Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

The Republican case for the Universal Basic IncomeFollow

#152 Jan 23 2014 at 11:45 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Jophiel wrote:
[quote=someproteinguy]The real question is how can we make this same successful model work for elementary education?

Combine it with the lucrative private prison model.

Get um hooked early.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#153 Jan 23 2014 at 12:38 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Hey now. The for-profit higher education industry is doing gangbusters. Sure, they lie to prospective students about graduation rates and job opportunities, use hard-sell tactics to pressure them into financing through the schools, have them rack up enormous debt and have atrocious graduation rates (for degrees that really aren't worth much) but... umm... they're successful at making money! Capitalism works! The real question is how can we make this same successful model work for elementary education?

Online kindergarten is the key, I just know it.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#154 Jan 23 2014 at 12:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Pokemath.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#155 Jan 23 2014 at 12:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Online kindergarten is the key, I just know it.

Kindergarten of Canary -- Graduate in as little as 5 months!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#156 Jan 23 2014 at 1:07 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,159 posts
Perhaps we could spice things up with some rap?

I earned my PhD/in the K of G
You kids is stuck/back in KS3;
Going potty to pee?/ I just inked a whole tree
You kids is ******* Like a ******* choirboy/
In the C of E.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#157 Jan 23 2014 at 1:32 PM Rating: Excellent
So this is a thing. It may help with the online kindergarten.

[link=http://www.amazon.com/CTA-Digital-iPotty-Activity-Seat/dp/**********************

Screenshot
#158 Jan 23 2014 at 1:39 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Poo to play
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#159 Jan 23 2014 at 2:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
So this is a thing. It may help with the online kindergarten.

We got our little guy a Nabi tablet (basically an Android tablet with a thick bumper and child/parent modes & controls). He loves that damn thing. I need to learn to leverage that better.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#160 Jan 28 2014 at 8:57 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
No one in the private sector actually attempts to compete for public education funds on anything remotely resembling an open market (charter schools aren't even close).
Because there's not a lot of money in it?


Well, there's a vast amount of money in it, but only if you create some kind of voucher system. Right now, all those public education dollars can only be spent on schools that the respective departments of education choose (ie: on public schools). Even charter schools are still selected for funding by said organizations.

Because of this fact, competition for the majority of students is stunted. Any private school option essentially starts with the parent choosing to throw away the "free" education dollars that the public school system offers (and their portion of taxes which paid for it), and then choose to spend more money on top of that. Very few people will do that. Which is why typically you only see people send their kids to private school because they are rich or really want their kids to receive some form of religious education.

A voucher system is a way to introduce competition for those education dollars. Any system which doesn't address the dollars present in the public school system can't possibly work.

Quote:
Take out the higher education and vocational schools, remove the gifted children who have parents with extra motivation to fund them, take out those with enough income to afford premium services, and you're left with a bunch of mediocre students who have little ambition to compete in a game they can't win, and parents who aren't going to throw much needed family funds down that sinkhole.


Which is why you divvy up the money currently spent by the public school system into vouchers for each child and let the parents choose where to spend them. They're not spending their own money. They're spending the public funds which would otherwise have been spent anyway. We're just changing how we decide to spend those dollars is all.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#161 Jan 29 2014 at 7:48 AM Rating: Good
Very few people do that because, if you want to spend the money on quality education, there actually isn't a lot of wiggle room in the overheard. Teachers, classrooms, and school staff cost $$$. Public schools are considered to be doing well when they break even.

When you try to make extra money on top of the costs of educating the kids, it doesn't work out that well. Not just because parents have to pay extra to send kids there, but because they also have to pad the pockets of the people who are trying to use the endeavor to make money, too.
#162 Jan 29 2014 at 12:43 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Because of this fact, competition for the majority of students is stunted. Any private school option essentially starts with the parent choosing to throw away the "free" education dollars that the public school system offers (and their portion of taxes which paid for it), and then choose to spend more money on top of that. Very few people will do that

Yeah, very few. A piddling 5 or 6 million.

A voucher system is a way to introduce competition for those education dollars. Any system which doesn't address the dollars present in the public school system can't possibly work.

Been tried. Failed miserably. Time after time. Not an open question. Not up for debate. Private schools do not educate children to a higher level or more cost effectively than public schools do. All done now, nothing else to pretend to continue this line of thinking. Theory - experiment - conclusion - replication. All complete. Doesn't work. Does. Not. Work. Sorry your fantasy idea turned out to not function in reality the way you'd hoped, but it didn't. Destroying the lives of more children won't fix that.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#163 Jan 29 2014 at 1:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Been tried. Failed miserably. Time after time. Not an open question. Not up for debate. Private schools do not educate children to a higher level or more cost effectively than public schools do. All done now, nothing else to pretend to continue this line of thinking.

Gbaji doesn't want better grades, he wants open markets and weakened unions and the like. Which is why his arguments for this boil down to "Sure, it might be terribly complicated and a disaster for years but if in the end parents can pick between schools A and B (neither of which actually offers better education) then isn't it all worth it?"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#164 Jan 29 2014 at 1:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
Been tried. Failed miserably. Time after time. Not an open question. Not up for debate. Private schools do not educate children to a higher level or more cost effectively than public schools do. All done now, nothing else to pretend to continue this line of thinking.

Gbaji doesn't want better grades, he wants open markets and weakened unions and the like. Which is why his arguments for this boil down to "Sure, it might be terribly complicated and a disaster for years but if in the end parents can pick between schools A and B (neither of which actually offers better education) then isn't it all worth it?"
If it helps it probably wouldn't matter anyway. It's not as if we really need more college-educated people applying for seasonal jobs at Macy's.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#165 Jan 29 2014 at 2:32 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
If it helps it probably wouldn't matter anyway. It's not as if we really need more college-educated people applying for seasonal jobs at Macy's.

No, no, those are just Sociology PhDs. 2 week certificate in plugging USB cables in, you're set for life.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#166 Jan 29 2014 at 3:07 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
My daughters bf - PhD in Pop Culture (yes there is such a thing). He's doing copy-editing.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#167 Jan 29 2014 at 3:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
My daughters bf - PhD in Pop Culture (yes there is such a thing). He's doing copy-editing.

For Tiger Beat?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#168 Jan 29 2014 at 5:53 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Catwho wrote:
Very few people do that because, if you want to spend the money on quality education, there actually isn't a lot of wiggle room in the overheard. Teachers, classrooms, and school staff cost $$$. Public schools are considered to be doing well when they break even.


Given that public schools are not for profit, then by definition any amount of money spent on them is always "breaking even". It's a meaningless concept. You can't actually assess whether public schools are grossly wasting money or being very efficient because there's no metric to use. This is precisely why for profit systems work better.

Quote:
When you try to make extra money on top of the costs of educating the kids, it doesn't work out that well. Not just because parents have to pay extra to send kids there, but because they also have to pad the pockets of the people who are trying to use the endeavor to make money, too.


I'd suggest that the massive padding of pockets to union bosses and politicians campaigns puts a hell of a lot of overhead into our current costs. The key difference is that the private schools profits are going to be based on whether they provide education that parents want to pay for, while the current folks who are getting their pockets padded are more or less rewarded as long as they maintain the public system. Quality of education isn't even a consideration.

I'll also point out that right now the reason why private schools are expensive and rare is because they have to complete with "free". They must provide something significantly better than the public school (which means it'll cost more). No one would pay money for a private school that provided "just as good" an education as the free public school. That's why private schools don't compete for that market. Put vouchers in place, and they can.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#169 Jan 29 2014 at 5:56 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Been tried. Failed miserably. Time after time. Not an open question. Not up for debate.


Has never been tried. Not once. Ever.


Quote:
Private schools do not educate children to a higher level or more cost effectively than public schools do.


Of course they do. If they didn't, no one would choose to pay their tuition. Unless you have some new definition of "more cost effective" which doesn't include some sort of cost choices made by the consumer that is? Proofs kinda in the pudding, isn't it?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#170 Jan 29 2014 at 6:03 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Of course they do. If they didn't, no one would choose to pay their tuition.

They really don't. Even the elite ones don't send a higher percentage of kids to tier 1 universities than public exam schools do. People pay the tuition, in the main, because the public schools in their area are underfunded and suck. Some small percentage of people send their kids to very expensive private schools not for the quality of the education but for the connections later in life. All of the Saint Grottlsex schools are ****, but you get to live with 500 other wealthy kids with powerful parents, which is far more important in the long run.

Has never been tried. Not once. Ever.

Right, I forgot, you don't understand math. My mistake, carry on.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#171 Jan 29 2014 at 6:43 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Adding back in the statement I was responding to, just so that we're all on the same page here.

gbaji wrote:
Quote:
Private schools do not educate children to a higher level or more cost effectively than public schools do.


Of course they do. If they didn't, no one would choose to pay their tuition. Unless you have some new definition of "more cost effective" which doesn't include some sort of cost choices made by the consumer that is? Proofs kinda in the pudding, isn't it?


Smasharoo wrote:
Of course they do. If they didn't, no one would choose to pay their tuition.

They really don't. Even the elite ones don't send a higher percentage of kids to tier 1 universities than public exam schools do. People pay the tuition, in the main, because the public schools in their area are underfunded and suck.


So for those parents, it's worth paying the price for the private school. Presumably because the delta between that private school and the public school they'd have to send their child to is significant enough to make the cost worth it. So what about that makes you think that my earlier statement is incorrect? If those parents didn't think that the private school was "more cost effective", they would not have paid the money for it.


Quote:
Some small percentage of people send their kids to very expensive private schools not for the quality of the education but for the connections later in life. All of the Saint Grottlsex schools are sh*t, but you get to live with 500 other wealthy kids with powerful parents, which is far more important in the long run.


So some sort of cost choices made by the consumer, right? I mean, if I think that paying $30k/year to send my kid to a school is worth it because he'll rub elbows with folks who'll provide him with valuable contacts later in life, then I've made the decision that it's worth it.

Do you understand yet?

Quote:
Has never been tried. Not once. Ever.

Right, I forgot, you don't understand math. My mistake, carry on.


And yet, I'm still waiting for you to actually provide an example of it having actually been tried. You repeating "it's been tried and failed!" over and over isn't terribly convincing.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#172 Jan 29 2014 at 6:54 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

So for those parents, it's worth paying the price for the private school. Presumably because the delta between that private school and the public school they'd have to send their child to is significant enough to make the cost worth it.


Nah, that's not how that decision is made. It's usually more along the lines of "I don't want my kids to have to go to school with <ethnic group I don't like>s kids"

And yet, I'm still waiting for you to actually provide an example of it having actually been tried.

I did. You know what's sometimes helpful in these sorts of discussions? Reading the posts.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#173 Jan 29 2014 at 8:39 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Reading the posts.
High hopes.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#174 Jan 30 2014 at 5:28 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Gbaji wrote:
Given that public schools are not for profit, then by definition any amount of money spent on them is always "breaking even". It's a meaningless concept. You can't actually assess whether public schools are grossly wasting money or being very efficient because there's no metric to use. This is precisely why for profit systems work better.

I'm going to assume that I'm missing something. Please explain how nonprofits can't waste money? Just because you aren't taking in money, doesn't mean that money isn't spent on them.
#175 Jan 30 2014 at 7:22 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:

So for those parents, it's worth paying the price for the private school. Presumably because the delta between that private school and the public school they'd have to send their child to is significant enough to make the cost worth it. So what about that makes you think that my earlier statement is incorrect? If those parents didn't think that the private school was "more cost effective", they would not have paid the money for it.

The delta between what you presume and what may be reality is inversely proportional to iota.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#176 Jan 30 2014 at 8:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
So some sort of cost choices made by the consumer, right? I mean, if I think that paying $30k/year to send my kid to a school is worth it because he'll rub elbows with folks who'll provide him with valuable contacts later in life, then I've made the decision that it's worth it.

Sure, but since he's using vouchers with my tax money, I don't think it's worth it to pay to go to a school that isn't excelling in educating but rather in building connections. Now, if this guy wants to pay out of his own pocket to send his kids to that sort of school... Hey! He can do that right now! The system works! Sure, he'll still have to pay public school taxes, just like everyone else does whether they have children or not and just like everyone pays for a multitude of things they may or may not use or appreciate. That's sorta part of living in a society.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 459 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (459)