Public schools are bad and should not exist.

Post Reply New Topic

Now you may be thinking "You seemed so left-wing! Have you become libertarian?"

No, I have not become libertarian. I have discovered that it is possible for people who are fiscally left-wing to hate public schools.

Right now we have a system where children are educated by the state through the public schools. As a result, parents constantly bicker over what should be taught in schools. Things would be better if the government gave parents enough money to educate their own kids because nobody would argue about public schools anymore.

"Mass education was designed to turn independent farmers into docile, passive tools of production. That was its primary purpose. And don't think people didn't know it. They knew it and they fought against it. There was a lot of resistance to mass education for exactly that reason."
- Noam Chomsky

When the school bells rang I always thought we were like rats being trained in a maze.My experience with most public schools is that they s%* k big time,they were a special brand of hell.

Uh, no. My very bad history with public schools aside, they serve a valuable and necessary service, underfunded and over regulated though they might be.

If you had a system where kids were all just home schooled, you'd create a caste system where people of the lower end of the economy, who couldn't afford proper tools and had to spend the majority of their time working to put food on the table, wouldn't be able to properly educate their children, thus damning them to an ever worse existence much like the serf class of old.
Public schools, though not always the greatest, still serve as a baseline for educational standards in America. Kids go to school and should be able to come out with basic tools to survive and better themselves if they so choose. They should know how to read, do basic math, as well as having exposure to the social aspect of life.


Yeah, there's a lot wrong in education that desperately needs fixing, but to throw the whole system out would be asinine. The epitome of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I said I was fiscally left-wing so there would be no serfdom.

I fail to see where your personal political leanings would have any bearing on an American society where there were no public schools. How would you, personally, go about making certain every child was educated to a standard where they could compete in the workplace?

I do understand the desire to see a system that has so many flaws to be replaced or removed, but much like with people calling for secession, we must be pragmatic and look at the entire picture rationally, not through an emotional prism. The consequences for such an action would be far reaching and dire. There would be problems that would crop up that the entirety of the community, thinking together, could never anticipate, much less create a strategy for dealing with. And that's aside from all of the problems that are immediately apparent.

Again, it's nice to dream about a flawed system being removed, but let's be reasonable here. Having every child home schooled is both impractical and impossible. Surely we could find a better solution or at least a solution to one or two of the larger problems facing schools today without having to resort to hyperbolic 'what if' scenarios.

where else could you hack computers and blow stuff up with no negative consequences? (assuming there was no lasting damage)

A lot of the bickering about public schools is because certain parents don't want their children knowing certain facts about reality. I can understand how a person would desire to sidestep all of this, but the problem is that without some standards, we will certainly have some parents who send their kids to school to bad outcomes. (Jesus H Christ High, where this: http://pbh2.blogspot.com/2010/07/electr ... jones.html is an acceptable textbook)

If parents send their kids to schools like that, then what's the point of the public subsidy at all? The public subsidy to education is to social benefit, not private distortion and lies.

I went to public school and still didn't manage to get a decent education.

I guess public schools work for many but I personally would have been much better off if I had been home schooled.

Almost everything the government operates fails miserably.

ruveyn

The supposed problems of the current system are minimal compared to the problems of your system.

Most parents will not be able to educate their children themselves unless they leave their job. The government will therefore need to pay for millions of new teachers.

You could set up a public school system, but this would either exasperate class equality in society (as some parents would be able to pay more than others) or allow the public schools to hold the government to ransom (by demanding more and more, knowing the government will pay it). The alternative is the government setting costs as well as handing out money, which is barely different to the comprehensive system except parents can choose to spend money elsewhere.

Squabbles over the curriculum normally happen amongst the political class. Parents generally seem content about what their children are taught, except a small number of nutjobs who don't want their children to learn science.

The U.S. ranks 20 th in math and scientific education effectiveness. Our students are ill prepared in this fields. Fortunately there are enough youngsters who survive public school to provide sufficient manpower for science and math related undertakings. And where a shortage exists we lure foreign trained students to our shores with H 1 B permits. There IS a brain drain and the U.S. is the sump.

ruveyn

Typical right wing hyperbole. The big lie being pushed is that Government is a failure and that's simply not the case. Does the school system have issues, sweet Baby Jesus and his pogo stick YES, but is it a failure? No. Problems, issues, bumps in the road, they happen but they do not indicate a miserable failure. They do, however, indicate room for improvement.

Explain the low standing of American students in science and math when compared to the educational outputs of other industrial nations.

In the mean time our best universities are privately owned and operated.

If you want to see the disease of governmental operation look at the NASA manned space program (which no longer really exists)

Or look at the dikes in New Orleans, constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. New Orleans was flooded.

And how about those 500 dollar toilet seats your dear Government contracted for.

Government has no real incentive to perform well on a day to day basis. They are only up for grabs every two years. And the Civil Service is immune from competition.

ruveyn

America doesn't have year round schooling, like much of the rest of the world. We, as a people, tend to take pride in our ignorance, like most the the Teahards who keep pushing science standards into the dark ages because they fear the evolution. Elected officials and school boards deal with less money from state government and have to fight with religious nutjobs. It's amazing America isn't already in another dark ages when you face that kind of obstacle.

Our best universities are pricing themselves out of reach for the majority of Americans. In order to attend one of those institutions, students have to take the equivilant of a morgage that many will never get out from under. Additionally, I'd pit public universities and the quality of the education received against private universities any day. Sure, the name on the diploma seems to mean more than the eduction for many employers, but the foundations of the education received are equal to or better.

Nasa is a tragedy that I'm hoping will get reversed. If we can afford multi million dollar jets that we don't really use (F-22) then we can afford to fully fund Nasa and really shoot for the stars.

As for the Army Corp of Engineers, they do what they can with what they have. There are many documentaries on why Louisiana is pretty f****d up and, surprise surprise, it has a lot to do with corporations ignoring the basic function and need of a wetlands in order to pursue profit.
The Government has a huge incentive to perform well. It's own existence is tied to the people it serves. If we are truly underserved or die out, so too does the government. It is in its own best interest to function well.
Private business is run with an eye to profit, nothing more. If it is better on a pay sheet to let me die in the street, a private business would, without question. With government, however, it is in their best interest I stay alive and healthy so I can generate tax revenue.

For a private firm, every day is Judgement Day. For a government election day is Judgement Day. In between election you have to put up with whatever sh*t the government is dropping on your head. With a private firm, you simply stop doing business with them. If enough people do this, they will either clean up their act or go out of business.

ruveyn

that however relies on humans actually being capable and logical as a group, is that the impression you get from the mankind in general?
i dont.