4 ms·
Federal funding for schools shouldn't exist, imo. I'd prefer to see states handle everything related to funding and operating their education systems and the De
by rndmize 9y ago
Federal funding for schools shouldn't exist, imo. I'd prefer to see states handle everything related to funding and operating their education systems and the Dept of Ed perform a metrics/analytics/analysis/recommendation function, so that effective changes made by one state can be propagated out to the others, if they want it.
- Retric 9y agoIMO, we should only have Federal funding for schools. Having local, state, and federal involvement in funding adds complexity without providing any net benefit. EX: People move all the time, focusing at the state level concentrates costs while defusing benefits.
- rndmize 9y agoDisagree. Moving funding to a federal level might be more efficient but gives me, as a resident of one particular state, less control over how much is spent on education. I have zero interest in seeing a nationally funded education system gutted because a party I don't support is elected from states I don't live in that have outsize influence. Further, the "laboratories of democracy" model means that if I don't like how my state is doing education, I'm free to move to another one. > People move all the time, focusing at the state level concentrates costs while defusing benefits. Not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. You don't think states are big enough to get economies of scale?
- Retric 9y ago> Not sure... scale? If some state say Iowa sees most young people move out of state then they don't get direct economic benefits from educating well. Alternatively, Virginia may benefit from importing an educated population and have less economic incentive to educate it's own population well. Yes, their are incentives to educate your own children well, but a Florida retiree may not have any kids or grand kids in state and thus not care about educating people without a direct connection to them. Those connections and thus incentives become more direct at the national level.
- baldfat 9y agoSadly it is against the US Constitution. Personally, Common Core standards for all states was a great idea that we will never see again in our lifetime. I do want all local taxes and property tax to be removed from Educational funding and all funding to be statewide and the same per student across the state. (This might happen in our lifetimes)
- a_tractor 9y agoSo you would prohibit local communities from locally allocating their hard earned resources towards educating their own children? Why? Because some strangers on the other side of the state are incapable of doing the same thing? So nobody can? >Freedom to pursue wealth and happiness >Sadly How about you keep your hands in your own pockets?
- maxerickson 9y agoMy county has ~40,000 (aging) people and 5 public school districts. The notion of local control isn't going anywhere. "(aging)" is just a remark about the demographics skewing away from children as the economy here stumbles along.
- scarface74 9y agoHow well will that work out for poorer states?
- rndmize 9y agoShouldn't make much difference, at a guess. Poorer states will generally have proportionally cheaper cost of living, real estate, etc. and should be able to do more with less as a result.
- baldfat 9y agoWest Virginia (My wife is from there) has a higher cost of living and 2/3 of the income than where we live in Eastern PA.
- scarface74 9y agoIt starts with people not wanting to help other states. Now we have wealthier neighborhoods in the same city breaking off to form their own cities do they can separate themselses from the poorer parts of the city.