Reply to Why racial segregation is unacceptable but socioeconomic segregation is ok in private schools

Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools

Reply to "Why racial segregation is unacceptable but socioeconomic segregation is ok in private schools "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]OP brings up a valid point that DCUM liberals like to ignore so that they can appear virtuous while perpetuating economic inequality.

[/quote]

What makes a person "liberal" is their political views on how our governement should serve the people. Do you support tax dollars going to free and appropriate public education for all, while simultaneously believing in the economic freedom to opt out of using that public service by homeschooling or choosing to pay for school?

Or are you "conservative" and feel that no federal government funds should go to education, and states should decide for themselves how or whether to educate the people with state and local tax dollars? Same divide at that government level as well, with the conservative default being little to no moeny for education, and the liberal view supporting taxes to support free public education for all.

Or are you the brand of conservative that believes that if the government supports public education at all, it should also take some of that money out of the universal public school pool (diminishing the universal) and give it to some taxpayers to pay a tiny part of private school fees (which only benefits those who can afford the balance of tuition)? Note that this position is a double win for the wealthy conservative -- it is essentially a tax break for the rich, taking back that portion of their tax payment that was supposed to support public education, while also getting a government discount on private tution fees.

The political liberal position is that we all pay into the public education system, but we are not obligated to use it, but that not using it is a choice that an individual should bear the cost of -- not everyone else.

Which of these positions goes the furtherst to promote economic opportunity? I say opportunity, because economic 'equality' is a false concept, even in the most socialist or communitst socitey, but absolutely in a capilalist economy.

The quesiton you seem to raise is how should a person with liberal political views, who also has wealth, educate their children?

You suggest that if they choose private education for their children, they are "promoting economic inequality"? How so? They are paying taxes, so are financially supporting public programs, including public education. They also are paying more for a service, education, that is supporting the salaries of additional people in the education community. Their kids are getting an education, which may or may not be better or even worse than their local public school, which I am assuming is where you think their kids should go. But does attending a public school promote economic equality? How exactly? What if they homeschool? What if they are very religious and choose religious school? Do those choices promote economic inequality too?

Wealthy or poor a kid may or may not succeed no matter where they are educated. Is it the education they are getting that determines the outcome for the wealthy kid? Or is is the fact that they will start life with an economic cushion thanks to their parents (who themselves may have come from poverty through public education, but were smart and worked really hard or got lucky in business)? Will that not be true for that wealthy kid whether they attended private or public school or homeschool or religious school? 
[/quote]

Boooooring.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics