# School Choice and Vouchers **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 25, 2009, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908 "2009-06-25T03:28:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![A.Selene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3ec8ea/32.png) [@A.Selene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A.Selene)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/321 "2009-07-10T21:18:25Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Disbanding all schools everywhere is a solution; killing all children at the age of four is a solution, hiring every single child an individual private tutor is a solution. And if you ignore all anticipable negative effects, like you’re doing with these vouchers, then they’re all “good” solutions! > > And even if you _had_ convinced me that vouchers, with their predictable negative effects and negligible-improvement-based-on-available-data, _were_ a better product than public education, you still haven’t convinced me that it’s the best solution - in _any_ way. So yeah, I concede it’s as good an idea as good as hammering in screws is, when there are screwdrivers readily available. Meaning that we’d be morons to do it. Does that satisfy you? What’s a better solution, that provides both more freedom and better outcomes in education? Once again, I am not providing a perfect solution that will magically improve the education of every student everywhere in the world. Get some perspective. Vouchers can provide better education for many students. > [@](#): > > I don’t see a problem with any of this. On the other hand, none of this is an arugment for the voucher system, either. It’s not. I was trying to show that I am not as vehemently pro-voucher as you seem to be anti. I see the merits of those systems, but understand that vouchers are an even better solution. > [@](#): > > I deny that vouchers are a good way to provide a good education for all. Heck, I deny that it’s been shown that vouchers provide a good education for _any_. (A month-per-year improvement in reading only doesn’t impress me. At all.) For a third of the cost? You wouldn’t purchase a vehicle that gets one MPG more than your current vehicle for a third of the cost? > [@](#): > > Succinctly, I still think it’s a scam, which can _only_ be expected to provide serious benefits to rich parents who are already sending their kids to private school, and which will pay for these benefits by sucking them out of the financing for the education of persons still in the public system. A scam that suckers in well-meaning people who think that that anti-government free market is their hammer and that everything is a nail, but just a scam nonetheless. And nothing I’ve seen here convinces me otherwise. And this is where you go terribly wrong. It’s more educational freedom and better education for some students. I understand some of your reservations, but they are overblown; better education for some children is better than better education for no children. ---
**Author:** ![Ruminator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Ruminator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruminator)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/322 "2009-07-10T21:23:58Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I’m not interested in helping the _parents_ with this money. I’m interested in _educating_ the _kids_. No need to be pedantic to the point of silliness. Of course, the homeschool parents in question have _kids_. > [@begbert2](#): > > > [@Ruminator](#): > > > > Charter schools are required to accept everyone. That’s a negative, not a positive. > > Says you. I thought it was you (or some other like minded posters) insisted the private schools do better because they were able to cherry pick their students. Do you disagree with this? ---
**Author:** ![A.Selene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3ec8ea/32.png) [@A.Selene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A.Selene)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/323 "2009-07-10T21:26:07Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Really, then who procides taht scholarship? A private entity. There are organizations other than the state that can provide help to those in need. I was a recipient of one such scholarship when attending college. > [@](#): > > What sort of freedom do private school provide that charter school not provide, other than religious instruction in some cases? Or is that the point? If you want to send your kids to a religious school and have the government pay for it then please just say so because we can have a discussion about why that would or would not be a good idea (putting aside the issue of the establishment clause). Complete freedom from state inference. Freedom to do whatever the hell they want in terms of curriculum. I don’t have children, but if I did, I would have no interest in sending them to a religiously affiliated school. > [@](#): > > Because it is not really an improvement for the education system as a whole. I was never claiming it is. Anyone expecting some cure for all of the problems in US education is naive at best and delusional at worst. I’m willing to improve this step by step - and an expanded voucher program would be a large step towards improving education for many, many students. I’m out for the weekend, everybody enjoy it! I’ll check back in on Monday. ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/324 "2009-07-10T21:31:15Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > Charter schools are required to accept everyone. That’s a negative, not a positive. > > Charter schools don’t help homeschool parents. Vouchers do. Keep in mind that homeschool parents are not rich. What do homeschool parents have to do with vouchers? If you give vouchers to homeschool parents, are you going to require them to become certified teachers? Are you going to make sure that they’re following the grade level expectations every year? Are you going to require them to provide music, computer and physical education? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/325 "2009-07-10T21:36:59Z")
> [@A.Selene](#): > > Bad for the country? You’re going to have to do better than that. You haven’t shown why they would be “bad for the country” The only example of a voucher system you have presented is the DC voucher system and it doesn’t work the way you think it does. It certainly doesn’t work the way voucher proponents want a voucher system to work. But that doesn’t say anything about why a voucher system would be bad for the country. There are several reasons that voucher systems (as proposed by conservatives) suck. The biggest problem I have with it is that it offers no discernable advantage over Charter Schools and funds an activity that doesn’t need funding (giving vouchers to the parents of kids that are already attending private school). I generally have a policy problem with a voucher system that allows schools to accept vouchers in PARTIAL payment of tuition. I am also not particularly keen on the idea of further stratifying education by income levels but I could probably live with that if you could address my other concerns. > [@](#): > > nor why I should care. I thought we were talking about policy. I thought that one of the things you care about in a policy discussion is what is best for the nation as a whole. > [@](#): > > The article you provided is interesting on two levels: one, because the formerly private schools are trying to become charters. And secondly, why? Not because charters are the end all and be all of educational practice, but because the charters schools are “free” because they are **completely subsidized** : I don’t see your point. Doesn’t the fact that they are losing students to charters instead of the public school system tell you something about charters? Are these Catholic schools going to become worse now that they are charters? If so why? > [@](#): > > You mention the heavy subsidies the catholic schools receive from private donors, but what of the entire budget that the charter school receives from taxpayers? The move for these schools to become charters makes complete sense in the distorted market that is education in America. It makes sense because charters provide all the flexibility and funds they need to pursue their eduational mission. I have no problem with the archdiocese subsidizing Catholic Schools, I was just pointing out that Catholic Schools that charge $13,000/student actually cost more than $13,000 per student to educate and they make up the difference with donations and subsidies from the archdiocese and not necessarily because they have a cheaper more cost effective method of educating children (although I will admit DC’s public school system is a pretty good example of the worst of American public education). > [@](#): > > Yeah, I figure they are low for the DC area, but as no one else is providing any numbers, they at least give some heft to the pro-voucher side of the argument. The point being, vouchers need not take the entire per pupil spending amount from a public school in order to aid families and students in seeking out better education. Like I said, I have a policy based problem with a voucher system where the school can ask the student’s parents to pay more than the voucher. DC (non charter)private Schools are about $25k -$30K, Catholic Schools are about between $12K and $25K (even day care is $15K). The DC voucher is for $7500, it is really not a viable option for the poor unless they also get a scholarship. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/326 "2009-07-10T21:49:18Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > I specifically mentioned structured options for the poor such as private schooling and yet you still want to distort what I said via an analogy with hunting deer? Unbelievable. You specifically said that education would be free because you could go learn stuff in a library. It is not my fault if you start to drown in your own rhetoric. Your other options for educating the poor also included things like home schooling, tutoring by various people who would presumably work for free, scholarships to private schools, and the internet. You also mention public schools in the same sentence and say that with these options poor kids should ge tthe same education as Bill gates’ kids. Well with the exception of the scholarships to private schools, they have all those options today what does adding private school scholarships add to the mix? You have this almost unhealthy worship of the free market and its purported ability to solve all problems. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/327 "2009-07-10T21:53:46Z")
> [@A.Selene](#): > > What’s a better solution, that provides both more freedom and better outcomes in education? Once again, I am not providing a perfect solution that will magically improve the education of every student everywhere in the world. Get some perspective. Vouchers can provide better education for many students. And they can trash the educations of the remaining students. _Vouchers are not free._ The money comes from somewhere. And yes, I think the “Public schools are so bad that we could torture all the children to death and it would be just as good” argument is a load of crap. So let’s not pull that out again in another effort to pretend vouchers are free and brush off the costs of voucher systems. > [@A.Selene](#): > > It’s not. I was trying to show that I am not as vehemently pro-voucher as you seem to be anti. I see the merits of those systems, but understand that vouchers are an even better solution. How can vouchers _possibly_ be better? With regards to benefits, government-sponsored scholarships are _exactly_ equivalent to the voucher programs currently effect. Charter schools, on the other hand, are _exactly_ equivalent to when vouchers are large enough to completely pay for private education. With regards to benefits, anyway. Regarding downsides they’re not eqaul, though. > [@A.Selene](#): > > For a third of the cost? You wouldn’t purchase a vehicle that gets one MPG more than your current vehicle for a third of the cost? Dude. The government will be paying _just as much_. Some of it will go to get kids into private schools that would be charter schools except they can’t resist the desire to pound in religion. A sparse handful will go to kids who could get full-cost private schools to give them large scholarships. And the rest will go to parents who will not spend a single additional penny on the education of their children - because they were already paying full price! (Though we can be sure they’d be very appreciative of the “reward for being rich” money.) And all this will be paid for at the expense of the rest of the kids’ educations, a fact which a disturbing number of people here don’t seem to have a problem with. So yeah, you’d have me pay _full_ price to raise the mileage a little in a few cars, lower the mileage of at least as many cars, and install brand new radios in every mercedes. I think I’ll pass, thanks. > [@A.Selene](#): > > And this is where you go terribly wrong. It’s more educational freedom and better education for some students. I understand some of your reservations, but they are overblown; better education for some children is better than better education for no children. It looks to me that when I said “A scam that suckers in well-meaning people who think that that anti-government free market is their hammer and that everything is a nail, but just a scam nonetheless,” I went terribly _right_. > [@Ruminator](#): > > No need to be pedantic to the point of silliness. Of course, the homeschool parents in question have _kids_. And what are they going to do with this money, eh? Buy a few more textbooks? Maybe? Gee, that’ll be a good use of the $5000, or $7500, or whatever you want to give them. Well, at least we can be sure every penny of it will be spent on education, right? Though, if your intent is to get parents to pull their kids out of school and then buy more beer with the voucher money, then this is a _great_ idea. Who cares about the damn kids anyway? > [@Ruminator](#): > > I thought it was you (or some other like minded posters) insisted the private schools do better because they were able to cherry pick their students. Do you disagree with this? Right, and if you beat up one person and give their money to another one, then the second person has more money! Whee! Seriously man. You are proposing _denying kids educations_. _You_ may think that’s a good idea, but fortunately most of civilized society disagrees. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/328 "2009-07-10T22:02:27Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > Charter schools are required to accept everyone. That’s a negative, not a positive. Well, I guess I don’t really have a problem with allowing charter schools to be selective. After all I don’t really have a problem with magnet schools. > [@](#): > > Charter schools don’t help homeschool parents. Vouchers do. Keep in mind that homeschool parents are not rich. I am not sympathetic to people who homeschool because they generally do it because they don’t want their kids to learn about “godless” science and evolution. I guess there might be other reasons for homeschooling, but I have no idea what they could be. What I would absolutely want to avoid is people pulling their kids out of school to homeschool them in order to cash the voucher checks they get for homeschooling their kids. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/329 "2009-07-10T22:26:14Z")
> [@A.Selene](#): > > What’s a better solution, that provides both more freedom and better outcomes in education? Charter schools. > [@](#): > > Vouchers can provide better education for many students. Says who? Not in the the form most commonly presented by coservatives. Under your voucher system, how much would the voucher be? If it would be $7500 in DC, then it would effectively help a couple of thousand kids that could get a scholarship to private schools while charter schools in DC are helping tens of thousands of kids achieve higher rates of high school graduation and college attendance. > [@](#): > > but understand that vouchers are an even better solution. Explain to me how a voucher system is a better solution than a charter school system? > [@](#): > > For a third of the cost? You wouldn’t purchase a vehicle that gets one MPG more than your current vehicle for a third of the cost? Its not a third of the cost because these private school would never provide enough scholarships to educate all those students. If you say that the parents can pay the difference then I would say that you would largely be subsidizing parents that are already sending their kids to pricate schools. > [@](#): > > And this is where you go terribly wrong. It’s more educational freedom and better education for some students. I understand some of your reservations, but they are overblown; better education for some children is better than better education for no children. It is not at all overblown. Unless the vouchers in DC are at significantly higher levels than they are now (in which case your 1/3 the cost argument goes away), the vast majority of those vouchers would be used by people who are already sending their kids to private school. There is also significantly more opportunity for fraud outside a charter system (heck there are problems enough with a charter system), people commit food stamp fraud for less than a hundred dollars a month, what makes you think that this same kind of fraud wouldn’t occur with a voucher system involving thousands of dollars? If you could prove to me that this would not happen or if you could present a structure that wold prevent this from happening (without basically reverting to a charter system) then you might have a case but if you can’t do that, then the only significant difference between a voucher system and a charter system is the subsidy going to people who are already sending their kids to private school and the higher potential for fraud. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2009, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/330 "2009-07-10T22:32:08Z")
> [@A.Selene](#): > > A private entity. There are organizations other than the state that can provide help to those in need. I was a recipient of one such scholarship when attending college. That is not a model for publicly educating the nation’s youth. > [@](#): > > Complete freedom from state inference. Freedom to do whatever the hell they want in terms of curriculum. I don’t have children, but if I did, I would have no interest in sending them to a religiously affiliated school. So having educational standards is no longer an important part of education? WTF? So can I open a school that basically cashes the vouchers and gives half the money back to the parents? I don’t think any of the serious proposals for vouchers don’t include some educational requirements. > [@](#): > > I was never claiming it is. Anyone expecting some cure for all of the problems in US education is naive at best and delusional at worst. I’m willing to improve this step by step - and an expanded voucher program would be a large step towards improving education for many, many students. I think he meant that the educational system as a whole would not be improved and might actually be harmed. ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2009, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/331 "2009-07-11T02:27:31Z")
> [@](#): > > It also shouldn’t cost $24000 a year to teach these knowledge like this. It can be taught by a parent, a sibling, a neighorhood community leader, a retired worker, or (gasp) even a teacher. > > Presidents George Washington and Abraham Lincoln both learned to read without public schools. Abraham Lincoln was not rich boy in a rich family. > > You’re trying to protect of the “institution” of public schools but that’s not quite the same as ensuring a first class education. You’re more focused on the mechanism instead of the outcome. > > If education was structured as completely free market, poor people would still have access to the finest education. Just like they did before public schools were implemented in 1900s. The poor would get their education from a combination of private schools (with scholarships), public schools, home schooling, distance schooling with internet, free libraries, whatever it takes. Poor people will always be able to get as good an education as Bill Gates’ children. FYI, the reason why public education tends to appear to be more expensive is simple. The people “calculating the costs” are figuring in the costs of things like building maintance, physical plants, and upkeep that can eat a HUGE hunk of money away especially in those communities like East St Louis where they can’t exactly afford new schools. And sorry, but I don’t agree with the statement that if education was totally free market, poor kids would still have access to education. Pre-1900’s, a LOT of the poor kids were in factories (child labor anyone?) Heck, look at the sittuion in Africa or India right now. A LOT of poor kids aren’t getting ANY education. ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2009, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/332 "2009-07-12T03:28:54Z")
Oh and for the pro-voucher people…you still haven’t answered as to why it’s OK for tax money to go to private schools. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2009, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/333 "2009-07-13T05:18:20Z")
> [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](#): > > Oh and for the pro-voucher people…you still haven’t answered as to why it’s OK for tax money to go to private schools. I am not pro-voucher but I think it is OK for tax money to go to private schools if private schools do the job better than public schools. That is why I support properly structured charter programs. The biggest problem I have with vouchers is that too much of it goes to subsidize tuition for people who are already sending their kids to private school. Its like when we spent half the first stimulus package (under Bush) on accelerated depreciation. It did very little to promote more capital investment and ended up giving a tax break to folks who were already going to make capital investments. Assuming your goal is to spend your education dollars in a manner that will result in the highest level of societal education, vouchers are a very inefficient way of doing that. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2009, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/334 "2009-07-13T22:45:05Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I am not pro-voucher but I think it is OK for tax money to go to private schools if private schools do the job better than public schools. That is why I support properly structured charter programs. > > The biggest problem I have with vouchers is that too much of it goes to subsidize tuition for people who are already sending their kids to private school. Its like when we spent half the first stimulus package (under Bush) on accelerated depreciation. It did very little to promote more capital investment and ended up giving a tax break to folks who were already going to make capital investments. > > Assuming your goal is to spend your education dollars in a manner that will result in the highest level of societal education, vouchers are a very inefficient way of doing that. Seconded - there’s nothing wrong with government subsidation of private entities for good causes, as long as there is sufficient oversight and controls to avoid people deliberately misusing the funds, and as long as the establishment clause et all aren’t violated. The reason to be opposed to vouchers isn’t because of any love for the public school system. It’s because the voucher system is a bad solution all on its own. ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/335 "2009-07-15T05:11:53Z")
> [@](#): > > A sparse handful will go to kids who could get full-cost private schools to give them large scholarships. Hey…I just thought of something…Why couldn’t the private schools simply provide scholarships? Like Phillips Exeter has an established program where poor kids can get full scholarships (room and board) Why involve the government in private enterprise? The very same people who are advocating for vouchers are often the very same people yapping about Big Governent. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/336 "2009-07-15T14:58:47Z")
> [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](#): > > Hey…I just thought of something…Why couldn’t the private schools simply provide scholarships? Like Phillips Exeter has an established program where poor kids can get full scholarships (room and board). In the same way, we can address the problem of runaway Medicare spending by requiring doctors and hospitals to provide care for free. The purpose of the voucher system is to ensure, to the degree possible, that any student can go to the school that his or her parents believe will provide the best education. The major objection seems to be that the parents might decide that the best school is not a public school. To which the same reply is appropriate - so what? > [@](#): > > I think the “Public schools are so bad that we could torture all the children to death and it would be just as good” argument is a load of crap. So do I, which is why it is unfortunate that you felt the need to make it up. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/337 "2009-07-15T20:58:07Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > In the same way, we can address the problem of runaway Medicare spending by requiring doctors and hospitals to provide care for free. Actually he sounded like he wasn’t proposing we forced the schools to offer scholarships; I read it more as “hey, what if they just decided to do it on their own?” And my answer to that is “I have no problem with that - but they don’t seem to want to do that (at least not enough to satisfy the people complaining about private school), do they?” If he _was_ suggesting we _force_ them to offer scholarships to everyone who wants one, without so much as government subsidies, that’s sounds like a quick road to putting them out of business, unless they’re charging crazy amounts beyond their costs from the ones who _do_ pay. > [@Shodan](#): > > The purpose of the voucher system is to ensure, to the degree possible, that any student can go to the school that his or her parents believe will provide the best education. The major objection seems to be that the parents might decide that the best school is not a public school. To which the same reply is appropriate - so what? _“The major objection seems to be that the parents might decide that the best school is not a public school”???_ Have you even been _reading_ this thread? Have you the **slightest** comprehension of the words that have been posted here? Nobody gives a fuck about whether people would rather send their kids to private school. The issue here is that the vouchers that you’re arguing for are a scam that will pay the rich extra without helping their kids in the slightest, that will likely do little to improve things for _anyone_, and _any_ positive effects it may have can be precisely replicated with one or more alternate plans that _don’t_ have the scammerific side effect of paying the rich a bonus to do what they’re already doing. And then you have the gall to pretend _I’m_ mischaracterizing _you_. > [@Shodan](#): > > So do I, which is why it is unfortunate that you felt the need to make it up. I didn’t. You did. I only added a dash of hyperbole - and a rather small one at that, all things considered. > [@Shodan](#): > > My question is, why is that a bad thing? The students at Freddie Wash are already failing. This includes the 25% between the top 15% and the bottom 60%. Whereas, to the extent that the 25% are being dragged down by the bottom 60%, this will not be the case at TIHS. > > So the top 40% get a much better education, and the bottom 60% remain at FWMHS and get, essentially, the same failing education they got before. The only difference is that the top 40 are not dragged down by the bottom 60. **YOU** are the one who is arguing that the reason it’s no problem to pillage public schools is because, and I quote, “The only difference is that the top 40 are not dragged down by the bottom 60.” Your position is **literally** that it’s not possible to reduce the quality of public education. Your argument _relies_ on this in order to pretend that you’re not throwing the poor under the bus, so you can feel better about doing it or something. It’s apalling, really. Both that you would dismiss the possibility that public educators actually get _some_ small amount of effect out of the tax dollars they spend just to make an argument, _and_ that you would blatantly and overtly mischaracterize the arguments of others while accusing others of doing the same. ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2009, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/338 "2009-07-16T02:29:14Z")
> [@](#): > > The biggest problem I have with vouchers is that too much of it goes to subsidize tuition for people who are already sending their kids to private school. AND, in addition it would basicly subsidize suburban acheiver helicopter parents who think that their Wittle Smashlie can do so much better in private school, then in public school. There’s no guarentee that the vouchers will go to kids who REALLY need it. And no…I don’t believe that private schools should give scholarships to everyone wanting them. Just that they should do a Phillips Exeter type of set up and recruit talented poor students from the inner city…and most private schools can afford it since many if not most of them are basicly hedge funds with a school attached. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2009, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/339 "2009-07-16T12:08:44Z")
> [@](#): > > There’s no guarentee that the vouchers will go to kids who REALLY need it. How so? Vouchers should go to all parents. > [@begbert2](#): > > And then you have the gall to pretend _I’m_ mischaracterizing _you_. Actually, yes, you are, and quite badly too. Here’s another example - > [@](#): > > Your position is **literally** that it’s not possible to reduce the quality of public education. Frankly, this kind of thing is so idiotic that it is clear that you aren’t willing to actually address anything. To respond to a suggestion that parents and students should have an option by screaming “YOU WANT TO TORTURE CHILDREN!!!”? If that’s the best you can do, then the case against vouchers fails by default. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2009, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908/340 "2009-07-16T14:00:17Z")
> [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](#): > > FYI, the reason why public education tends to appear to be more expensive is simple. The people “calculating the costs” are figuring in the costs of things like building maintance, physical plants, and upkeep that can eat a HUGE hunk of money away especially in those communities like East St Louis where they can’t exactly afford new schools. > And sorry, but I don’t agree with the statement that if education was totally free market, poor kids would still have access to education. Pre-1900’s, a LOT of the poor kids were in factories (child labor anyone?) Heck, look at the sittuion in Africa or India right now. A LOT of poor kids aren’t getting ANY education. In addition, under federal law, education is an unqualified right. Meaning that if your kid is so massively disabled that he can’t move, talk, or breathe on his own, or if he is such a psychopath that he has to be in a group home, the town still has to pay to provide him with an “appropriate” education. It is the king of all unfunded mandates. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/school-choice-and-vouchers/500908.md?page=18)