Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder
This criticism would have a lot more bite had we not just concluded that the proposed changes haven't been shown to work (and might actually hurt).
And more so if defunding public school wasn't a goal of some on the right in their its own right.
|
But if the schools are going to suck whether we spend $9K/student or $24K/student like in Newark, is it not a better use of public resources for the schools to suck for less money?
It reminds me of a lady who tried to tell me that I was horribly selfish for sending my kids to Catholic school because the local district lost federal money for fewer students. She could not be persuaded that, despite the reduced federal money, the fact that I was paying many thousands per year to the local school district, and the fact that they weren't spending $30K/year to educate my kids more than made up for it, but whatever.
The problem is actually not the schools. The schools are already being asked to do too much that is not related to educating kids. If kids came to school ready to learn, that alone would be a huge improvement. The impact of a lack of parental responsibility and engagement cannot be overcome just by programs or actions in the public schools. It doesn't take a village, it takes parents with standards and expectations who give a crap about their kids. It's pretty hard to break the cycle of multi-generational dependency. But beyond that, it is almost impossible to help people who don't really want to change anything.
I am not a huge fan of Paul Ryan, but I support his ideas for reforming welfare and other benefits such that work is not as regressively punitive to the recipient and provides support to become independent, and doesn't just cut off so quickly that work is a net negative, making it harder to ever break free.
