Australian Politics Forum - Should taxpayer pay for private education?

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47705
At my desk.

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #210 - May 11^th, 2012 at 7:16pm

Quote:

And you keep repeating it like a mantra.

No Borg. I try to explain it in several different ways. So do several other members.

Quote:

I have acknowledged it several times

You have acknowledged that we have posted something. So far nothing you have posted in response indicates you understand it.

Quote:

I am prolly never going to agree

Let's start with understanding what myself, Longy, etc are saying.

Quote:

So you dont care about the children's education? Its just the money to you?

I acknowledge the reality that wasting money from the education budget means a lower standard of education. Every time we point out to you that your idea will make children worse off, you suggest we throw more money at the problem to offset your bad idea. Does this mean you understand the link between wasting money and harming our children's education?

Quote:

Do you accept my argument?

What argument? You keep telling us it is 'just an opinion'. Saying we 'should do blah blah blah' is not an argument. Trying to explain why you think we should do that is an argument. The closest thing you have posted to an argument is 'private means private' and 'wasting money is OK because we will spend more'. Neither of these are rational and I reject them both, and I have repeatedly explained why. And you have never shown any indication of understanding those responses.

Quote:

Not by you.

Would you like me to copy and paste the numbers again for you? This is about the 10th thread we have had here on the public vs private debate. I have seen it all before.

Quote:

and said that I think the money would be better spent on making public schools better

Did you attempt to put together a rational argument for this? Or can you still not even concieve of the possible negative consequences of withdrawing funding from private schools?

Back to top

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

IP Logged

hawil

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1345

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #211 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:22pm

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 8:32pm:

hawil wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 8:29pm:

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 8:18pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 12:42pm:

How does saving money mean better education?

Because it means that we get more value for the amount we spend. It means that both public and private school students get a better education out of the amount of money spent by the government. This is true regardless of how much money the government actually spends. It is illogical to link the public/private debate with the broader debate on how much should be spent on education.

Private education system is mainly practised in english speaking countries, compared to other European countries.
I cannot speak for Asian countries, because I do not know their system.
What the private system supports is elitism, because often job applicants from public school system have little chance to get jobs in higher paid jobs.
My own children, who were both educated in the public system can vouch for that, yet now they are using the private system to educate their own children, to give them a better chance in life, yet at considerable cost and effort.
The irony of all this is, that the students in the European countries with little or no private school systems perform as well or better than students from the dual system.

You are confusing two separate issues. The value placed on education, and the total amount spent, are separate issues to the private/public debate. Subsidised private schools improve the education for all students, regardless of the total amount spent by the government. It is effectively an extra education tax on the rich that allows the rich to put more money into both public and private education, for the benefit of all.

Maybe you are confusing things, or you are trying to confuse other readers on this forum.
You did not mention elitism, created by the dual education systems.
Why is Australia performing so poorly, compared to some other developed countries as far as education goes.

Back to top

IP Logged

nairbe Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2587 Rural NSW Gender:	Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education? Reply #212 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:23pm Why would i pay tax so someone can send their child to Kings. we pay for public education if you want different pay for it.
Back to top	"Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage." Confucius IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47705 At my desk.	Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education? Reply #213 - May 11^th, 2012 at 8:30pm Quote: Why would i pay tax so someone can send their child to Kings. Because it is cheaper than forcing everyone into the public system, and gives all students a better education. This is more important than your feelings of envy.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #214 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:38pm

hawil wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:22pm:

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 8:32pm:

hawil wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 8:29pm:

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 8:18pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 12:42pm:

How does saving money mean better education?

Because it means that we get more value for the amount we spend. It means that both public and private school students get a better education out of the amount of money spent by the government. This is true regardless of how much money the government actually spends. It is illogical to link the public/private debate with the broader debate on how much should be spent on education.

Private education system is mainly practised in english speaking countries, compared to other European countries.
I cannot speak for Asian countries, because I do not know their system.
What the private system supports is elitism, because often job applicants from public school system have little chance to get jobs in higher paid jobs.
My own children, who were both educated in the public system can vouch for that, yet now they are using the private system to educate their own children, to give them a better chance in life, yet at considerable cost and effort.
The irony of all this is, that the students in the European countries with little or no private school systems perform as well or better than students from the dual system.

You are confusing two separate issues. The value placed on education, and the total amount spent, are separate issues to the private/public debate. Subsidised private schools improve the education for all students, regardless of the total amount spent by the government. It is effectively an extra education tax on the rich that allows the rich to put more money into both public and private education, for the benefit of all.

Maybe you are confusing things, or you are trying to confuse other readers on this forum.
You did not mention elitism, created by the dual education systems.
Why is Australia performing so poorly, compared to some other developed countries as far as education goes.

because we dont perform badly. Why do you think we have an education INDUSTRY for foreign students including from UK and USA dn Europe? because it is very good and relatively cheap.

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

nairbe

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2587
Rural NSW
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #215 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:40pm

freediver wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:30pm:

Quote:

Why would i pay tax so someone can send their child to Kings.

Because it is cheaper than forcing everyone into the public system, and gives all students a better education. This is more important than your feelings of envy.

What a total load of bullsh1t. Envy you say well good for you. Government have few actual responsibilities despite that everyone seems to think they are here to ensure their lives are a success. To give massive amounts of funds to private schools is not just stupid but clearly in breach of their responsibility to the community. These schools are PRIVATE schools. The key word is private. If you want that education and can afford it well good luck to you it is your free choice to take that option. But why would you expect that the rest of the community would subsidise that for you? Do you think you are entitled because you pay tax, well you are welcome to your funded public school position. If you choose otherwise that's great but don't come looking for a refund.

This is the exact sort of thing that Hockey was talking about when he said the age of entitlement is over. If you want it it's yours but you pay for it thanks. Unless of course you want to change the funding scheme and we can pay teachers for the service rendered and the parents can choose the teacher their child goes to for lessons, or would that hurt all the lazy teachers.

Back to top

"Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage."
Confucius

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47705
At my desk.

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #216 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:50pm

Quote:

These schools are PRIVATE schools. The key word is private.

So just like SOB, you think it is a good idea to sacrifice the quality of our children's education because you are on some kind of quest for semantic consistency?

Quote:

But why would you expect that the rest of the community would subsidise that for you?

As has already been pointed out, these people are often subsidising everyone else's education.

Quote:

Do you think you are entitled because you pay tax

If you had bothered to attempt to comprehend the argument, rather than dismiss it as BS in such a simple minded manner, you would know that the argument has nothing at all to do with entitlement.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #217 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:51pm

nairbe wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 8:23pm:

Why would i pay tax so someone can send their child to Kings. we pay for public education if you want different pay for it.

They are paying more tax than you do, so they are not using any of your tax. PLUS they pay the fees for Kings.
What's your problem then?

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #218 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:58pm

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 1:28pm:

Quote:

Throwing money won't change their genetic predisposition to intelligence. Throwing money at them won't make them want to learn.

Adequate resources will help everyone reach their full potential. That should be a basic right in a country like ours.

Look around the Lebs you know - do you think that state funding of education is holding them back and IF ONLY the state spent more on schools and teachers, they wouldn't be who they are?? They would be reading Italo Calvino and discoursing about the best way to get top marks in school and be useful in the community??

Back to top

IP Logged

Annie Anthrax

Gold Member

Offline

Take the plan, spin it
sideways

Posts: 7057
Gender: female

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #219 - May 11^th, 2012 at 11:13pm

Soren wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:58pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 1:28pm:

Quote:

Throwing money won't change their genetic predisposition to intelligence. Throwing money at them won't make them want to learn.

Adequate resources will help everyone reach their full potential. That should be a basic right in a country like ours.

Look around the Lebs you know - do you think that state funding of education is holding them back and IF ONLY the state spent more on schools and teachers, they wouldn't be who they are?? They would be reading Italo Calvino and discoursing about the best way to get top marks in school and be useful in the community??

Take a trip out to any uni in Australia and see how many young Muslim women are getting an education.

Of course they couldn't read Calvino. That would be hypocritical of them.

Where did I advocate for more money to be spent?

Back to top

I can't do this, but I'm doing it anyway.

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26460
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #220 - May 12^th, 2012 at 5:59am

Quote:

I acknowledge the reality that wasting money from the education budget means a lower standard of education. Every time we point out to you that your idea will make children worse off, you suggest we throw more money at the problem to offset your bad idea. Does this mean you understand the link between wasting money and harming our children's education?

No this indicates that you do not understand that public schools should come first because thats where the majority of children are educated. They should have the money. I understand your point fine I just DISAGREE. I dont thing private schools should receive any funding. They are private. This is not purely semantic. In fact it isnt semantic @ all. It is what private means is private. If you want private schools then pay for them.

you have never shown any indication that you understand my response which i have had to repeat numerous times.

There may be "negative consequences" for some private schools of withdrawing govt funding but they shouldn't be relying on govt funding when they are private businesses anyway.

The majority of children attend public schools. Money should be focused there to make education better for the majority of children. If well off ppl want to get something different for their children then they can pay for it.

Do you understand what I am saying? I bet you dont. I bet you quote me out of context again and change what I am saying to something else again.

The thing is we are obviously not going to agree. I dont care if you ever agree with me but you need to realise that no matter how many times you imply I am stupid i am prolly not going to agree with you either.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

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

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47705
At my desk.

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #221 - May 12^th, 2012 at 10:54am

Quote:

No this indicates that you do not understand that public schools should come first because thats where the majority of children are educated.

This is not a rational argument. I have no idea why you think this, but I can't think of any sound reason. This is only an argument for them coming first in a descending list of popularity. If there is more to your argument, you should say so.

Quote:

I understand your point fine I just DISAGREE.

'Just disagreeing' appears to be the sum total of your argument.

Quote:

They are private. This is not purely semantic. In fact it isnt semantic @ all. It is what private means is private.

You are contradicting yourself here Borg. Do we really need an argument over the meaning of the word 'semantic'?

Quote:

There may be "negative consequences" for some private schools of withdrawing govt funding but they shouldn't be relying on govt funding when they are private businesses anyway.

Borg, the 'negative consequences' will be for all students, as has been explained dozens of times already. Do we need to explain it again?

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: 26460
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #222 - May 12^th, 2012 at 11:09am

Quote:

This is not a rational argument. I have no idea why you think this, but I can't think of any sound reason.

This is not a rational argument. I have no idea why you think this but well maybe its your religion or something.

Quote:

Borg, the 'negative consequences' will be for all students, as has been explained dozens of times already. Do we need to explain it again?

The "negative consequences" will not be for ALL students. If there are negative consequences they will be for private school students.

SOB

Round and round we go round and round

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

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

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47705
At my desk.

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #223 - May 12^th, 2012 at 11:12am

Quote:

The "negative consequences" will not be for ALL students. If there are negative consequences they will be for private school students.

SOB are you aware that we have been telling you for 15 pages that the negative consequences will be for public school students also, and that we have been explaining the mechanism, as well as providing evidence from the funding arrangements that support the argument?

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: 26460
Australia

Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #224 - May 12^th, 2012 at 11:20am

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

Quote:

The "negative consequences" will not be for ALL students. If there are negative consequences they will be for private school students.

SOB are you aware that we have been telling you for 15 pages that the negative consequences will be for public school students also, and that we have been explaining the mechanism, as well as providing evidence from the funding arrangements that support the argument?

Of course but i disagree. Are you aware that I have been telling you for 15 pages that it doesnt matter and public schools should be the focus of public money to make education better for more students?

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

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

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 »