From: mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
Subject: School choice, what is the issue?
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:13:21 GMT
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gelato.mips.com

ken bell) writes:
|> 
|> I've been hearing people claim that 'our country would be much worse off' if 
|> we did away with public education or, more often,if we had never had it in 
|> the first place.  Could someone flesh this argument out more fully for me 
|> and the rest of us?  It seems to me to be the one (the only) argument which 
|> has any chance of justifying the public educational system; it is certainly 
|> the one I here the most frequently.  I thought before I launched a full 
|> frontal assault it would be well to give the opposition a chance to present 
|> the most cogent reasons on the other side first.
|> 
I'll give it a shot so you can start your war.  There are two issues here.

1.	Publically funded education.  It is inconsistent with the objectives
	of this country that if you are born into a poor family that you 
	should forever be denied opportunity by being denied the opportunity
	for an education.  Consequently there is a public responsibility
	to provide an education for those whose parents cannot afford it.

	This is further supported by the belief that our country's future
	is dependant on an educated work force.  That all of the countries
	catching up and passing us, economically, are aided by strong
	education systems and ethics.

	Where it grows from "responsibility to those who cannot afford" to
	it is more efficient to expand the system to everyone, I do not
	know, but it is consistent with the move toward big is better we
	have seen over the last 200 years.

	The arguments here seem to be that "some private schools work
	better, so they are the solution" vs. the countries that are
	passing us up are doing it with public schools systems.  The 
	latter group believe that this issue is important, we should
	fix the public schools system, not abandon it.

2.	Public funding of Private schools.  There are two issues here
	that cause the supporters to fight this idea (including me).
	The first is that public funding of private schools will solve
	the problem of substandard education.  No posts show that
	private schools are cheaper, unless they are subsidized, ususally
	by a church/synagogue/etc.  The "best" private schools are not
	subsidized, and are more expensive than the per/student cost
	of public schools.  These private schools also offer a much 
	narrow selection of classes, create a completely artificial
	environment, and encourage economic (and therefore racial) 
	class distinction.

	The second part of this issue is the funding of religious
	schools.  Any method of moving this money to religious schools
	will be a subsidy of that church's ability to proselytize.  In
	addition, the students going to these schools will be taught,
	using funds from the community.  What they will be taught is
	that members of their religion are better and different from
	others, and that some members of the community are terrible
	people (e.g. athiests).  While this may not be true for all
	religions, it is not what one would consider an attitude which
	develops a sense of community.

Go for it.