3 ms·

Public schools don't have some inalienable right to that money either -- they are entrusted with the money by popular vote. If we want that to continue, then th

Public schools don't have some inalienable right to that money either -- they are entrusted with the money by popular vote. If we want that to continue, then there needs to be very broad consensus that the things teachers are teaching are the right things, or at least not the wrong things.

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
What other institutions do people try to claw back money from when people decide they can do a better job?
- chmod600 3y ago
  Schools are one area where there's a lot of money involved, it's a direct service to normal people, and those people actually can do a pretty good job without the school (not saying that everyone can or that it's easy). Some communities highly dissatisfied with their police attempted to defund and/or defunded their department. That's not a great example because self-service policing doesn't work very well, but it's kinda close. Ultimately, if you want the voters' money, you need to convince them that you at least won't use it against them. And it's really easy for people to start thinking that it's being used against them when engaging in culture war or political issues.
  - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
    > Some communities highly dissatisfied with their police attempted to defund and/or defunded their department. That's not a great example because self-service policing doesn't work very well, but it's kinda close. This is a great example for what should happen - demands for systemic reform, not taking what you think is "your" money and going home. It's one thing to opt out of a system, it's another to think you're justified to get money back for it. As someone without any children am I justified in getting 24k/year back because I'm not using the school system for my (average) 2 non-kids? Of course not, but I do pay taxes for that service.
    - chmod600 3y ago
      Tax money is a collective "yours" and when it stops aligning with the values of the voters then they will vote to make some serious changes. Without some widespread consensus on what the system should be about it's going to look more like a collapse than a reform. Ideally, it would be a back-to-basics reform that would be more neutral. But probably what would happen is a slow draining of the best students along with money until it spirals. You can say that shouldn't happen, or be mad at the people who opt out, or be mad at the people who underfund it. But it would be better to save it by at least making an effort to be neutral before it gets to that point. Too many teachers look at students as their children to mold according to their personal or party values rather than educating them according to collective or neutral values.
- Racing0461 3y ago
  Why are you assuming everyone pays into the system? In fact ide argue the people trying to claw back the money for a better outcome are the people actually paying into the system and the people that aren't are the ones causing the system to degrade.
  - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
    Well, that's an emotionally satisfying theory for some I'm sure, but one that requires evidence unless you're more invested in the ideology than the reality.

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago

What other institutions do people try to claw back money from when people decide they can do a better job?

chmod600 3y ago
Schools are one area where there's a lot of money involved, it's a direct service to normal people, and those people actually can do a pretty good job without the school (not saying that everyone can or that it's easy). Some communities highly dissatisfied with their police attempted to defund and/or defunded their department. That's not a great example because self-service policing doesn't work very well, but it's kinda close. Ultimately, if you want the voters' money, you need to convince them that you at least won't use it against them. And it's really easy for people to start thinking that it's being used against them when engaging in culture war or political issues.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
  > Some communities highly dissatisfied with their police attempted to defund and/or defunded their department. That's not a great example because self-service policing doesn't work very well, but it's kinda close. This is a great example for what should happen - demands for systemic reform, not taking what you think is "your" money and going home. It's one thing to opt out of a system, it's another to think you're justified to get money back for it. As someone without any children am I justified in getting 24k/year back because I'm not using the school system for my (average) 2 non-kids? Of course not, but I do pay taxes for that service.
  - chmod600 3y ago
    Tax money is a collective "yours" and when it stops aligning with the values of the voters then they will vote to make some serious changes. Without some widespread consensus on what the system should be about it's going to look more like a collapse than a reform. Ideally, it would be a back-to-basics reform that would be more neutral. But probably what would happen is a slow draining of the best students along with money until it spirals. You can say that shouldn't happen, or be mad at the people who opt out, or be mad at the people who underfund it. But it would be better to save it by at least making an effort to be neutral before it gets to that point. Too many teachers look at students as their children to mold according to their personal or party values rather than educating them according to collective or neutral values.
Racing0461 3y ago
Why are you assuming everyone pays into the system? In fact ide argue the people trying to claw back the money for a better outcome are the people actually paying into the system and the people that aren't are the ones causing the system to degrade.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
  Well, that's an emotionally satisfying theory for some I'm sure, but one that requires evidence unless you're more invested in the ideology than the reality.