bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,938
|
Post by bluepenquin on Feb 14, 2021 22:15:24 GMT -5
He already provided his idea of that, which was to feed the responder a bunch of claims about minimum wage making unemployment rise, and then asking them whether they favored it. But remember, you had to tell them it would make unemployment rise but NOT that it would bring almost a million people out of poverty. Agreed - put it all in the poll question. Frankly a 'fair' summary of the CBO conclusions would be very helpful - if that can be done fairly.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 14, 2021 22:16:58 GMT -5
I agree with cindra. It is concerning you claim to have a masters in economics. Your understanding of survey design is elementary.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 14, 2021 22:38:03 GMT -5
Hey bluepenquin , speaking of "school choice", what would you say to the idea of vouchers that can only be used for secular private schools which have the same restrictions on religious education as public schools? Obviously if churches can't be taxed because of the first amendment, then tax money can't be spent on religious schools, right? Correct, I think I addressed this in a previous thread. This would be a great idea. Throw out our current idea of Public School (Secular) and Private School (Religious) - and think in terms of all school is private - funded by tax dollars for which 'Religious' schools wouldn't be part of the tax funded money. Of course Religious schools can still keep their tax exemption - but this would be small in comparison. To me - this isn't about Public schools being non-secular. This isn't about promoting a specific religion (I am a big Religious Freedom guy - but this doesn't mean implicit Government sponsor of one religion). This is about creating an environment where these private (secular) schools are held accountable to the children/parents via the market. Where 'bad' schools go away and are replaced by better ones. Create some kind of 'cap' system that would create some equity between kids from poor and rich parents if we need to. There has to be a solution that would increase the quality of our schools (or weed out bad schools) while maintaining some form of 'equity'. It may not be everything I would want - but it could be a Huge improvement. But the problem with this is still that you end up having the taxpayers paying for this without any say in what they are paying for. I'm fine with private schools where parents pay for what they get, and I guess it's their kids who suffer if the parents make bad choices. But as a taxpayer, why should I hand my money to parents who want to play education roulette with their kids? At least I have a say with public schools. I can elect school board members. I can elect the superintendent of public education. I can elect legislators. Why should I pay you to select your kids' schools, and have absolutely no say in how you are spending my money?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Feb 15, 2021 0:10:27 GMT -5
Correct, I think I addressed this in a previous thread. This would be a great idea. Throw out our current idea of Public School (Secular) and Private School (Religious) - and think in terms of all school is private - funded by tax dollars for which 'Religious' schools wouldn't be part of the tax funded money. Of course Religious schools can still keep their tax exemption - but this would be small in comparison. To me - this isn't about Public schools being non-secular. This isn't about promoting a specific religion (I am a big Religious Freedom guy - but this doesn't mean implicit Government sponsor of one religion). This is about creating an environment where these private (secular) schools are held accountable to the children/parents via the market. Where 'bad' schools go away and are replaced by better ones. Create some kind of 'cap' system that would create some equity between kids from poor and rich parents if we need to. There has to be a solution that would increase the quality of our schools (or weed out bad schools) while maintaining some form of 'equity'. It may not be everything I would want - but it could be a Huge improvement. But the problem with this is still that you end up having the taxpayers paying for this without any say in what they are paying for. I'm fine with private schools where parents pay for what they get, and I guess it's their kids who suffer if the parents make bad choices. But as a taxpayer, why should I hand my money to parents who want to play education roulette with their kids? At least I have a say with public schools. I can elect school board members. I can elect the superintendent of public education. I can elect legislators. Why should I pay you to select your kids' schools, and have absolutely no say in how you are spending my money? So your response to a low-income family living in a failing school district is what exactly? It is what is it? Live with it?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 15, 2021 0:33:58 GMT -5
But the problem with this is still that you end up having the taxpayers paying for this without any say in what they are paying for. I'm fine with private schools where parents pay for what they get, and I guess it's their kids who suffer if the parents make bad choices. But as a taxpayer, why should I hand my money to parents who want to play education roulette with their kids? At least I have a say with public schools. I can elect school board members. I can elect the superintendent of public education. I can elect legislators. Why should I pay you to select your kids' schools, and have absolutely no say in how you are spending my money? So your response to a low-income family living in a failing school district is what exactly? It is what is it? Live with it? Obviously the response is to fix the school district. Among other things, that means that schools really should not be funded via local property taxes. If they have to be funded by property taxes, they should be funded from a statewide pool, so you don't have well-funded schools in rich neighborhoods and poorly-funded schools in poor neighborhoods.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Feb 15, 2021 0:50:17 GMT -5
So your response to a low-income family living in a failing school district is what exactly? It is what is it? Live with it? Obviously the response is to fix the school district. I can't believe those school districts didn't think of that!
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 15, 2021 2:46:17 GMT -5
Obviously the response is to fix the school district. I can't believe those school districts didn't think of that! Well what the hell do you expect? You toss out "failing school districts" with no explanation. How are they failing? What's going wrong? If you can just hypothetically specify that they are failing with no further explanation as to why, then I have the equal right to just say "make them stop failing" with just as little explanation. If you want to suggest exactly how they are "failing", then we'll proceed from there. But it sure sounds like you are just assuming that public schools "fail".
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Feb 15, 2021 3:54:23 GMT -5
I can't believe those school districts didn't think of that! Well what the hell do you expect? You toss out "failing school districts" with no explanation. How are they failing? What's going wrong? If you can just hypothetically specify that they are failing with no further explanation as to why, then I have the equal right to just say "make them stop failing" with just as little explanation. If you want to suggest exactly how they are "failing", then we'll proceed from there. But it sure sounds like you are just assuming that public schools "fail". Part of the reason they are "failing" is because of all they are asked to do. School lunch programs and before and after school care for socioeconomic disadvantaged kids, special services for mental and physical handicaps, bilingual programs (LA Unified has kids that speak 95 different languages at home), programs for at risk kids for everything from behavior disorders, abuse, pregnancy and more. Public schools accept everybody. Private schools don't have that requirement. That makes for an inherently uneven playing field if you are going to give each kid a voucher and treat public and private schools the same. I know a family with twins that talked to a prestigious college prep high school that runs about $32k per year. One twin was a good athlete and they thought would fit in just fine. The other had a mild learning disability where they took regular classes but might need some special accommodations for taking class and standardized tests. Family was told they could not accommodate the twin and recommended that the family send their twins to two different schools. Parents were incredulous at what they were hearing and told the school to pound sand. Voucher systems are not that straight forward when the private schools are allowed to make up their own rules and cherry pick which populations they wish to serve.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 15, 2021 4:11:33 GMT -5
Well what the hell do you expect? You toss out "failing school districts" with no explanation. How are they failing? What's going wrong? If you can just hypothetically specify that they are failing with no further explanation as to why, then I have the equal right to just say "make them stop failing" with just as little explanation. If you want to suggest exactly how they are "failing", then we'll proceed from there. But it sure sounds like you are just assuming that public schools "fail". Part of the reason they are "failing" is because of all they are asked to do. School lunch programs and before and after school care for socioeconomic disadvantaged kids, special services for mental and physical handicaps, bilingual programs (LA Unified has kids that speak 95 different languages at home), programs for at risk kids for everything from behavior disorders, abuse, pregnancy and more. Public schools accept everybody. Private schools don't have that requirement. That makes for an inherently uneven playing field if you are going to give each kid a voucher and treat public and private schools the same. I know a family with twins that talked to a prestigious college prep high school that runs about $32k per year. One twin was a good athlete and they thought would fit in just fine. The other had a mild learning disability where they took regular classes but might need some special accommodations for taking class and standardized tests. Family was told they could not accommodate the twin and recommended that the family send their twins to two different schools. Parents were incredulous at what they were hearing and told the school to pound sand. Voucher systems are not that straight forward when the private schools are allowed to make up their own rules and cherry pick which populations they wish to serve. That still assumes they are "failing" without defining what they are failing at. The implication in the question was "public schools fail" but somehow private schools don't. Well, you have to define what the failure is! What is "failing"? And then you have to explain why private schools don't have this same "failing". What would prevent public schools from fixing this unspecified "failing"? I'm not a fan of charter schools, but at least one of the rules charter schools have to deal with is that they can't pick and choose their students. I definitely have problems with the idea of giving taxpayer money to private schools that are allowed to select their student base. (Of course, there are selective "magnet" public schools as part of some larger school districts, but at least the school district as a whole still has to serve all comers.)
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,938
|
Post by bluepenquin on Feb 15, 2021 9:07:20 GMT -5
Correct, I think I addressed this in a previous thread. This would be a great idea. Throw out our current idea of Public School (Secular) and Private School (Religious) - and think in terms of all school is private - funded by tax dollars for which 'Religious' schools wouldn't be part of the tax funded money. Of course Religious schools can still keep their tax exemption - but this would be small in comparison. To me - this isn't about Public schools being non-secular. This isn't about promoting a specific religion (I am a big Religious Freedom guy - but this doesn't mean implicit Government sponsor of one religion). This is about creating an environment where these private (secular) schools are held accountable to the children/parents via the market. Where 'bad' schools go away and are replaced by better ones. Create some kind of 'cap' system that would create some equity between kids from poor and rich parents if we need to. There has to be a solution that would increase the quality of our schools (or weed out bad schools) while maintaining some form of 'equity'. It may not be everything I would want - but it could be a Huge improvement. But the problem with this is still that you end up having the taxpayers paying for this without any say in what they are paying for. I'm fine with private schools where parents pay for what they get, and I guess it's their kids who suffer if the parents make bad choices. But as a taxpayer, why should I hand my money to parents who want to play education roulette with their kids? At least I have a say with public schools. I can elect school board members. I can elect the superintendent of public education. I can elect legislators. Why should I pay you to select your kids' schools, and have absolutely no say in how you are spending my money? Taxpayers pay for Food Stamps without any input on what food the person ends up buying. I am envisioning taxpayer money goes to the kid (we could index based on parent income or not). That money can only be used for K-12 school. The parents cannot just spend half the money and pocket the rest. The advantage would be those kids living in a city or suburb - can go to the (approved) school of their choice (much like rich kids are currently able to do with *some* limitations). BTW, the first thing we need to do - stop tying education to property taxes and where you live. Money should be tied to the kid at the state level with the kid having the opportunity to go to any of those schools. Heck, just make them all public schools as they are now - and this would be an improvement. The keys being, 1) kids/parents have a choice, and 2) schools have an incentive to be good - otherwise kids will stop going and that school will go out of business. Stop subsidizing (or trying to fix) failing schools and allow them to be replaced by better ones.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,938
|
Post by bluepenquin on Feb 15, 2021 9:14:44 GMT -5
Part of the reason they are "failing" is because of all they are asked to do. School lunch programs and before and after school care for socioeconomic disadvantaged kids, special services for mental and physical handicaps, bilingual programs (LA Unified has kids that speak 95 different languages at home), programs for at risk kids for everything from behavior disorders, abuse, pregnancy and more. Public schools accept everybody. Private schools don't have that requirement. That makes for an inherently uneven playing field if you are going to give each kid a voucher and treat public and private schools the same. I know a family with twins that talked to a prestigious college prep high school that runs about $32k per year. One twin was a good athlete and they thought would fit in just fine. The other had a mild learning disability where they took regular classes but might need some special accommodations for taking class and standardized tests. Family was told they could not accommodate the twin and recommended that the family send their twins to two different schools. Parents were incredulous at what they were hearing and told the school to pound sand. Voucher systems are not that straight forward when the private schools are allowed to make up their own rules and cherry pick which populations they wish to serve. That still assumes they are "failing" without defining what they are failing at. The implication in the question was "public schools fail" but somehow private schools don't. Well, you have to define what the failure is! What is "failing"? And then you have to explain why private schools don't have this same "failing". What would prevent public schools from fixing this unspecified "failing"? We probably will not agree on the answer - but I would like the market to determine failure in the form of # of people attending the school. Force the schools to have skin in the game in terms of attracting more students or enough students to stay in business. BTW, private schools fail - they go out of business when they fail. Public schools aren't allowed to go out of business. The primary goal is how can we get the poor and minority students out of a school they don't want to attend. I think this can be best done with the aid of private schools and a market. It could possibly be done with just public schools - but there needs to be choice.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 15, 2021 9:20:34 GMT -5
I'm going to try and put on my libertarian brain this morning.
What happens when the rural high school 30 minutes from my house "fails?" The one that serves kids from an hour away who'd either have to drive another 30 minutes to the one in my neighborhood or . . . maybe just drop out of school. Where do those kids go?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 15, 2021 9:25:24 GMT -5
It's much cleaner, more equitable, and more just to invest in universal public education. If you want people to "have skin in the game" (which I'm not sure how someone who pays taxes and can vote on school board/etc don't have skin in the game, but whatever), just abolish private education and really invest everyone in public schools.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 15, 2021 9:27:31 GMT -5
Yeah, I still haven't heard a good reason for why when we look at countries like Finland, Poland, South Korea, Canada, Estonia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc., (countries with some of the best education systems in the word), we should go "nah, f*ck them, school choice is the answer."
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,938
|
Post by bluepenquin on Feb 15, 2021 11:08:22 GMT -5
I'm going to try and put on my libertarian brain this morning. What happens when the rural high school 30 minutes from my house "fails?" The one that serves kids from an hour away who'd either have to drive another 30 minutes to the one in my neighborhood or . . . maybe just drop out of school. Where do those kids go? Certainly not the same kind of choices for rural kids. I guess if a rural school sucks - some investor could see the opportunity to bring in a better school.
|
|