5 ms·

The libertarian party supports School Choice, Actual Education for children, and less protectionism based on "seniority" So it is no wonder that unionized teac

• jakelazaroff 6y ago
  At best it's very arguable whether school choice results in children getting a better education.
  • mc32 6y ago
    I dunno. School isn’t primarily about academics. It’s mostly about moulding pupils, their minds to their current society. It’s mostly political in that sense. Whether it’s patriotism, community building, stressing this over that, etc. The three Rs are kind of incidental. Now to be clear, we do need to grow up to be functional adults, but public schooling is not the only one option to achieve that.
    • jakelazaroff 6y ago
      To be clear — when people refer to "school choice", they usually mean a system that funnels taxpayer dollars to private schools based on student attendance. Similarly, when people oppose "school choice", they usually oppose that appropriation of public funds specifically, not public school alternatives in general. It's a sneaky name designed to make you conflate the two.
      • leesalminen 6y ago
        I always thought that school choice means a system that funnels taxpayer dollars to any school, public or private, based on student attendance. Parents can choose to send their children to public school, if they feel the outcome will be superior to alternatives.
        • syshum 6y ago
          That is what school choice is, Every parent has a voucher, that voucher can be redeemed at a school of their choice, could be the public school, could be a private school, etc.
          • munk-a 6y ago
            It is important to note that that voucher only has a fixed value so those parents choosing to send their children to private schools still need to make up the difference out of pocket. That results in a wide variety of school choice for the rich and a smaller number of choices for those less well off. This voucher results in funds being diverted from public schools while the capacity requirements on those public schools may not be impacted but there is a larger issue IMO. If the more influential parents move their children to private schools then the amount that voucher should cover becomes less important and various parties can argue to shrink the voucher as a cost saving measure - that will end up strongly effecting those residents with less wealth since the money they are paying toward the value of that voucher is being multiplied due to the effect of progressive taxation brackets - while the more affluent residents will end up paying less money overall the smaller the voucher is since their tax revenue is going to subsidize school vouchers at large. School vouchers can easily lead toward incentivizing minimizing education spending. Oh also, private schools are often not held to the same standards of avoiding religious teaching as public schools are (by virtue of being a public service). The result is that the vouchers can end up funding religious education, but that's a whole other can of worms.
            • syshum 6y ago
              It is worth noting that many area;s where this has been tried the private schools were more than capable of providing better education for the same money that the public schools do since the public schools are wasteful and have no incentive to spend tax payer money wisely It is completely false to charatice a school choice program as "more choices for the rich" as the rich already have those choices, poor and middle class people have zero choice because their money has already been taken to fund the public schools. redirecting this money to better more efficient systems is preferred and gives the poor and middle class choice that is normally reserved for the wealthy >> This voucher results in funds being diverted from public schools yes, that is by design and the desired outcome of libertarians. >>Oh also, private schools are often not held to the same standards of avoiding religious teaching as public schools are (by virtue of being a public service). The result is that the vouchers can end up funding religious education, but that's a whole other can of worms. Another red herring and strawman, but I (and most libertarian) are fine with the limited amount of religious education that would result from school choice if it means dismantling the failed and unethical public school system we have today. I am sure you are a huge supporter of the Public School System and see nothing systemically wrong with it. We disagree with this position
• JKCalhoun 6y ago
  If you are trying to espouse the virtues of Libertarianism I would say you're not doing a very good job.
  • syshum 6y ago
    People here are already set in their political tribes, if you were already a libertarian (or republican) then you just agreed with my post. If you are an Authoritarian you just down voted it. Nothing I say will change anyone's minds on this topic, it is one of those things where no amount of data or facts will change minds. You either believe in a unionized Public school that only fails because we do not spend enough money, or you recognize that giving a monopoly over education to a group of people based on geography will always result in bad outcomes no matter how much money you spend.
    • JKCalhoun 6y ago
      I had heard Libertarians are bull-headed, self-righteous, think only they understand the facts, think everyone who disagrees with them are Authoritarians. I heard wrong.
      • syshum 6y ago
        By definition anyone that disagrees with Libertarianism is an Authoritarian. While Libertarian and Authoritarian do exist on a spectrum in some ways, you are either on the Libertarian side of that spectrum or the Authoritarian Side.