5 ms·

That would be fine if the Czech government returned said families the taxes they took from them to finance public education. No service, no charge.

by dapf 5y ago

tzs 5y ago
If Czechoslovakia is like most other countries where people pay taxes for public education regardless of whether or not they have school-age children, then your suggestion makes no sense.
- dapf 5y ago
  Even in this not-so-good system, in which some people get taxed for a service they won't use, there is the assumption that if you have children than you have the right to be supplied with state-provided education. Is the state decides not to grant you the service, for whatever reason, then it should give you the money it would otherwise have spent in order to provide you with said service. Else you are subject to discriminatory treatment by the state, based on your personal decisions. The parents don't approve giving their child a vaccine they consider experimental/risky/unnecessary, they do this in full use of their reason and with the children best interest at heart. The State decides no to provide educational service to the child, but the child still needs an educational service. The right course of action would be for the State to give the parents the amount money it would hav spent, so the parent can contract the services of a private educational institution that would give the child the education the child needs.
  - yokaze 5y ago
    > The parents don't approve giving their child a vaccine they consider experimental/risky/unnecessary, they do this in full use of their reason and with the children best interest at heart. Sure, but some parents are unfit to take decisions for their children, and quite apparently the culture in the US seems to be religiously (pun intended) on the side of the parents. In Europe, the fear of government in that regard is less expressed and the fear of parents mistreating their children by not giving the proper health-care or education overweighs that one in general. If there is a criticism on that point, I hope it will not diverge into hypotheticals but rather concrete current examples, where you think that is misguided.
    - tzs 5y ago
      Also worth noting that these aren't experimental or risky vaccines. This is about vaccination for measles, tetanus, whooping cough, diphtheria, and others. They are all vaccines that have long been in very wide use around the world and are known to be safe and effective.
- zenlot 5y ago
  There's no "Czechoslovakia" for quite some time now.
knorker 5y ago
That makes no sense. Can I get my taxes back since I don't have children, and I've never been a child in this country? And I've never driven on that road, can I have taxes back for the maintenance of that road?
- dapf 5y ago
  It makes total sense. You shouldn't be taxed if you don't use a service. We have an easy way to deal with roads: tolls. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnpike_trust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnpike_trust
  - yokaze 5y ago
    We also have an easy way to deal with military: mercenaries. (/s) You don't receive a service from taxes, because a government is not a company, and society is not a itemised order list for a reason: they are often interdependent to a degree, that you cannot have one without the other. You definitely want everyone in your country to be as good educated as possible, especially in a democracy. You can't complain about a stupid government, if you have stupid electorate.
    - krapp 5y ago
      >You can't complain about a stupid government, if you have stupid electorate. The American electorate would like to have a few monosyllabic, badly spelled and probably racist words with you.
oaiey 5y ago
And - while I do not know exactly for the czech republic - in most European countries school education is mandatory by law. It is not a choice situation whether you kid goes to school. In germany, ultimately a parent can go to prison for not sending their kids to school (rarely but it happened ... In case of a religious sect who tried their luck how far they can stretch the tolerance of the government).
- dapf 5y ago
  Yes, that is a beautiful example of freedom... It presupposes that some bureaucrat in Berlin should be entrusted with the educational decisions has the kids best interest at heart. The bureaucrat cares more about a child than the child's parents.
  - oaiey 5y ago
    He is definitely more qualified than most parents. Like are the teachers. And actually most likely this state (not country) level officer is a career teacher who is no longer teaching. And yes, they are doing their share of stupid things. But that is the 1% everyone does wrong
    - dapf 5y ago
      My question is who cares more, which you didn't answer. Also, more qualified? What makes the bureaucrat more qualified? Does the bureaucrat know the child better? Is the bureaucrat better equipped to make decisions about the child future having limited to none information about the particular child? Doesn't the caring part have a huge impact on how carefully the decisions are made? I see the rightful role of the bureaucrat only as one more source of information for the parent, to supplement any lack of knowledge the parents may have. But, the decisions, an ultimate responsibility, lies with the parents. I sense a certain underestimation on your part towards non-college educated people, or maybe an overestimation of what college educated people can do. Correct me if I'm wrong.
      - oaiey 5y ago

That would be fine if the Czech government returned said families the taxes they took from them to finance public education. No service, no charge.

by dapf 5y ago

That would be fine if the Czech government returned said families the taxes they took from them to finance public education. No service, no charge.

tzs 5y ago

If Czechoslovakia is like most other countries where people pay taxes for public education regardless of whether or not they have school-age children, then your suggestion makes no sense.

dapf 5y ago
Even in this not-so-good system, in which some people get taxed for a service they won't use, there is the assumption that if you have children than you have the right to be supplied with state-provided education. Is the state decides not to grant you the service, for whatever reason, then it should give you the money it would otherwise have spent in order to provide you with said service. Else you are subject to discriminatory treatment by the state, based on your personal decisions. The parents don't approve giving their child a vaccine they consider experimental/risky/unnecessary, they do this in full use of their reason and with the children best interest at heart. The State decides no to provide educational service to the child, but the child still needs an educational service. The right course of action would be for the State to give the parents the amount money it would hav spent, so the parent can contract the services of a private educational institution that would give the child the education the child needs.
- yokaze 5y ago
  > The parents don't approve giving their child a vaccine they consider experimental/risky/unnecessary, they do this in full use of their reason and with the children best interest at heart. Sure, but some parents are unfit to take decisions for their children, and quite apparently the culture in the US seems to be religiously (pun intended) on the side of the parents. In Europe, the fear of government in that regard is less expressed and the fear of parents mistreating their children by not giving the proper health-care or education overweighs that one in general. If there is a criticism on that point, I hope it will not diverge into hypotheticals but rather concrete current examples, where you think that is misguided.
  - tzs 5y ago
    Also worth noting that these aren't experimental or risky vaccines. This is about vaccination for measles, tetanus, whooping cough, diphtheria, and others. They are all vaccines that have long been in very wide use around the world and are known to be safe and effective.
zenlot 5y ago
There's no "Czechoslovakia" for quite some time now.

knorker 5y ago

That makes no sense. Can I get my taxes back since I don't have children, and I've never been a child in this country? And I've never driven on that road, can I have taxes back for the maintenance of that road?

dapf 5y ago
It makes total sense. You shouldn't be taxed if you don't use a service. We have an easy way to deal with roads: tolls. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnpike_trust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnpike_trust
- yokaze 5y ago
  We also have an easy way to deal with military: mercenaries. (/s) You don't receive a service from taxes, because a government is not a company, and society is not a itemised order list for a reason: they are often interdependent to a degree, that you cannot have one without the other. You definitely want everyone in your country to be as good educated as possible, especially in a democracy. You can't complain about a stupid government, if you have stupid electorate.
  - krapp 5y ago
    >You can't complain about a stupid government, if you have stupid electorate. The American electorate would like to have a few monosyllabic, badly spelled and probably racist words with you.

oaiey 5y ago

And - while I do not know exactly for the czech republic - in most European countries school education is mandatory by law. It is not a choice situation whether you kid goes to school. In germany, ultimately a parent can go to prison for not sending their kids to school (rarely but it happened ... In case of a religious sect who tried their luck how far they can stretch the tolerance of the government).

dapf 5y ago
Yes, that is a beautiful example of freedom... It presupposes that some bureaucrat in Berlin should be entrusted with the educational decisions has the kids best interest at heart. The bureaucrat cares more about a child than the child's parents.
- oaiey 5y ago
  He is definitely more qualified than most parents. Like are the teachers. And actually most likely this state (not country) level officer is a career teacher who is no longer teaching. And yes, they are doing their share of stupid things. But that is the 1% everyone does wrong
  - dapf 5y ago
    My question is who cares more, which you didn't answer. Also, more qualified? What makes the bureaucrat more qualified? Does the bureaucrat know the child better? Is the bureaucrat better equipped to make decisions about the child future having limited to none information about the particular child? Doesn't the caring part have a huge impact on how carefully the decisions are made? I see the rightful role of the bureaucrat only as one more source of information for the parent, to supplement any lack of knowledge the parents may have. But, the decisions, an ultimate responsibility, lies with the parents. I sense a certain underestimation on your part towards non-college educated people, or maybe an overestimation of what college educated people can do. Correct me if I'm wrong.
    - oaiey 5y ago