schools voluntarily, at the local or state level (you see, education is NOT a federal matter at all...never has been), without sending a third of their money to some fat fuck in Washington.
Hmm schools pre 20th century?, what % of children went 1%, 0.1%?. Mass education is a 20th century state run concept. So are hospitals for that matter, pre 20th century is was church voodoo which had about as much chance as killing you are curing you
Complete and utter nonsense. Schools have been provided by communities for a very long time without taxing the public because parents and community members recognize the rational self-interest in an educated workforce.
Even more so now.
Do you really think if property taxes to pay for schools were done away with that the funding would simply evaporate? Wrong. First, residents would very likely vote to tax themselves in other, more voluntary ways, like a sales tax, or by user fees for schools. Second, charities and public-minded organizations would, and have stepped up to educate children. Third, if there's going to be a property tax of some sort to fund schools that tax should be levied on that sector of the economy that directly benefits from an educated working class: business.
Taxing landowners whether or not they have children is a remnant of the days when commerce was not sufficient to support schools and when it was almost impossible to effectively collect sales taxes. That's no longer a problem. The entire system can easily and indeed profitably shifted over to having voters approve sales taxes to fund schools, just like Boulder County and the City of Boulder use sales taxes, approved by the voters, to fund their long-standing and expansive public open space system. The governments have never been turned down for a sales tax for open space because the citizens of the community like their open space and see both the value in the program and that the revenues they pay are explicitly and only used for that program.
Simply replace property tax with a sales tax and the schools will actually make MORE money.
Or just let people who want educated kids pay to educate kids. I think you'll find that more people are interested in doing so than you think. Like India, where the public schools are horrific wastes of time and money where teachers sleep through class and the kids learn nothing, but the poorest of the poor in India work hard to send their kids to PRIVATE SCHOOLS so they can get a good education.
Get rid of the teacher's unions and unionized teachers, who suck up the vast majority of school funding for no particularly good reason except that the NEA and the teacher's unions have been made very powerful by government favoritism, and school will cost a LOT less, and kids will get much better educations from teachers who can actually teach instead of sinecured strap-hangers who don't give a fuck about students but just want their paycheck, come hell or high water, whether they can or do perform their duties or not.
You get this by making schools competitive in the free market, so parents can pick a school best suited for their child that will give THAT child the very best education the parents can afford.
As it is now, we force students into failing, government-run, unionized factories where they either learn next to nothing or they are indoctrinated into Marxist obedience and compliance, on the notion that it's more important that schools be racially integrated than it is that children get good educations.
Let parents choose and more kids will get better educations...and layabout fuckwit teachers who are in it for the pension will become unemployed rather quickly, to be replaced by motivated and skilled teachers working in the private sector where they are rewarded for excellence.
If you're going to tax people to pay for kids to go to school, at least let the money follow the CHILD to whatever school the parents think will best serve their needs, rather than giving the money to the schools, where it can be continually wasted while providing an inferior education. Yes, I'm talking vouchers here.
What's a 'dependent class' again oh people who are reliant on the a functioning state to survive like 100% of the human race, I have doubts whether Seth is part of the 100% on the basis I'm not fully convinced he is human but then again maybe I'm being unfair on psychopaths with serious father issues
Yes, you are being a bit hard on yourself, but it's okay, you deserve it.
And your fallacy is clear. Just because some people are dependent on government doesn't mean that everyone is, much less that everyone SHOULD BE, which is what the Marxist in Chief in the White House (and his cunt of a wife) want.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
