4 ms·

> All the wealthy families sending their kids to private schools or homeschooling and removing their property taxes from the public school system. How exactly

by troupe 3y ago

> All the wealthy families sending their kids to private schools or homeschooling and removing their property taxes from the public school system. How exactly does that work? We homeschool and I pay property taxes that fund our local school just like everyone else in town. I pay for services that I don't use and can be used for other children if the powers that be decide to allocate it that way.

tanjtanjtanj 3y ago
The above poster is talking about "school choice" which is making its rounds through legislatures in red states. The legislation effectively defunds public schools if people decide to homeschool or can afford to send their children to private school.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  You use defunding as if it is a bad thing. The purpose of the public school system is not to maximize funding or revenue. School choice/vouchers defund public schools proportional to loss of public school responsibility for students.
  - troupe 3y ago
    Yes, but the argument goes that parents who are likely to move their kids elsewhere have kids where the cost to educate them is just a fraction of what is being spent on the average kid. Imagine a school system that spends $15k per student per year. But that is just the average. Some of the kids are only consuming $5k of resources while others require $60k per year. If the kids who are only costing $5k go to another school and take the $15k with them, they will presumably get a better education where more of the $15k will be allocated to them. Meanwhile at the school that was used to spending $60k on some students, they will presumably need to have less disparity in the amount they spend on each student.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      Well maybe we shouldnt be paying schools the same for disabled and average students to begin with. Besides, it is pretty said that the best counter argument against charter schools is that parents will take their fair share of funding and use it to buy a much better education for their children.
      - troupe 3y ago
        I believe that most school systems do get more money for disabled kids. But kids that do their homework, pay attention in class, etc. cost a lot less to educate than a kid who isn't really interested in learning--even without any disabilities. To your point about charter schools, there is a strong argument to be made that when parents have a choice where there kids go, public schools will have to make sure they are providing more academic opportunities if they don't want to risk losing the academically minded families (and their money). That seems like it would be a good thing for everyone.
- lukas099 3y ago
  Couldn't there be a scheme by which parents could reduce their taxes by privately educating their children, but only up to some portion of the public schools' savings from not having to educate those children?
  - troupe 3y ago
    You'll find public school unions are very opposed to that idea.

by troupe 3y ago

tanjtanjtanj 3y ago

The above poster is talking about "school choice" which is making its rounds through legislatures in red states. The legislation effectively defunds public schools if people decide to homeschool or can afford to send their children to private school.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
You use defunding as if it is a bad thing. The purpose of the public school system is not to maximize funding or revenue. School choice/vouchers defund public schools proportional to loss of public school responsibility for students.
- troupe 3y ago
  Yes, but the argument goes that parents who are likely to move their kids elsewhere have kids where the cost to educate them is just a fraction of what is being spent on the average kid. Imagine a school system that spends $15k per student per year. But that is just the average. Some of the kids are only consuming $5k of resources while others require $60k per year. If the kids who are only costing $5k go to another school and take the $15k with them, they will presumably get a better education where more of the $15k will be allocated to them. Meanwhile at the school that was used to spending $60k on some students, they will presumably need to have less disparity in the amount they spend on each student.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    Well maybe we shouldnt be paying schools the same for disabled and average students to begin with. Besides, it is pretty said that the best counter argument against charter schools is that parents will take their fair share of funding and use it to buy a much better education for their children.
    - troupe 3y ago
      I believe that most school systems do get more money for disabled kids. But kids that do their homework, pay attention in class, etc. cost a lot less to educate than a kid who isn't really interested in learning--even without any disabilities. To your point about charter schools, there is a strong argument to be made that when parents have a choice where there kids go, public schools will have to make sure they are providing more academic opportunities if they don't want to risk losing the academically minded families (and their money). That seems like it would be a good thing for everyone.
lukas099 3y ago
Couldn't there be a scheme by which parents could reduce their taxes by privately educating their children, but only up to some portion of the public schools' savings from not having to educate those children?
- troupe 3y ago
  You'll find public school unions are very opposed to that idea.