Most Helpful Opinions
Of course, it's necessary. I strongly agree.
Otherwise all we would have are private, tuition-based schools, and not everyone would be able to afford that.11
All three are tax generated funds, so yeah. Necessary.
Would be awesome if billionaires paid their taxes and funded the lot. Pretty sure Musk had some to spare before he spent his "non-existent" money to buy Twitter instead of paying his taxes or ending world hunger like he proposed.11
This country can't afford to have uneducated people. So yes its important for the future of our country and world yes education is important11
What Girls & Guys Said
Believe it or not Public education is only a few hundred years old, in many states its not even that old.
Its also insanely expensive, depending on your state your spending between $7,000 to $23,000 per student per year. With Utah being the least expensive and New York being the most expensive, that is $120,000 to $690,000 per class room per year.
I uses to work for a State department of education, and you would be shocked just how much red tape they have with so many difference sources of money from different governments each demanding they jump thou different hoops to get it.
Insolently this is also why there has been soo little innovation in education.
Particularly since the Fed's got involved in the 1950's effectively ending much of the real reform driven by interstate competition.
States can't major reforms such as abandoning the industrial model in favor of a more natural smaller school environment because of federal strings.10
It is necessary because the people who have the money to fund it privately won't invest their money in it as it has no direct benefit for them. They won't get any return on the investment, plus few people who have that kind of cash would do that level of charity.10
Since most states are doing such a lousy job, why not just give Americans their money back and let local jurisdictions build and manage their own schools.
This is becoming embarrassing. Other nations are leaving us behind. So instead of giving the government the ability to make us collectively stupid, let the stupid people be as stupid and as ignorant as they wish, while the rest of us can get a decent education.10
School system is broken, I don't want to pay a damn cent to help the schools unless I know the money is going to a good cause, school renovations isn't helping, just giving the school a makeover, I just know these schools don't use the money to help the students, they just use the money to help the school thrive, which is different10
Bo I'm into prostate schooling or homeschooling
Give me the tax dollars and ill fund my kids schooling.
On top of the fact the internet is a better teacher and has programs to teach.
Or I'll use the funding for a tutors. That's what I plan on doing for my future kids11
*Deep down wanting high school not to exists*310
Yes I agree, strongly! I don’t think we should EVER get back to the days where if your kid didn't have her money on Monday morning, she went home until she DID have the money whatever10
I'm guessing this question is in response to that Karen looking Fox host or guest13
No one likes paying taxes. But if school was not paid for, there would be more maniacs around raising hell. We have enough already.10
Taxes to fund public high schools is necessary. ALL government public services are paid by taxes. However, WHERE those funds goes and how they are distributed needs to change.10
Disagree, they should use the endless funds they find and use to bail out and hire, buy, trick and cojole those same indoctrinated darlings who protest and riot10
It should be a high priority BUT to me it's so corrupted! In California schools were to get a % of the lottery yet they never seen a dime!10
I actually hate paying for it. I don't have kids. I find a lot of school subjects are useless in life. And people that do have a ton of kids that rent, don't even pay school taxes, is what really gets under my skin.10
I agree.. not strongly because I don't know so much about politics...10
I would certainly not want the churches paying for it...10
I agree but there must also be control over what they teach and how to get state funding.10
It's definitely necessary, the money isn't going to come from anywhere else.10
If school actually taught kids important life skills instead of useless crap then yes. But it doesn't so...10
I I agree that we need to pay taxes. But when administrative staff out number and out waged the teachers. The administrative staff needs to be released.10
And for those of you that disagree, you had your education where?20
Most Helpful Opinions
I lean towards "agree" although I went with "undecided". Ideally, I think it should be the responsibility of the parents to pay for their children's education. Yet there are children of parents who have children they can't afford and children who even lack parents outright in care.
Those children are innocent and ought to be able to have access to education. In these types of cases, I prefer something like UBI over negative income tax: that is to say, a welfare system that provides services to everyone regardless of their income. I think it becomes politically less divisive that way.
That said, I'm strongly in favor of school vouchers at least so that the $12,000 year or so spent in tax dollars on students can be used at any school of their choice whether it's a public school, private school, or charter school. I think that would especially help children in the inner cities; $12,000/year should be more than enough for them to get an excellent education at a school that most suits them.
One of the biggest problems I find with public schools in the US is that they lack a strong incentive to provide quality education since they receive tax dollars regardless of their performance and get assigned students by the district in which they live. Wealthy families can bypass that and send their children to private schools if the public school in their district is doing poorly for their child, but children of lower classes lack this luxury.
A school voucher system would offer this type of school choice even to the lower classes, and it should place some healthy competitive pressure on public schools to provide quality education to their students. This way, even if a child of modest means is doing poorly at a particular school for whatever reason (bad teachers, bullying, whatever the case may be), they have the option to go to another and turn their lives around.
A common counter-argument I see to this is that it might allow parents of modest means to send children to ideological schools of their choice, like religious clown schools that teach "Intelligent Design" instead of actual biology. I could see that happening in some cases but I don't think it's going to be the common case, and I don't think this possibility alone should prevent children of modest means in inner cities from receiving a decent education because they're hopelessly stuck with the one assigned to them and no means to seek alternative options.