Should Private School (k-12) be Abolished in the United States?

[Deus Naturae]

Out of curiosity, is there any non-dictatorship where private education is illegal?

[Cassius]

Yes, of course. It's impossible for "equality of opportunity" to exist as long as private schools exist.

No child deserves a better education just because their parents make more money or have better connections.

Why not?

Yes, of course. It's impossible for "equality of opportunity" to exist as long as private schools exist.

No child deserves a better education just because their parents make more money or have better connections.

And yet that would happen even without private schools, just based on geography.

This is very true of course. An school which happens to cater to a generally affluent area will see better results (after all, wealthy parents can afford tutoring and, if the child is so inclined, lots of books).

[Hatman 🍁]

Yes, of course. It's impossible for "equality of opportunity" to exist as long as private schools exist.

No child deserves a better education just because their parents make more money or have better connections.

And yet that would happen even without private schools, just based on geography.

This is a good point of course, but would be rectified by other measures. I wouldn't implement busing practices, but I would like to see more affluent communities better integrated by including working class housing. Abolishing private schools would only be one part of a plan of implementing "equality of opportunity" for all.

I can understand the resistance in the US to such an idea, especially on a forum full of Whites who went to private schools. The public education system in the US is so deplorable, that the idea of forcing everyone to go to a public school sounds horrible. Such a move would require a huge overhaul in the public education system first, of course.

Keep in mind I am coming at this from a Canadian perspective. Very few Canadians send their children to private schools. Even the Prime Minister, a conservative, sends his children to a public school (though, it is located in the richest area of town, as that's where his official residence is).

[dead0man]

I can understand the resistance in the US to such an idea, especially on a forum full of Whites who went to private schools. The public education system in the US is so deplorable, that the idea of forcing everyone to go to a public school sounds horrible. Such a move would require a huge overhaul in the public education system first, of course.

I'm pretty sure we've done the poll before and we overwhelming went to public school.  The US public school system has problems, no doubt, but the typical school district isn't a trainwreck* and actually does a fairly decent job at educating.  Yes, there are some horrid school districts, and they bring the numbers for everybody else down, but they are the exception, not the rule.




*some have large financial issues coming to a head thanks to some stupid pension deals, but those are largely correctable

[DemPGH]

No, but I think home schooling and charter schooling should be, and this business of online school or whatever should be seriously looked into. I can't help but doubt the rigor of that. There are other options available, like Sylvan Learning schools and so on (basically glorified tutoring), but I'm not sure of cost.

But as to private schools, some of them are excellent and they're not all religious either.  

[Indy Texas]

I can understand the resistance in the US to such an idea, especially on a forum full of Whites who went to private schools. The public education system in the US is so deplorable, that the idea of forcing everyone to go to a public school sounds horrible. Such a move would require a huge overhaul in the public education system first, of course.

I think this explains a lot. Moreover, sending your kids to a decent public school in the US can be more expensive than paying for a private education when you consider the cost of purchasing a house and paying taxes in the country's best school districts. I'm surprised that there isn't a significant market for micro-apartments where families could maintain a legal primary residence in some of these places.

There's a market for regular apartments that families then sublease to someone else so they can have their name on a lease and a water bill with an address in the right district.

I grew up in a well-to-do neighborhood that was zoned to a very mediocre high school. It was right on the district boundary so that if you were just across the bayou half a mile you'd be in a much nicer district with much better schools. As a result, a lot of families either sent their kids to private school (as mine did), or would lease a really cheap apartment in the other district and then sublease it to someone else (preferably someone without kids) and use the proof of residency to allow their kids to attend the other high school.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I can understand the resistance in the US to such an idea, especially on a forum full of Whites who went to private schools. The public education system in the US is so deplorable, that the idea of forcing everyone to go to a public school sounds horrible. Such a move would require a huge overhaul in the public education system first, of course.

I think this explains a lot. Moreover, sending your kids to a decent public school in the US can be more expensive than paying for a private education when you consider the cost of purchasing a house and paying taxes in the country's best school districts. I'm surprised that there isn't a significant market for micro-apartments where families could maintain a legal primary residence in some of these places.

There's a market for regular apartments that families then sublease to someone else so they can have their name on a lease and a water bill with an address in the right district.

I grew up in a well-to-do neighborhood that was zoned to a very mediocre high school. It was right on the district boundary so that if you were just across the bayou half a mile you'd be in a much nicer district with much better schools. As a result, a lot of families either sent their kids to private school (as mine did), or would lease a really cheap apartment in the other district and then sublease it to someone else (preferably someone without kids) and use the proof of residency to allow their kids to attend the other high school.

My parents wanted to do this to keep my brother out of the drug filled Catholic High School and drug filled public school. They didn't since the state has really been cracking down on this, and as a result, my brother went to the horrible public school. He got out of rehab today....

[Indy Texas]

I can understand the resistance in the US to such an idea, especially on a forum full of Whites who went to private schools. The public education system in the US is so deplorable, that the idea of forcing everyone to go to a public school sounds horrible. Such a move would require a huge overhaul in the public education system first, of course.

I think this explains a lot. Moreover, sending your kids to a decent public school in the US can be more expensive than paying for a private education when you consider the cost of purchasing a house and paying taxes in the country's best school districts. I'm surprised that there isn't a significant market for micro-apartments where families could maintain a legal primary residence in some of these places.

There's a market for regular apartments that families then sublease to someone else so they can have their name on a lease and a water bill with an address in the right district.

I grew up in a well-to-do neighborhood that was zoned to a very mediocre high school. It was right on the district boundary so that if you were just across the bayou half a mile you'd be in a much nicer district with much better schools. As a result, a lot of families either sent their kids to private school (as mine did), or would lease a really cheap apartment in the other district and then sublease it to someone else (preferably someone without kids) and use the proof of residency to allow their kids to attend the other high school.

My parents wanted to do this to keep my brother out of the drug filled Catholic High School and drug filled public school. They didn't since the state has really been cracking down on this, and as a result, my brother went to the horrible public school. He got out of rehab today....

In their defense, they're contributing to the district tax base with the property taxes that are implicitly included in the cost of their rent. Whether or not they actually live in the apartment they lease has no bearing on that.

Of course, in Texas, public schools are funded via local property taxes. I don't know what the situation is in Florida.

[DC Al Fine]

Of course not. I'm not sure how anyone can claim they support a free society while trying to force their neighbour to educate his children in a particular way.

[Simfan34]

Of course not. Everyone is still paying taxes to fund schools, so it's not as if the public system is being deprived of funds. This is a rather strange suggestion. I'm not really seeing a reason given for this beyond "equality of opportunity", which is disingenuous. It really is the same logic that led to busing.

But even stranger is the suggestion we should ban charter schools... why? It's as if those suggesting this want to wantonly eliminate any and all positive elements of the education system. The problem with education in this country is not a lack of funding.

Yet another strange idea is prohibiting selective schools. Where's the logic in that? Many times selective public schools are the sole means for inner city children to receive a quality education.

[SWE]

Yes

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Yes

Care to explain besides "muh equality?"

[Franzl]

Yes

Care to explain besides "muh equality?"

Not that I oppose private schools, but wouldn't your argument be "muh freedom"?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Yes

Care to explain besides "muh equality?"

Not that I oppose private schools, but wouldn't your argument be "muh freedom"?

At the core, yes, but I have practical reasons why private schools are important. It seems the opposition comes from kneejerk reactions in the name of equality instead of arguments that private education somehow doesn't provide a decent education.

[Franzl]

Yes

Care to explain besides "muh equality?"

Not that I oppose private schools, but wouldn't your argument be "muh freedom"?

At the core, yes, but I have practical reasons why private schools are important. It seems the opposition comes from kneejerk reactions in the name of equality instead of arguments that private education somehow doesn't provide a decent education.

Well, if equality is of primary importance to you, why should one have to show that private education isn't good? That it's good is the point, or rather that it's better than most can afford.

Again, I don't agree that that's a good reason to ban private education, but it's not that the opponents aren't arguing properly.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Yes

Care to explain besides "muh equality?"

Not that I oppose private schools, but wouldn't your argument be "muh freedom"?

At the core, yes, but I have practical reasons why private schools are important. It seems the opposition comes from kneejerk reactions in the name of equality instead of arguments that private education somehow doesn't provide a decent education.

Well, if equality is of primary importance to you, why should one have to show that private education isn't good? That it's good is the point, or rather that it's better than most can afford.

Again, I don't agree that that's a good reason to ban private education, but it's not that the opponents aren't arguing properly.

A good solution that I think many of these people could support is government funded scholarships for lower income students. We already have them, in fact, but they could be expanded.

[ingemann]

Yes, of course. It's impossible for "equality of opportunity" to exist as long as private schools exist.

No child deserves a better education just because their parents make more money or have better connections.

Unless you plan to remove all children from their parents and raise them in orphanage, the children will still get those benefits.

[Franzl]

Yes

Care to explain besides "muh equality?"

Not that I oppose private schools, but wouldn't your argument be "muh freedom"?

At the core, yes, but I have practical reasons why private schools are important. It seems the opposition comes from kneejerk reactions in the name of equality instead of arguments that private education somehow doesn't provide a decent education.

Well, if equality is of primary importance to you, why should one have to show that private education isn't good? That it's good is the point, or rather that it's better than most can afford.

Again, I don't agree that that's a good reason to ban private education, but it's not that the opponents aren't arguing properly.

A good solution that I think many of these people could support is government funded scholarships for lower income students. We already have them, in fact, but they could be expanded.

The proper solution would be to improve the public education system, particularly the awful, awful way it's funded in the US. That alone is the root of so many problems.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

If any1 says yes, they are an idiot and a threat to education

Using the term "any1" in place of "anyone" doesn't help your case.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Yes, because then people will start to care about improving public schools instead of just yelling "VOUCHERS!" and running away from the problem.

[angus]

If any1 says yes, they are an idiot and a threat to education

Using the term "any1" in place of "anyone" doesn't help your case.

More importantly, nor does the use of the second-personal plural pronoun "they" with the antecedent of any1, *especially* with the emphasis on "1" (although that may have been intentional.)

Nevertheless, I say no.

[Deus Naturae]

Yes, because then people will start to care about improving public schools instead of just yelling "VOUCHERS!" and running away from the problem.

As opposed to yelling "MOAR FUNDING" even though the quality of education has continually declined as the Federal government has poured more money into the system?

[Simfan34]

Yes, because then people will start to care about improving public schools instead of just yelling "VOUCHERS!" and running away from the problem.

As opposed to yelling "MOAR FUNDING" even though the quality of education has continually declined as the Federal government has poured more money into the system?

This is an important point.

[Indy Texas]

Yes, because then people will start to care about improving public schools instead of just yelling "VOUCHERS!" and running away from the problem.

As opposed to yelling "MOAR FUNDING" even though the quality of education has continually declined as the Federal government has poured more money into the system?

This is an important point.

The federal government began pouring money into the system when it was decided that every American child ought to be obliged to complete high school.

Prior to the 1960s, by the time you got to high school, all of the "problem kids" or the kids who were likely learning disabled or otherwise academically disinclined had dropped out. The only kids who were left actually wanted to be there, for the most part.

[Franzl]

Yes, because then people will start to care about improving public schools instead of just yelling "VOUCHERS!" and running away from the problem.

As opposed to yelling "MOAR FUNDING" even though the quality of education has continually declined as the Federal government has poured more money into the system?

This is an important point.

The federal government began pouring money into the system when it was decided that every American child ought to be obliged to complete high school.

But in reality, how is anyone supposed to function today without at the very minimum an American high school education? Internationally, it's really not at a high academic standard (at least without APs).

I have trouble imagining how you wouldn't be condemning everyone who doesn't finish high school to a pretty terrible economic outlook.