A debate on a plan

Okay, so what will happen is I will post a plan, that is a solution to a modern problem. My opponent will attack the plan, and try to disprove it. Here's my plan to eliminate poverty. Step One: Education Education is the most important tool to escape poverty. Obviously we must provide a higher quality education for impoverished children. UNICEF ranked the United States' educational system 22nd out of 30 developed nations. That is clearly failure. The school system is choked by bureaucracy and standardization. There is no accountability for schools. If they fail, they aren't hurt, if they succeed, they aren't rewarded. The solution is clear, a private school voucher system will improve education. A voucher system would create a market-style school system, if a public school fails, students zoned for it will go to private schools. In a way this competition already exists, but not to its full extent. In many cities the schools are failing. This is for a variety of reasons, most of which stem from the socialist model, but those who can afford to go to private schools go to private schools. Poorer children are left in the failing schools. They have no where to go. As long as the school has a captive student body, it has little incentive to improve, and the children who have to go there are left with a very poor quality education. Also, many low income students are stuck in bad schools, schools described by the Chicago Tribune as "An institutionalized case of child neglect." If these schools are failing, children need a way out. Vouchers provide a way out. Education used to be a child's ticket out of poverty, but now it is what keeps them impoverished. In Colombia, a nation with a fairly similar educational system, a voucher program was developed. Unfortunately, as Colombia is a poor nation, only 50% of those eligible for vouchers could get a voucher. Luckily for us, this allows us to compare the success of the vouchers to the traditional system. The Brookings Institution performed a study of this program and it found that there was an increase among voucher winners in those taking college entrance exams, voucher winners being about 9% more likely to do so, a 5-7% increase in high school graduation among winners, and winners were much less likely to fail a grade. The authors of the study said "On balance, our results suggest a substantial gain in both high school graduation rates and achievement as a result of the voucher program. Although the benefits of achievement gains per se are hard to quantify, there is a substantial economic return to high school graduation in Colombia." Also, in 1994, a conservative government in Sweden made a voucher system that was so successful that when the liberals took over, politically they could not end the system. The world has tried vouchers, and they have been a wild success. We need the best for our children. Vouchers have proven that they work best. Also the problem with public schools is not money. Public school systems spend an average of about $10000 on every student, whereas private schools spend substantially less. It is not money, it is how the money is spent, and private schools that by nature are forced to compete have shown they can spend the money better, it is better to let people make the choice to instill competition, than it is to consign people to failing schools that seem broken beyond repair. Money is not the issue. We save money with vouchers, and we get a much more educated populace. Step Two: Eliminating the Ghetto Ghettos place a lot of desperate people in one place. This leads to gang violence, drug abuse and other problems. The solution to that problem is clear. We must eliminate the ghetto. This can be easily done. The answer is to spread low income housing. If we put one low income household on every block, the low income families would be spread out, and would also be placed in areas that have affluent families ready to help out. Spreading them out eliminates urban slums, which increases urban real estate value, and it reduces gang violence by eliminating the need for a gang. Also, affluent neighborhoods tend to have access to better public services, which would also improve the quality of life for low income families. Step Three: Increasing Employment Opportunities The Brookings Institution writes "The decentralizing U.S. economy has, in many metropolitan areas, led to a spatial mismatch between where welfare recipients live and where jobs are available. In Milwaukee, for instance, nearly 90 percent of full-time entry-level job openings in May 2000 were located in the suburban/exurban parts of the metropolitan area. Only 4 percent of full-time and part-time entry-level job openings were located in the central Milwaukee neighborhoods where most W-2 (Wisconsin's welfare reform program) participants lived. An October 2001 survey showed that there were only 2,700 full- and part-time jobs available in central city Milwaukee for the 13,100 persons actively seeking work there." This problem has a number of solutions necessary. One important solution is the elimination of the ghetto, and the movement of low income families from the city to the suburbs. Also, welfare programs must focus on providing employment. This entails providing a car. Most low income families do not have an automobile. This prevents them from getting jobs far away from their residence. Providing an automobile would drastically increase employment.