NationStates

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:Did you miss the part about private schools being mostly frequented by middle-class students?

There is nothing liberal or progressive about forgetting about the working class my friend.

How does this forget the working class exactly...?

Ainin wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
There is nothing liberal or progressive about forgetting about the working class my friend.

How does this forget the working class exactly...?

They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:How does this forget the working class exactly...?

They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

Yes they can. It's called "substantial amounts of welfare and tax cuts".

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:How does this forget the working class exactly...?

They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

I think we should have a Belgian- like voucher system.

I can see if this bill is for the lower class but I'm sure middle class people can fend for themselves.

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:How does this forget the working class exactly...?

They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

Is there not the Matter of Regulating and Maintaining a system of Public education before worrying about Private education?

We need to establish a system of acrediting Schools, Establish a system of Education and to worry more so about Public education then the Private for the Imediate Future on the issue of education.

In my opinion anyway.

Ainin wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

Yes they can. It's called "substantial amounts of welfare and tax cuts".

So working class students get 100% of fees paid?

Ainin wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

Yes they can. It's called "substantial amounts of welfare and tax cuts".

Indeed there are many avenues already in place in Many Nations for this very scenario.

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:Yes they can. It's called "substantial amounts of welfare and tax cuts".

So working class students get 100% of fees paid?

I would rather look at it as a Loan Personally.

Private Education unlike Public isn't by any Nature a Right.

Bleckonia wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
They can't afford even 25% of private school fees, thus the government is making sure that middle class and above can receive a better education.

I think we should have a Belgian- like voucher system.

Vouchers can easily be outpaced by costs in an essential service market while legislators of a future unknown government refuse to raise the output.

Free South Califas wrote:

Bleckonia wrote:
I think we should have a Belgian- like voucher system.

Vouchers can easily be outpaced by costs in an essential service market while legislators of a future unknown government refuse to raise the output.

Not if one does not specify an amount on the voucher.

We could adopt an education system similar to Sweden. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_sweden#Free_schools We should focus on fully-public schools first though.

Free South Califas wrote:

Bleckonia wrote:
I think we should have a Belgian- like voucher system.

Vouchers can easily be outpaced by costs in an essential service market while legislators of a future unknown government refuse to raise the output.

That won't happen with vouchers. For example, vouchers in Sweden are worth the same amount as what public schools are given per student. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_sweden#Free_schools

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Free South Califas wrote:Vouchers can easily be outpaced by costs in an essential service market while legislators of a future unknown government refuse to raise the output.

Not if one does not specify an amount on the voucher.

So the private sector should just be able to bilk the government at any rate it chooses?

Geilinor wrote:

Free South Califas wrote:Vouchers can easily be outpaced by costs in an essential service market while legislators of a future unknown government refuse to raise the output.

That won't happen with vouchers. For example, vouchers in Sweden are worth the same amount as what public schools are given per student. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_sweden#Free_schools

Meaning they'll be functionally useless if the private schools charge more? I mean, don't get me wrong, I like free schools, especially if operated by the local community to try their own favored pedagogical methods or whatever. But that's about as far as I'd want subsidies to go personally.

Geilinor wrote:We could adopt an education system similar to Sweden. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_sweden#Free_schools We should focus on fully-public schools first though.

Why make the government pay for it when like in the UK we could make private schools having to offer bursaries to disadvantaged pupils a requirement to retain their charitable status? That way the issue of vouchers not being worth enough anymore is also got around.

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:It is that subjective. Many people, including many governments, support that and think it is the right thing to do.

Steal from the poor to effectively feed the rich? Glad the UK does not do that and does the right thing by it.

So should we means-test public schools too?

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Geilinor wrote:We could adopt an education system similar to Sweden. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_sweden#Free_schools We should focus on fully-public schools first though.

Why make the government pay for it when like in the UK we could make private schools having to offer bursaries to disadvantaged pupils a requirement to retain their charitable status? That way the issue of vouchers not being worth enough anymore is also got around.

Here's an idea with legs.

Geilinor wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Steal from the poor to effectively feed the rich? Glad the UK does not do that and does the right thing by it.

So should we means-test public schools too?

Presumably that's covered by the progressive tax?

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Ainin wrote:No. At least, in Quebec, the government subsidies 75% of private school tuition, and it makes it so Quebec has one of the, and maybe even the, highest private school enrollment rates in Canada. And guess what? They're not rich? Most are middle-class families.

And Canada is supposed to be liberal and progressive!!

You seriously don't know what you're talking about, do you, Boris? Belgium, Sweden, Australia, Quebec. They do subsidize private school tuition. They make it so that a middle-class student could go to a private school instead of being restricted to public schools. What's not liberal is in fact not subsidizing private schools. The US system, for example, makes it so that the middle-class only has one option, while the wealthy have many. By adopting such a system, everyone has an equal opportunity to attend the school of their choice.

Free South Califas wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Why make the government pay for it when like in the UK we could make private schools having to offer bursaries to disadvantaged pupils a requirement to retain their charitable status? That way the issue of vouchers not being worth enough anymore is also got around.

Here's an idea with legs.

Geilinor wrote:So should we means-test public schools too?

Presumably that's covered by the progressive tax?

You know that wasn't a serious suggestion, right FSC?

Geilinor wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Steal from the poor to effectively feed the rich? Glad the UK does not do that and does the right thing by it.

So should we means-test public schools too?

In all seriousness, I would be in favor of a school tax on the wealthy for using public school, say those earning over £100,000 should start to pay a small fee that rises to about £2000 when earnings hit £120,000. Here it levels off.

Geilinor wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
And Canada is supposed to be liberal and progressive!!

You seriously don't know what you're talking about, do you, Boris? Belgium, Sweden, Australia, Quebec. They do subsidize private school tuition. They make it so that a middle-class student could go to a private school instead of being restricted to public schools. What's not liberal is in fact not subsidizing private schools. The US system, for example, makes it so that the middle-class only has one option, while the wealthy have many. By adopting such a system, everyone has an equal opportunity to attend the school of their choice.

Apart from the poor, again!

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Beta Test wrote:
They weren't better off than me no.

what were the cost of your school fees?

In Australia or Sweden, almost nothing or no more than a public school.

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Geilinor wrote:You seriously don't know what you're talking about, do you, Boris? Belgium, Sweden, Australia, Quebec. They do subsidize private school tuition. They make it so that a middle-class student could go to a private school instead of being restricted to public schools. What's not liberal is in fact not subsidizing private schools. The US system, for example, makes it so that the middle-class only has one option, while the wealthy have many. By adopting such a system, everyone has an equal opportunity to attend the school of their choice.

Apart from the poor, again!

Your argument is seriously "if there is no full equality, improvements in the field of equality are immoral"?

Free South Califas wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Not if one does not specify an amount on the voucher.

So the private sector should just be able to bilk the government at any rate it chooses?

Geilinor wrote:That won't happen with vouchers. For example, vouchers in Sweden are worth the same amount as what public schools are given per student. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_sweden#Free_schools

Meaning they'll be functionally useless if the private schools charge more? I mean, don't get me wrong, I like free schools, especially if operated by the local community to try their own favored pedagogical methods or whatever. But that's about as far as I'd want subsidies to go personally.

That's not true either. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Sweden#Free_schools

nor are they allowed to charge the students any additional fees

They aren't allowed to charge additional fees, though they may accept private donations. There are no admissions tests either.

Ainin wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Apart from the poor, again!

Your argument is seriously "if there is no full equality, improvements in the field of equality are immoral"?

No, my argument in the realms of education is if the government cannot provide the same level of education for all pupils that cannot afford private then it is not even worth the ballot paper it was voted in on.

The Nihilistic view wrote:

Geilinor wrote:You seriously don't know what you're talking about, do you, Boris? Belgium, Sweden, Australia, Quebec. They do subsidize private school tuition. They make it so that a middle-class student could go to a private school instead of being restricted to public schools. What's not liberal is in fact not subsidizing private schools. The US system, for example, makes it so that the middle-class only has one option, while the wealthy have many. By adopting such a system, everyone has an equal opportunity to attend the school of their choice.

Apart from the poor, again!

What in the world are you saying, Boris? Can't you read the fact that "the average person can actually attend a private school in those countries!". The US and UK system where only the wealthy can attend private schools is the immoral system. The system we are proposing improves equality, as well as choice, in education.