| </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Edge,)
"1. We accept that they're going to ignore us and that the system is doomed. We wait for the collapse and stand ready to rebuild it from the ashes."
The government system is already toast. We already have a two track educational system. Those who government school their children, and those who do not. Private education, both home and contract educations are doing well. They are in fact thriving. As much as I long to share the success with government schools, I have no desire to sacrifice the education of my children and grandchildren to help "show them the light." Since I firmly believe that vouchers will lead to the elimination of quality education, I would be a fool or disengenuous to advocate for someone else that which I would never advocate for my loved ones.
"2. We somehow manage to get our ideas through their thick skulls. They admit that everything they've believed in for 140 years is fundamentally flawed and agree to join us in privatizing the schools."
Already on the way. We don't have to do anything. The government system is collapsing of it's own weight. Despite the compassion for those children who will be lost in the system, organizations have fought long and hard to make sure parents have the right to educate their children the way they see fit. This is not a step in the right direction.
"3. We examine vouchers with a critical eye instead of dismissing them out of hand. We find a way to stall off the state-approval time bomb for long enough to show people that private school is more affordable than they think. We privatize schools completely before the 'bomb' goes off."
I think your goal is laudable. But vouchers by their very nature are intrusive, and I believe that the competitiveness that you attempt to bring to the system will be overwhelmed by the power of the state.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
The entire thrust of your argument rests on the assertion that vouchers will lead to inevitable and rapid subjugation of all private schools. While it's true that many private schools will be willing to jump through "small" hoops to get voucher funding, some of them will not. As long as independent private schools haven't died out completely, parents will still have the option of sending their kids to schools that are free of government control. Everyone who realizes they can afford private school now without vouchers will still realize that they can afford to ignore vouchers when we have them.
School districts with vouchers have existed for decades, and most (but not all, sadly) have been able to maintain their independence. What supporting evidence do you offer for the assertion that vouchers make subjugation inevitable?
"With regard to the inevitable collapse... And as much as I hate to say it, you can't start to raise yourself up until you hit rock bottom." - We both know this is just rhetoric. Plenty of people and societies have managed to advance socially without ever hitting "rock bottom".
"As long as the illusion that government schools exist to educate children persists, then it will continue to be a threat to liberty." - I agree. What we seem to disagree on is which method will expose this illusion more quickly.
"I don't believe that it is possible to design any state approval process that will not lead to governmental control over education. And the stakes are much higher. Right now, you can opt out of the system. The day an activist judge decides that it is in the "public interest" that private educational activities be regulated will be the end of private education. And the more "state" money that is used for "private" educational choices makes the case easier to make."
I agree that this is a concern, which is why we need to scream bloody murder every time anyone so much as hints at the idea that the state needs to regulate the few remaining schools that aren't already completely under its control.
"A less intrusive method would be a straight tax credit for any and all educational tuition, fees, books, supplies, etc. No Questions Asked. The tax credits would be funded directly out reductions in the Dept of Education's budget. I haven't decided whether this would be a viable alternative or not. Mostly because churches used to be autonomous, then they recieved their tax exempt status, then they lost thier first amendment rights (or negotiated them away)."
I'd be all for a clause like this if we could get it passed, but I really don't see it happening. Something like this would be a big fat target for anyone with vested interest in government schools who wants to rouse public opinion and prevent it from happening. With the system I proposed, there is no way at all that I can see for educrats to argue against it without revealing that the only reason for their opposition is the power they would stand to lose. |