The economic cost of charter schools

[Deleted member 391673]

Ya but women who don't have kids are taking advantage of the system themselves. The system is designed to go easy on women because they are expected to reproduce. A women who does not reproduce has taken benefits without paying back by providing a new generation.

ok i introduced the non-kid argument but let's get back on topic,
my main argument is that at a certain point in time retirees on fixed income should be exempt from school tax.

 

[The ScorpioN]

Ya but women who don't have kids are taking advantage of the system themselves. The system is designed to go easy on women because they are expected to reproduce. A women who does not reproduce has taken benefits without paying back by providing a new generation.

How is the system designed to go easy on women who don't want to have a child?

 

[Lord Coke]

ok i introduced the non-kid argument but let's get back on topic,
my main argument is that at a certain point in time retirees on fixed income should be exempt from school tax.

I don't disagree with you but if that is the case then something else needs to be taxed. The youth need to be educated. If there is no public education then only the rich and maybe middle class will educate their kids.
Social mobility is an inherent social good and that would disappear with out public education.

That goes back to the time of the Founding. The Northwest ordinance

• Public Education reservations of the Land Ordinance of 1785 Background:*

The Land Ordinance of 1785, adopted May 20, 1785 by the Continental Congress, set the stage for an organized and community-based westward expansion in the United States in the years after the American Revolution. Under the 1785 act, section 16 of each township was set aside for school purposes, and as such was often called the school section. Section 36 was also subsequently added as a school section in western states. The various states and counties ignored, altered or amended this provision in their own ways, but the general (intended) effect was a guarantee that local schools would have an income and that the community schoolhouses would be centrally located for all children. An example of land allotments made specifically for higher education is Ohio's College Township.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Ordinance_of_1785

 

[Lord Coke]

How is the system designed to go easy on women who don't want to have a child?

It goes easy on women in general but it evens out for women who have children. Look at the disparity in criminal sentencing when convicted at the same time. When is the last time a women was drafted to fight in a foreign war? Men fight because the women are expected to have children. There are literally dozens of examples.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html
If you’re a convicted criminal, the best thing you can have going for you might be your gender.

A new study by Sonja Starr, an assistant law professor at the University of Michigan, found that men are given much higher sentences than women convicted of the same crimes in federal court.

The study found that men receive sentences that are 63 percent higher, on average, than their female counterparts.

Starr also found that females arrested for a crime are also significantly more likely to avoid charges and convictions entirely, and twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted.

Other research has found evidence of the same gender gap, though Starr asserts that the disparity is actually larger than previously suspected because other studies haven’t looked at the role of plea bargains and other pre-sentencing steps in the criminal justice system.

 

[Deleted member 391673]

I don't disagree with you but if that is the case then something else needs to be taxed. The youth need to be educated. If there is no public education then only the rich and maybe middle class will educate their kids.
Social mobility is an inherent social good and that would disappear with out public education.

That goes back to the time of the Founding. The Northwest ordinance

• Public Education reservations of the Land Ordinance of 1785 Background:*

The Land Ordinance of 1785, adopted May 20, 1785 by the Continental Congress, set the stage for an organized and community-based westward expansion in the United States in the years after the American Revolution. Under the 1785 act, section 16 of each township was set aside for school purposes, and as such was often called the school section. Section 36 was also subsequently added as a school section in western states. The various states and counties ignored, altered or amended this provision in their own ways, but the general (intended) effect was a guarantee that local schools would have an income and that the community schoolhouses would be centrally located for all children. An example of land allotments made specifically for higher education is Ohio's College Township.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Ordinance_of_1785

it's the bureaucratic inefficiencies that squanders the money.
but it's absolutely unfair to fixed income retirees who own their own houses.
at a certain point, the burden needs to be lifted from them even if it is at the expense of education.

 

[Deleted member 391673]

I don't disagree with you but if that is the case then something else needs to be taxed. The youth need to be educated. If there is no public education then only the rich and maybe middle class will educate their kids.
Social mobility is an inherent social good and that would disappear with out public education.

That goes back to the time of the Founding. The Northwest ordinance

• Public Education reservations of the Land Ordinance of 1785 Background:*

The Land Ordinance of 1785, adopted May 20, 1785 by the Continental Congress, set the stage for an organized and community-based westward expansion in the United States in the years after the American Revolution. Under the 1785 act, section 16 of each township was set aside for school purposes, and as such was often called the school section. Section 36 was also subsequently added as a school section in western states. The various states and counties ignored, altered or amended this provision in their own ways, but the general (intended) effect was a guarantee that local schools would have an income and that the community schoolhouses would be centrally located for all children. An example of land allotments made specifically for higher education is Ohio's College Township.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Ordinance_of_1785

in philadelphia they passed the soda-sugar tax to raise money for school and parks, but it doesn't mean they're going to alleviate the burden of school/property tax on fixed income retirees.

they're going to continue to suck everyone dry like the vampires they are.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

What is it about their ed system? Korean and Japanese Americans out perform in the US ed system too.

well with that, youd have to consider what types of japanese and korean people are coming here. desperate economic migrants, or affluent economic migrants? we know its the latter.

 

[superpunch]

nm

 

[CastielJh]

Perhaps more than any other reason, the fact that by getting a degree you will be making a investment in your future makes the cost of college worth it. Despite the significant financial commitment you're making when you enroll in a degree program - not to mention the time, energy, and work required to reach completion - the payoff is more than worth it in the end. College degree is critical to your success in today's workforce. I am doing my MBA now. I want to open own business. I also attend EMBA events to meet new ppl. In conclusion if you want to be happier and more financially savvy then get a degree.

 

[lifelessheap]

Charter schools give parents a choice, and we all know Leftists hate choice and want everyone locked into the same cookie cutter school system. What if I don't want my daughter taught by some SJW nimwit who wants to pollute my daughter's mind with 59 genders?

And there are so many shitty teachers at public schools that don't care. They get tenure and go into auto pilot and cash in for decades. And it is 2018 we all have super computers in our pockets with access to all the information in the history of mankind.

 

[lifelessheap]

It's really disingenuous at best to act like Charter schools are to blame for a failure in Education. But it's easy for politicians to do so

Think about how different America is than most other countries. Comparing us to Switzerland or Japan is crazy

We are a unique nation with unique problems. And Banning Charter schools or throwing more money at education will not help

Throwing money at education will never make things better. It boils down to understanding that parents that care about their children and work hard to ensure them a good future create good students. Shitty parents create bad students. The end.

 

[panamaican]

The really, really shocking thing to me is that private school teachers make less money than public school teachers

I still can’t undeestand how having lower paid teachers (therefore wouldn’t the better ones not want that and wish to make more?) = those schools are better as evidenced in higher standardized test scores and fewer school discipline incidents

Because once you account for differences in the students, private schools don't yield better students outcomes (2 exceptions - elite college prep schools and Jesuit schools). So private school teachers aren't actually giving you better results than their better paid public school counterparts.

However, the cost of private school acts as a barrier to lower income students and to families that don't care about education. So, it's probably a more enjoyable environment for the teachers, enough to offset the lower pay.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

From what I get is that a charter school is a private school that gets public funding.

That is a silly notion. Just privatize all education. You don't need large campuses where you coral large groups of strangers into boxes for 50 mins listening to boring ass teacher, and then move on to another subject. There isn't enough time in each period to learn enough about topic to keep you interested. After the 24hr period you won't care to continue.

By privatizing, you can format any way you want. It can be five or so kids sitting in a nice park on a nice day. Or like ten kids sitting in a one room office with a chalk board. You can study which ever topic you want for as long as you feel like until you feel like moving on to someone else.

If you think you teacher sucks you can find a new one. And if these teachers suck, they don't eat, and their kids starve. If there are poor people who cannot afford on their own, we have something called welfare, sec 8, and food stamps that are already abused a lot, so they can get equivalent for education.

No need for public, charter, or even big large university campuses. Those places are just breeding grounds for liberals, SJWs, feminizes, pretentious yuppies, and phony hipsters.

Best thing though, is you won't get bullied. You don't have to be around kids you don't like. You can choose your class, and your mates, and your teacher. So no more school shooting.

This entire post is mentally insane

 

[MadSquabbles500]

This entire post is mentally insane

well elaborate then.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

well elaborate then.

Look at the picture you're painting. I don't know what kind of school you went to but I didn't attend anything like what you're describing.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Look at the picture you're painting. I don't know what kind of school you went to but I didn't attend anything like what you're describing.

By privatizing, you can format your learning any way you want. Vendors can format ways to attract kids they specifically want to attract. So if you like the school you can attend, you can still go out and find it. It just won't have any tax payer backing. The format I about to show below does not help a lot of people, and they should not be forced to abide by it

 

[HatchetHarry]

Most people can agree that education is an important public service. And most people can agree that the current system isn't serving the needs of our less fortunate students. THe concept of school choice and the expansion of charter schools to meet that need has become a standard point of discussion.

Yet a criticism brought against this particular direction is that charter schools are financially detrimental to the school districts where they're operating.and the students who are in those districts but not in the charter schools.

https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/report-the-cost-of-charter-schools-for-public-school-districts/
https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/wp-content/uploads/ITPI_Breaking_Point_May2018FINAL.pdf

Here's a study out of California that shows that for those districts, the expansion of charter schools is literally taking money away from the other kids. It's not a simple one to one transfer of dollars, the students left behind are actually receiving less per student dollars.

School choice is an important concept but we have to make sure that it's not coming at the expense of other kids. As always it's one more reason to look closely at how we choose to fund schools. Perhaps the funding for charter schools should not come out of the same funding that we allocate for the public schools. Public school students should not be penalized so that charter school students can go elsewhere. And school choice should not be inhibited for those who wish to take advantage of it.

It's not a simple problem and deserves our attention.

Stopped reading at “less fortunate”

 

[panamaican]

Stopped reading at “less fortunate”

Too many words for ya. It's ok.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

By privatizing, you can format your learning any way you want. Vendors can format ways to attract kids they specifically want to attract. So if you like the school you can attend, you can still go out and find it. It just won't have any tax payer backing. The format I about to show below does not help a lot of people, and they should not be forced to abide by it

How would this benefit low income and working class people. The schools would be more divided than ever.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

How would this benefit low income and working class people. The schools would be more divided than ever.

With this current system, the lower income and working class still already don't have it as good as the higher income classes anyways.

The money saved from not funding any more public projects like schools is more money in everyone's pocket. Plus if we already have things like food stamps, Sec 8, I sure we can have for educations.

Yeh, that means more welfare, but only as needed, and it goes directly to the consumer/people. This welfare will not subsidize an industry like it basically is now.