Australian Politics Forum - Should taxpayer pay for private education?

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 120089
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #135 - May 11^th, 2012 at 12:30am

Nail,
Quote:

yes I do. I know people in the industry and have heard all of the horror stories. And you misunderstand Montessori. Montessori teaching is non discriminant and is not exclusive to wealthy people because it was originally aimed at people who couldn't afford a decent education for their kids. There maybe some Montessori schools charging like wounded bulls simply because there is no competition so they can charge what they like.

There is no reason why all child care centers could not adopt Montessori at no extra cost. At the price some of these child care centers are charging parents they should be offering a much higher level of learning than they are.

Hear hear Nail,
Kids should start school at 5,
already knowing the alphabet &
how to count to 10 etc.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 53170
At my desk.

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #136 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:10am

Sir lastnail wrote on May 10^th, 2012 at 11:32pm:

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2012 at 9:48pm:

Quote:

and play based learning for infants and pres-school is rubbish and a wasted opportunity of brain development.

Do you have any actual evidence for this that goes beyond shifting the goal posts to make money for proponents of expensive 'alternative' education methods?

The scientific community has looked into this, and found that any evidence of benefit disappears after a few years.

yes I do. I know people in the industry and have heard all of the horror stories. And you misunderstand Montessori. Montessori teaching is non discriminant and is not exclusive to wealthy people because it was originally aimed at people who couldn't afford a decent education for their kids. There maybe some Montessori schools charging like wounded bulls simply because there is no competition so they can charge what they like.

There is no reason why all child care centers could not adopt Montessori at no extra cost. At the price some of these child care centers are charging parents they should be offering a much higher level of learning than they are.

You seem to have completely missed the question Nail. I am not asking aabout cost-benefit. I am asking you if there is any real evidence of a benefit (the same things i have asked a dozen times already). The damage done to children's social and physical development is far more significant that the financial cost.

Like I said, the scientific community has looked into the outcomes and found that all benefit disappears. That is, other children catch up in primary, so the efffort put into teaching children when they are obviously far too young is wasted. That is why all the evidence you will find in favour is based only on short term outcomes.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26588
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #137 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:43am

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2012 at 7:58pm:

Quote:

Thats what i said. INVEST MORE IN EDUCATION. How does that translate in any way to giving children a worse education?

Have you changed your mind about ending private school subsidies? Or are you completely oblivious to the dozen or so times where I have pointed out that the two issues are entirely separable? Oh wait, the bit you quoted was actually about ending private schooling and implied no net increase in the education budget. So I guess you are still completely oblivious to the main argument about how this would result in a decrease in funding per student. It is not like this is some complicated accounting.

Lets try yet again for Borg: when those students shift to the public system, they will go from being partly subsidised to wholly subsidised. That means less money spent per student, because money has to be taken from the students that were already public to increase the new arrivals, and the new arrivals get a massive cut because the parents are not paying extra any more. That means every student gets a worse education.

As I have also pointed out, this argument does not change if the total education budget changes. They are two separate issues. Unless you think it is impossible to spend more on education without getting rid of private schools.

I'm not sure how I can spell this out any clearer for you SOB. I honestly can not understand why you are still so oblivious to what we have been saying for a dozen pages.

Quote:

but private schools can provide their own funding and the money can go to public schools

This is where reality kicks in SOB. If you cut the subsidies, most parents would send their children to public schools instead. Not just because it is a kick in the guts for them to have to pay for public schooling via taxes and pay all over again because they don't get their fair share - but also because they simply could not afford it. Most parents who send their children to private schools are regular people without a bottomless bank account who make genuine sacrifices for the better education.

Quote:

If we were to get rid of private schools altogether there would still be more money left over for the public schools

No there would not, because all those private school students would be in public schools. The total amount going to public schools may go up, but the amount per student goes down.

Quote:

and the government is pretty good with moving money around and they can find more money for public schools if it will make them better.

Like I said Borg, they can do this whether they ban private schools or not. It is a completely separate issue.

Stop calling me stupid. You know i get your "point" i just disagree.

you have not provided any evidence to support your opinion either so mine is just as valid.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26588 Australia	Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education? Reply #138 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:44am Quotes went wrong somehow
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26588
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #139 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #140 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:04am

Bobby. wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 12:30am:

Nail,
Quote:

yes I do. I know people in the industry and have heard all of the horror stories. And you misunderstand Montessori. Montessori teaching is non discriminant and is not exclusive to wealthy people because it was originally aimed at people who couldn't afford a decent education for their kids. There maybe some Montessori schools charging like wounded bulls simply because there is no competition so they can charge what they like.

There is no reason why all child care centers could not adopt Montessori at no extra cost. At the price some of these child care centers are charging parents they should be offering a much higher level of learning than they are.

Hear hear Nail,
Kids should start school at 5,
already knowing the alphabet &
how to count to 10 etc.

why? being able to repeat by rote is no indication of understanding and as has already been shown that the relative benfit disappears vry quickly. in the meantime, play-based learning has already shown greater social skills development.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #141 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26588
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #142 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #143 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26588
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #144 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:51am

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

No I am not saying that @ all. Read and comprehend. I am saying it doesnt matter whether its cheaper or not since its supposedly the childrens education we are investing in. Spend what we have to to make public schools decent.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #145 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:04am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

No I am not saying that @ all. Read and comprehend. I am saying it doesnt matter whether its cheaper or not since its supposedly the childrens education we are investing in. Spend what we have to to make public schools decent.

SOB

thanks for making my point. That isnt nor has it even been the topic under discussion.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26588
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #146 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:08am

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:04am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

No I am not saying that @ all. Read and comprehend. I am saying it doesnt matter whether its cheaper or not since its supposedly the childrens education we are investing in. Spend what we have to to make public schools decent.

SOB

thanks for making my point. That isnt nor has it even been the topic under discussion.

I have been saying that ALL ALONG but you obviously cant read or comprehend.

How many socks do you have?

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #147 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:12am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:08am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:04am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

No I am not saying that @ all. Read and comprehend. I am saying it doesnt matter whether its cheaper or not since its supposedly the childrens education we are investing in. Spend what we have to to make public schools decent.

SOB

thanks for making my point. That isnt nor has it even been the topic under discussion.

I have been saying that ALL ALONG but you obviously cant read or comprehend.

How many socks do you have?

SOB

Do you accept that ending the subsidy of private schools would require MORE govt funding for public schools than it saves?

Im just trying to see if it is possible to get you to actually answer a direct question with a direct answer.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26588
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #148 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:57am

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:12am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:08am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:04am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

No I am not saying that @ all. Read and comprehend. I am saying it doesnt matter whether its cheaper or not since its supposedly the childrens education we are investing in. Spend what we have to to make public schools decent.

SOB

thanks for making my point. That isnt nor has it even been the topic under discussion.

I have been saying that ALL ALONG but you obviously cant read or comprehend.

How many socks do you have?

SOB

Do you accept that ending the subsidy of private schools would require MORE govt funding for public schools than it saves?

Im just trying to see if it is possible to get you to actually answer a direct question with a direct answer.

No why should i take your word for it? You havent provided me any evidence of such a thing.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #149 - May 11^th, 2012 at 11:11am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:57am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:12am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:08am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:04am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:51am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:46am:

Quote:

you are one of those people that 'cant be taught'. all your arguments have been addressed multiple times but you seem unable to understand them, You are quite simply wrong but it seems not possible to explain why as you seem to lack the intelligence to understand the argument.

You are stupid

SOB

You havent yet answered any single objection to your position. All you do is to repeat your position ad nauseuem without supporting it in any way. When you can provide a single thought-out argument than I will retract the 'you are stupid' claim. But until then. you are earning the title yourself on this topic.

Get some glasses stupid

SOB

Well you are still saying that it is cheaper and better not to pay private schools so that is proof you are not reading and understanding.

No I am not saying that @ all. Read and comprehend. I am saying it doesnt matter whether its cheaper or not since its supposedly the childrens education we are investing in. Spend what we have to to make public schools decent.

SOB

thanks for making my point. That isnt nor has it even been the topic under discussion.

I have been saying that ALL ALONG but you obviously cant read or comprehend.

How many socks do you have?

SOB

Do you accept that ending the subsidy of private schools would require MORE govt funding for public schools than it saves?

Im just trying to see if it is possible to get you to actually answer a direct question with a direct answer.

No why should i take your word for it? You havent provided me any evidence of such a thing.

SOB

are you trying to prove my point??? this has been explained to you DOZENS of times. so let's try again shall we?

1) most private school parents are not wealthy and removing govt subsidies would raise private schools fees by $7500 pers student pa.
2) This woudl then cause most private school students to return to the public school system as they simply cannot afford it.
3) this would increase public school enrollments by around 30%
4) to cover this increased enrollment the govt would have to pay $11,000 pers student simply to keep pace with current funding levels.

the simply an obvious answer is that for every private school student who leaves and goes to the public sector, the govt is $3500 WORSE OFF.

Please tell me you either understand this or wish to question it. and before you questino it keep in mind that almost all education professionals accept that this is correct.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Should taxpayers money pay for private education ?
Yes 11 (35.5%) No 20 (64.5%) Total votes: 31 « Created by: Sir lastnail on: May 7^th, 2012 at 11:47am »