4 ms·

I just feel that vouchers tend to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. Anything that increases choices tends to increase choic

I just feel that vouchers tend to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. Anything that increases choices tends to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. This also applies to Affirmative Action. The beneficiaries of Affirmative Action tend to be kids who are already in the Upper Middle or Upper classes. For most proposed implementations I've seen of school voucher programs, money is also a big issue. If you give each kid say $8k in vouchers, the bottom 50% or so of families financially will choose between schools costing $8k per year. That may well be $8k more choice than they would have had otherwise. By increasing choice for the middle of the income bracket, you've decreased the wealth diversity of many schools, and that "urban kid in a crappy public school" is now an "urban kid in a crappy private school" The difference being that the 2nd school can exclude troublemakers, so at least those kids aren't in a constantly disrupted environment.

aidenn0 8y ago
>> I just feel that vouchers tend to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. > Anything that increases choices tends to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. This also applies to Affirmative Action. The beneficiaries of Affirmative Action tend to be kids who are already in the Upper Middle or Upper classes. School vouchers appear to be particularly bad by this measure though. For anyone already sending their kids to public school, it's subsidizing a behavior they already do. It's $8k per kid that could be spent on improving other schools. For those who just-barely can't afford to send their kids to private schools better than the public schools, it's a huge gain, but I am of the opinion (though I admit without sufficient data) that this gain comes at the expense of the quality of the public schools (or in a zero-public-school, voucher scenario, the 0-added-tuition private schools) that those poorer will be relegated to. [edit] I guess my point is that I think vouchers are likely to be a net-loss for the poor, and even if I'm wrong about that, I'm struggling to think of ways in which they could be a net-gain.

aidenn0 8y ago

>> I just feel that vouchers tend to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. > Anything that increases choices tends to increase choices primarily for those who are already fairly well off. This also applies to Affirmative Action. The beneficiaries of Affirmative Action tend to be kids who are already in the Upper Middle or Upper classes. School vouchers appear to be particularly bad by this measure though. For anyone already sending their kids to public school, it's subsidizing a behavior they already do. It's $8k per kid that could be spent on improving other schools. For those who just-barely can't afford to send their kids to private schools better than the public schools, it's a huge gain, but I am of the opinion (though I admit without sufficient data) that this gain comes at the expense of the quality of the public schools (or in a zero-public-school, voucher scenario, the 0-added-tuition private schools) that those poorer will be relegated to. [edit] I guess my point is that I think vouchers are likely to be a net-loss for the poor, and even if I'm wrong about that, I'm struggling to think of ways in which they could be a net-gain.