Quoted: Quoted: Vouchers are stealing, end of story. Putting guns in my face and threatening my life, while stealing MY money in order to give it someone else is wrong. If you support communist control over education than you are no better than some swine who steals some old crippled grandmothers purse on the streets. If you support communism than you are no better than some punk who breaks into peoples houses to rob them, but when they resist the punk guns them down in cold blood. Wrong. YOUR money is already 'stolen' when taxes are taken out of your paycheck.  The current educational system is as close to communist control as can be achieved without actually being under communist rule. Vouchers transfer control from the NEA/teachers union to the parents, where it belongs.  Vouchers hold parents/teachers accountable for results.  If the current system were not broken,  parents would use their vouchers to send their kids to the schools they attend now. You really should learn a little more about how our government works

+1

My 3 kids went K-12 in private schools, so I paid twice for their education (taxes and tuition). Vouchers are the best way to remove you kids from the clutches of liberal indoctrination.

I can’t believe some of you can’t get the point. The concept of asking money back from the government is flawed and riddled with statism. If the government wants to tax you then they should be SPENDING the money, not offering it back to you with all of these little strings attached in order to get you to be a good little citizen. I don’t want ANY tax dollars supporting education, and I will not give my support to ANY system which steals MY money.

Sure vouchers are better than the current system, and I really wouldn’t object to switching over to a pure voucher system, because it would be better than what we have now. However, I will not voice any support for vouchers because I am a man of principle (very few of these left now a days) and one who completely set against armed robbery by the state.

Why should anyone be forced to support anyone else? Why can’t private charity provide for those deserving who can’t provide for themselves? If on average 60% of peoples income wasn’t being stolen by the guns of the government, I think plenty of people would voluntary give more to charity. The United States is already an extremely charitable nation, just look at the tsunami, and look at New Orleans, when people are in trouble they get help from concerned citizens.

The people of this nation aren’t going to let poor people go uneducated, they will help those who are honestly experiencing tough times. To think we would be a nation of the uneducated if the government got out of the business of education is lunacy, especially since we are basically nation of the uneducated today. In fact, I say that education is to important to our nations future for us to place it in the hands of the government, the same government that has time and time again proved to be incompetent in every venture that it undertakes.

The only answer to the education problems in this nation is complete, 100% abolishment of all communist education. Education must be replaced 100% by private organizations and funding for such will be paid by the parents or by charitable organizations. No one here is going to argue that some punk who shoves a gun in some old ladies face while stealing her purse is a moral person. So why are you saying that when the government does the same thing it is ok?

Kinda funny how liberals and Democrats always champion the issues of the poor...yet when they get the opportunity to actually help the "less wealthy" achieve something only certain people can afford...the Democrats demonize it.

Quoted: I can’t believe some of you can’t get the point. The concept of asking money back from the government is flawed and riddled with statism. If the government wants to tax you then they should be SPENDING the money, not offering it back to you with all of these little strings attached in order to get you to be a good little citizen. I don’t want ANY tax dollars supporting education, and I will not give my support to ANY system which steals MY money. Sure vouchers are better than the current system, and I really wouldn’t object to switching over to a pure voucher system, because it would be better than what we have now. However, I will not voice any support for vouchers because I am a man of principle (very few of these left now a days) and one who completely set against armed robbery by the state. Why should anyone be forced to support anyone else? Why can’t private charity provide for those deserving who can’t provide for themselves? If on average 60% of peoples income wasn’t being stolen by the guns of the government, I think plenty of people would voluntary give more to charity. The United States is already an extremely charitable nation, just look at the tsunami, and look at New Orleans, when people are in trouble they get help from concerned citizens. The people of this nation aren’t going to let poor people go uneducated, they will help those who are honestly experiencing tough times. To think we would be a nation of the uneducated if the government got out of the business of education is lunacy, especially since we are basically nation of the uneducated today. In fact, I say that education is to important to our nations future for us to place it in the hands of the government, the same government that has time and time again proved to be incompetent in every venture that it undertakes. The only answer to the education problems in this nation is complete, 100% abolishment of all communist education. Education must be replaced 100% by private organizations and funding for such will be paid by the parents or by charitable organizations. No one here is going to argue that some punk who shoves a gun in some old ladies face while stealing her purse is a moral person. So why are you saying that when the government does the same thing it is ok?

I agree with you, but the road to getting there requires an educated populace that is knowledgable about how our system of government is designed. Such an educated populace could tell that what's on paper doesn't match real world operations, and would know that repairs are needed, and how to fix things. We do NOT have such a populace right now, and their general ignorance will only get worse if we continue on as we have for the past 80 years. Remember, a definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, hoping for a different result every time.

As it stands now, continuing to throw our education dollars down the government school monopoly black hole in ever larger amounts is the poster child example of insanity.

Quoted: You're in NY. This is NOT the case in many other states. That makes a huge difference with your well financed town based school systems,since your high school tax rates mean NY has the money to spend on private school kids.  I was privately schooled in MD. I could not use public school buses, nor could I use any public school facilities,sports or otherwise. This is the case in many states. My parents were ROBBED of their property tax money simply because they chose not to allow me an education by the state. My wife was a NY teacher in a private school upstate,and was very surprised when I told her that other states did not extend public school benefits to private school children.

By private schooled,do you mean home schooled? That movement has been growing,and many places are now letting homeschooled kids participate in public school after school activities, programs etc. As has been noted,those parents ARE paying taxes into the school system after all,and their kids don't lose the right to use those programs just because they are bing home schooled. You might want to update your information as to what programs the home schooled are allowed to take part in now.

How are YOUR schools financed, if not by property-based school taxes?

Quoted: Quoted: Not just no, but hell no!! and just why the hell not?

The voucher idea is premised on a simple point - that if you don't USE the public education system, you should be refunded "your" money so you can spend it elsewhere, right?  It's presented as being all about fairness.  That's great - except for the huge giant hipocracy which is that people without children don't get THEIR money back.  

So the people that support vouchers shout about how they don't want to be paying for public schools if they are not using them, but people without kids aren't using them either!  ... but I have NEVER heard anyone who wants vouchers for their kids be willing to agree that childless people should then also get their money back.

I didn't make anyone have children.  It's an expensive thing, and people voluntarily chose to do it.  I chose to not have a child, and instead chose to buy a different money pit, namely my 1973 mustang from hell .  If people with kids who don't "like" the free government education can just get THEIR money back to spend on a fancy education for their kids, why the hell can't I get my money back to spend on my mustang's restoration??


I'm completely serious.  I'd be 100% in favor of vouchers, if it meant that ANYONE who wasn't taking advantage of the public school system got their money partially or fully refunded to them.  But that's never the suggestion, is it?

I completely agree that the current system might be improved by competition, and it seems that vouchers might be more efficient from some economic perspectives (although there certainly are other costs as well).  In fact, I am in favor of COMPLETELY ABANDONING public education.  There are plenty of private schools and entreprenuers who could take the place of public schools, in my opinion - and at least do as good or better a job.  Even the good private schools in wealthy suburbs could easily be privatized without much disruption, since their fees would probably be LOWER than the property tax reductions that would have to follow.

However, I refuse to support a system that is just a DIFFERENT way of taking my tax dollars and redistributing them to other people.  



(I was reluctant to express my view, because it invariably gets little sympathy .  Usually, lots of people with kids piles on and critisize, because the reality is that few people complain about socialism when it benfits THEM .  I don't accept that socialized schools are a "public good" like roads and the military, and I don't accept that I should be paying for other peoples' kids education. )

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not just no, but hell no!! and just why the hell not? The voucher idea is premised on a simple point - that if you don't USE the public education system, you should be refunded "your" money so you can spend it elsewhere, right?  It's presented as being all about fairness.  That's great - except for the huge giant hipocracy which is that people without children don't get THEIR money back.   So the people that support vouchers shout about how they don't want to be paying for public schools if they are not using them, but people without kids aren't using them either!  ... but I have NEVER heard anyone who wants vouchers for their kids be willing to agree that childless people should then also get their money back. I didn't make anyone have children.  It's an expensive thing, and people voluntarily chose to do it.  I chose to not have a child, and instead chose to buy a different money pit, namely my 1973 mustang from hell .  If people with kids who don't "like" the free government education can just get THEIR money back to spend on a fancy education for their kids, why the hell can't I get my money back to spend on my mustang's restoration?? I'm completely serious.  I'd be 100% in favor of vouchers, if it meant that ANYONE who wasn't taking advantage of the public school system got their money partially or fully refunded to them.  But that's never the suggestion, is it? I completely agree that the current system might be improved by competition, and it seems that vouchers might be more efficient from some economic perspectives (although there certainly are other costs as well).  In fact, I am in favor of COMPLETELY ABANDONING public education.  There are plenty of private schools and entreprenuers who could take the place of public schools, in my opinion - and at least do as good or better a job.  Even the good private schools in wealthy suburbs could easily be privatized without much disruption, since their fees would probably be LOWER than the property tax reductions that would have to follow. However, I refuse to support a system that is just a DIFFERENT way of taking my tax dollars and redistributing them to other people.   (I was reluctant to express my view, because it invariably gets little sympathy .  Usually, lots of people with kids piles on and critisize, because the reality is that few people complain about socialism when it benfits THEM .  I don't accept that socialized schools are a "public good" like roads and the military, and I don't accept that I should be paying for other peoples' kids education. )

Vouchers are only offered in areas where the public schools have FAILED to meet minimum standards.

Quoted: Vouchers are only offered in areas where the public schools have FAILED to meet minimum standards.

Okay - then give me my money back !  



Your precious logic will do no good against my armor of righteous selfishness, reinforced with angry bitterness.  

The reason I support vouchers is because public schools have failed.  The only way to bring a balance to the system is through competition for the dollar.  It doesn't matter what the social problem is history has proven time and time again that socialism/communism will not work.  The state can not provide a truly free appropriate education for all, which is what they have brought upon themselves to do.  They now claim that their failures is because of lack of money - yet private schools have proven time and time again that they can provide a better system of education with less money.

Quoted: Not just no, but hell no!!

I agree 100%......If you want to use my tax dollars for some poor city kid's education, then send my child to a better school, not some welfare mama's brood......

Quoted: Quoted: Vouchers are only offered in areas where the public schools have FAILED to meet minimum standards. Okay - then give me my money back !   Your precious logic will do no good against my armor of righteous selfishness, reinforced with angry bitterness.

Have some kids who are in a failing public school and we will...

Seriously...we all funded public school prior to having kids. I still don't have kids and have paid into that fund for decades. But if the public schools system doesn't provide the minimum accepted standards then people should get an option.

This fullfills the original argument that it is in the best public interest that EVERYONE be provided a decent (minimum standards) education.

Quoted: Quoted: Not just no, but hell no!! I agree 100%......If you want to use my tax dollars for some poor city kid's education, then send my child to a better school, not some welfare mama's brood......

You need to SERIOUSLY learn about this issue.

Vouchers will NOT send ghetto kids to private schools.

They refund the amount the average tax payers spend in those cases where the public school has FAILED to meet minimum standards.

Then IF the parents can AFFORD to pay the difference, they have the OPTION to send their kids to private school. For working class folks, that refund makes the difference.

It surprises me that there isn't 75%+ in support of vouchers here at ARFCOM.

If 99%+ of the liberal pos demoncrats are against it I thought for sure the ARFCOM ARMY would be for it but I guess this thread will prove that wrong.

Well I guess I shouldn't be surprised because there are plenty here that agree with them on a regular basis so why would this be any different?

BigDozer66

Quoted: It surprises me that there isn't 75%+ in support of vouchers here at ARFCOM. If 99%+ of the liberal pos demoncrats are against it I thought for sure the ARFCOM ARMY would be for it but I guess this thread will prove that wrong. Well I guess I shouldn't be surprised because there are plenty here that agree with them on a regular basis so why would this be any different? BigDozer66

I don't think 75% understand it. The liberal dems have been extremely effective at clouding the issue and what it really is.

Quoted: Quoted: It surprises me that there isn't 75%+ in support of vouchers here at ARFCOM. If 99%+ of the liberal pos demoncrats are against it I thought for sure the ARFCOM ARMY would be for it but I guess this thread will prove that wrong. Well I guess I shouldn't be surprised because there are plenty here that agree with them on a regular basis so why would this be any different? BigDozer66 I don't think 75% understand it. The liberal dems have been extremely effective at clouding the issue and what it really is.

a loss of power and influence

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Vouchers are only offered in areas where the public schools have FAILED to meet minimum standards. Okay - then give me my money back !   Your precious logic will do no good against my armor of righteous selfishness, reinforced with angry bitterness.   Have some kids who are in a failing public school and we will... Seriously...we all funded public school prior to having kids. I still don't have kids and have paid into that fund for decades. But if the public schools system doesn't provide the minimum accepted standards then people should get an option. This fullfills the original argument that it is in the best public interest that EVERYONE be provided a decent (minimum standards) education.

Just because we've been supporting socialist wealth distribution in the past, doesn't mean it's right, nor that we should keep doing it.

"Best public interest" - the rallying cry of the socialist!  



I'm not saying YOU are a socialist (obviously ) - but do you REALLY want to invoke a "best public interest" argument?  



I'll repeat that in a free market modern democracy like the U.S., there is no NEED for a inefficent bureaucratized socialized school system.  The "public good" argument is a bogeyman from the 19th century.

If you get to opt out of the government cheese because you don't want to feed it to your child, then I should get to opt out too if I don't even have a child.  My logic is that simple, and it is bulletproof.  


And if you keep arguing, I'm going to stick my hands in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALA


(... actually I need to get back to work anyway - I gotta work hard so I can put all of your children through school, apparently )

Quoted: I'm not saying YOU are a socialist (obviously ) - but do you REALLY want to invoke a "best public interest" argument?

In truth I simply enjoy the irony of using their ideas against them.

Vouchers improve public schools through competition.  

I'd support all schools be funded and operated through a tuition just like higher education.

You have a kid you pay for it. You want your kid to go to a better school, you pay more. You want a babysitting service for your vermin bastard offspring, you pay for a cut-rate discount school.

Then only those with kids would be paying. There would be no refund. Schools with a bad rep would get no buiness. Social engineering, such as creating magnet (or whatever other name this shit uses) schools in slums and busing for diversity (Louisville, KY has diversity busing and good god, the traffic created because of all the parents driving their kids to school to avoid 2 hour bus rides) would cease.

Of course the .gov would have to be willing to eliminate a tax (ROFL) and the power (ROFFL) that taxes and captive test subjects that control of the public school system gives them.

Quoted: I'm for people paying for their own education. If people had vouchers then public schools would have to compete for the students and the voucher money. Just like I'm against government health care - competition is good for every one save the NEA.

I agree in theory, but there are many areas where there is only one school system (and no private alternative). Unless you want to drive over to the next county you are SOL.

That's not a problem here. In one county we have a county system and FOUR city systems. Atrocious duplication- bureaucracy in quintuplicate, but I guess you could have more choices.