Supreme Court Rules Vouchers to Be Constitutional!

[Jac de Molay]

I was thinking of special needs children - ie learning disabilities, children with ADD, para and quadriplegic. If they are systematically turned away by the private institutions who dont have the time or resources to deal with them, that's not much of a "choice" .

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by drake
"most private school teachers get paid much less than public school ones "

Link???

hmmm

I thinkk I found one with a little searching

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/ce/c9756d06.html

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by DetroitDave
I was thinking of special needs children - ie learning disabilities, children with ADD, para and quadriplegic. If they are systematically turned away by the private institutions who dont have the time or resources to deal with them, that's not much of a "choice" .

the schools are private

so they have a choice

people should have a choice to, instead of being forced to use the public schools

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

from the web site some key numbers


Average Salaries
Average Lowest Average Highest
Public Teachers 21,653 $31,655
Private Teachers 14,218 23,426

as you can see

Private school teachers get paid a lot less in 1997 and I would assume it would be so today also

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

crap my table really messed up

here is the stats
Public teachers
Average high salary 31,655
average low salary 21,653

Private teachers
Average high salary 23,426
average low salary 14,218

Jon Miller

[- Groucho -]

Hmmm, the Dept. of Ed. indicates that at the 50th percentile, tuition in private secondary schools is $4,000 for church based schools and $5,000 for non-church based schools.

If the voucher Bush is contemplating is only $2,600, doesn't that disproportionately favour wealthier families who can make up the difference?

I'm not in favour of vouchers, but if you're going to have them, at least make them fair.

[drake]

Thanks for the numbers Jon. I appreciate you taking the time.

Must be the only profession in the world where quality of work isn't relative to the pay, and is tolerated.

[Jon Miller]

oh, I should say, those are the without salary schedules schools

the with salary schedule schools have similiar disparities between public and private school teachers

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Echinda
Hmmm, the Dept. of Ed. indicates that at the 50th percentile, tuition in private secondary schools is $4,000 for church based schools and $5,000 for non-church based schools.

If the voucher Bush is contemplating is only $2,600, doesn't that disproportionately favour wealthier families who can make up the difference?

I'm not in favour of vouchers, but if you're going to have them, at least make them fair.

I am not saying that it shouldn't be greater

but for someone without much money they are far more likely to be able to afford 1400 rather than 4000

Jon Miller

[orange]

School Vouchers - a farse solution to a very lage problem.

FUND PUBLIC SCHOOLS THEY'RE A ****ING JOKE!

[Jon Miller]

I found this page also
which might explain why some teachers prefer private school teaching

http://www.capenet.org/teach.html

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by orange
School Vouchers - a farse solution to a very lage problem.

FUND PUBLIC SCHOOLS THEY'RE A ****ING JOKE!

but why should the poor pay for the problems with pblic schools

oh, and provate school get much less money than public schools (but do a better job in many cases)

(BTW I have heard of good public school, I just have not been to one)

Jon Miller

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
why would they be a bad idea

in many places school vouchers would give the poor a chance and education which is edcent which had previously only be allowed for the rich

this is a great triumph for the proletariat who were being denied decent education from the public institutions (in many cases)

Jon Miller

Jon, you're missing the major point: even with the tax credits amounting to 2500$, most low-income families won't be able to afford sending their kids o yuppie schools that cost 10 000$ p.a. This means that the main beneficiaries are going to be those who could already afford to send their kids to private school and who have just been granted a 2500$ rebate.

Once these higher-income parents have been given additional incentive to send their kids to private school, they have no reason to want to pay taxes to support public schools, and school budgets will shrink, hurting the lower-income students who still can't afford to go to school with the yuppies...

[- Groucho -]

KH is exactly right. Add to that the problem that public schools will be required to teach the kids that private schools refuse to take (who are usually the ones that require more funding due to behavioural issues or special needs) and you've got a recipe for disaster.

I, for one, despite being a "yuppy" who could afford otherwise, am sending my kids to public school. For all the above reasons and because I don't want my kids to turn out to be private school snots.

[Sava]

Just another loophole that the religious zealots in this country are trying to take advantage of. The good people in California got "under God" taken out of the pledge, as it should be, because religion has no place in school. Likewise, the public's money should not fund private/religious schools. I wouldn't mind so much if the private schools were separated into religious and non-religious. But it seems to me that this country is taking a backwards step by allowing the conservatives to integrate religion into everything. Bush even said, "Our basic ideals and freedoms came from God..." Wrong Dubya, our ideals and freedoms are because of the influence of religion which screwed the world up. Religion once ruled the nations in Europe, it was called the Dark Ages. And today, look at the countries that have established religions. They are some of the worst to live in.

Taking religion out of government won't infringe upon anybody's beliefs or faith. But having religion in government will. I know you conservatives want to be selfish and cry about how it's tradition. Remember, slavery was a tradition that lasted for nearly 100 years in this country. Just because something is old and established doesn't mean its right. The "under God" has only been in the pledge since 1954 for Pete's sake!

BTW: The pledge was written by a prominent Boston Socialist.