3 ms·

How about we take all the school’s money, give it to the parents, and let them decide to which school to send their children?

duxup 8y ago
The unpredictable nature of school funding would then be a pretty big problem, and the results for students who choose wrong, have the schools in their neighborhood all but defunded / can't afford to commute to a better school would also be bad. It would basically be the existing school funding issues, on steroids.
- NoblePublius 8y ago
  This seems based on the assumption most parents are too stupid to realize whether or not their kid’s school is good or bad.
yboris 8y ago
Simply stop funding schools based on local taxes, fund all schools equally based on federal and state taxes. Many problems solved.
- kemiller 8y ago
  Oregon and California are already run this way. It sucks. Creates more problems than it solves.
zanny 8y ago
Because private industry would not build schools for those students in depressed and poor neighborhoods, even at the guarantee of the general fund of the school that was there, because most schools in the US are operating at a substantial loss to their direct income from school / property tax. Its part of why "bake sales" to fund schools are so common in many depressed and poor areas. Its also why schools are so strongly incentivized to seek funding for sports, sports programs, and sports arenas. If you can build a fancy stadium on a state grant it can bring in supplementary income to keep the power on for general ed. Private enterprise would only be interested in building schools for poor kids only offering public dollars if there were profit to be made from said dollars, which is innately more inefficient than a public school that simply operates at, or better, under cost - especially when that general income is coming from direct local residents.
- NoblePublius 8y ago
  Who said anything about private industry? Give parents their school money to spend at the school of their choice. Maybe if I call it “universal basic school income” you would like it.

duxup 8y ago

The unpredictable nature of school funding would then be a pretty big problem, and the results for students who choose wrong, have the schools in their neighborhood all but defunded / can't afford to commute to a better school would also be bad. It would basically be the existing school funding issues, on steroids.

NoblePublius 8y ago
This seems based on the assumption most parents are too stupid to realize whether or not their kid’s school is good or bad.

yboris 8y ago

Simply stop funding schools based on local taxes, fund all schools equally based on federal and state taxes. Many problems solved.

kemiller 8y ago
Oregon and California are already run this way. It sucks. Creates more problems than it solves.

zanny 8y ago

Because private industry would not build schools for those students in depressed and poor neighborhoods, even at the guarantee of the general fund of the school that was there, because most schools in the US are operating at a substantial loss to their direct income from school / property tax. Its part of why "bake sales" to fund schools are so common in many depressed and poor areas. Its also why schools are so strongly incentivized to seek funding for sports, sports programs, and sports arenas. If you can build a fancy stadium on a state grant it can bring in supplementary income to keep the power on for general ed. Private enterprise would only be interested in building schools for poor kids only offering public dollars if there were profit to be made from said dollars, which is innately more inefficient than a public school that simply operates at, or better, under cost - especially when that general income is coming from direct local residents.

NoblePublius 8y ago
Who said anything about private industry? Give parents their school money to spend at the school of their choice. Maybe if I call it “universal basic school income” you would like it.