Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Poll 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 7th, 2012 at 11:47am »

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 
Send Topic Print
Should taxpayer pay for private education? (Read 8850 times)
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30618
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #300 - May 16th, 2012 at 4:25pm
 
Sir lastnail wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 11:43am:
longweekend58 wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 5:44pm:
Verge wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 5:32pm:
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 3:42pm:
Uncle Meat wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 3:31pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 3:04pm:
MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 8:23pm:
Can anyone suggest how we might move to an education system that involves zero public funding of private schools. It might well be the ideal outcome, but how do we get there.


Look at the publicly run Finnish schooling system. The best teachers money can buy and no wasting money on daggy uniforms which is another racket that goes on in this backward run system here !!



Yes, but the question was "how do we get there"?





I am not an economist but my suggestion is to start by dropping all the funding for private schools. Let them put their fees up or whatever to pay for themselves or close. Put all that money (theres a lot) into public schools.

Uniforms arent that much of an issue imo. If there werent uniforms parents would be forking a lot more out for latest fashions and different clothes for every day etc.

SOB


A local private school here charges $4,400 per year for a non boarder for primary school.

It receives about $3300 per student in funding.

If you were to withdraw this funding, that would mean an increase of fees of 75%.  How many people could afford such an increase in fees for their kids primary school education.

The local public school on the other hand receives approximatley $7000 per student in funding.

It doesnt take much for the government to be paying more in the long run if you make the education unaffordable.

Not all private schools are your Melbourne and Geelong Grammars.

There is heaps of them out of the metro areas and are far from "elite".  They just tend to have better discipline and the teachers have more pressure applied to them to succeed.


good argument but a total waste of time. Borg is incapable of absorbing an argument. he just hates private schools and that is the beginning and end of the discussion as far as he is concerned.


and you love scam operators such as church institutions that never pay tax on their takings and schools run by church institutions. You are so predictable when you post crap on this forum.


predictable??? you should read some of your drivel sometimes. You have at most, three topics and three opinions. Beyond that you are a complete no-show.
Back to top
 

SKippys' prediction: "If Abbott and Gillard are the leaders Gillard will win the next election"
 
IP Logged
 
Sir lastnail
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 12851
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #301 - May 16th, 2012 at 4:57pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 4:25pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 11:43am:
longweekend58 wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 5:44pm:
Verge wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 5:32pm:
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 3:42pm:
Uncle Meat wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 3:31pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 3:04pm:
MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 8:23pm:
Can anyone suggest how we might move to an education system that involves zero public funding of private schools. It might well be the ideal outcome, but how do we get there.


Look at the publicly run Finnish schooling system. The best teachers money can buy and no wasting money on daggy uniforms which is another racket that goes on in this backward run system here !!



Yes, but the question was "how do we get there"?





I am not an economist but my suggestion is to start by dropping all the funding for private schools. Let them put their fees up or whatever to pay for themselves or close. Put all that money (theres a lot) into public schools.

Uniforms arent that much of an issue imo. If there werent uniforms parents would be forking a lot more out for latest fashions and different clothes for every day etc.

SOB


A local private school here charges $4,400 per year for a non boarder for primary school.

It receives about $3300 per student in funding.

If you were to withdraw this funding, that would mean an increase of fees of 75%.  How many people could afford such an increase in fees for their kids primary school education.

The local public school on the other hand receives approximatley $7000 per student in funding.

It doesnt take much for the government to be paying more in the long run if you make the education unaffordable.

Not all private schools are your Melbourne and Geelong Grammars.

There is heaps of them out of the metro areas and are far from "elite".  They just tend to have better discipline and the teachers have more pressure applied to them to succeed.


good argument but a total waste of time. Borg is incapable of absorbing an argument. he just hates private schools and that is the beginning and end of the discussion as far as he is concerned.


and you love scam operators such as church institutions that never pay tax on their takings and schools run by church institutions. You are so predictable when you post crap on this forum.


predictable??? you should read some of your drivel sometimes. You have at most, three topics and three opinions. Beyond that you are a complete no-show.


the poll results speak for themselves. Nobody is agreeing with you or your scam operations Wink
Back to top
 

"When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Luke Muehlhauser
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30618
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #302 - May 16th, 2012 at 5:01pm
 
a poll of 25 people in an online forum???

that has ZERO credibility.
Back to top
 

SKippys' prediction: "If Abbott and Gillard are the leaders Gillard will win the next election"
 
IP Logged
 
Sir lastnail
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 12851
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #303 - May 16th, 2012 at 5:05pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 5:01pm:
a poll of 25 people in an online forum???

that has ZERO credibility.


more credibility than you will ever have.

It's funny how you say that nobody agrees with me on this forum and that is a very important point for you, but in the other breath this poll has no relevance Cheesy LOL
Back to top
 

"When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Luke Muehlhauser
 
IP Logged
 
hawil
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 836
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #304 - May 16th, 2012 at 5:11pm
 
freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:32pm:
hawil wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:29pm:
freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:18pm:
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 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.


I,am not confusing anything, it is you who is trying to confuse the subject.
I claimed that private schools foster elitism, and I still stick to that claim.
What i find a little confusing is, that I have posted the "elitism" claim before, yet my post seems to have somehow disappeared.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30618
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #305 - May 16th, 2012 at 5:28pm
 
hawil wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 5:11pm:
freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:32pm:
hawil wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:29pm:
freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:18pm:
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 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.


I,am not confusing anything, it is you who is trying to confuse the subject.
I claimed that private schools foster elitism, and I still stick to that claim.
What i find a little confusing is, that I have posted the "elitism" claim before, yet my post seems to have somehow disappeared.


it might help if you actually posted some evidence. Perhaps the 'elitism' you refre to is not quite what yuo think it is. If - as the evidence suggests - private schools give better educational and life outcomes than public schools then isnt it more likely to be true that public schools promote failure and medocrity? it is an equally valid point unless you subscribe to the soviet approach that everyone should be reduced to the lowest common denominator.
Back to top
 

SKippys' prediction: "If Abbott and Gillard are the leaders Gillard will win the next election"
 
IP Logged
 
Dooley
Senior Member
****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 345
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #306 - May 16th, 2012 at 7:15pm
 
it might help if you actually posted some evidence. Perhaps the 'elitism' you refre to is not quite what yuo think it is. If - as the evidence suggests - private schools give better educational and life outcomes than public schools then isnt it more likely to be true that public schools promote failure and medocrity? it is an equally valid point unless you subscribe to the soviet approach that everyone should be reduced to the lowest common denominator.

ahhh - the good ol' "soviet" slur - sort of like the nazi slur isn't it??  What I'm sure you'll find if you get your hand off your pudding, is the world is slowly but surely moving into an era where catcheisms like that are redundant before you open your mealy mouth ratbag.

Further - you are the mental equivalent of a hatfull of arsehholes and just as ugly.

You won't find me complaining about any insults you make you dickless wonder as I've dealt with buggernucles like you before on BB's like this one and on the many construction worksites as a steel erector.......... Wanna take another swing ol' mate??

That shroud of paranoia you unveiled before with the soviet slur is just the sort of "reds under the beds" tinfoil hat psyhcosis that can get you into real strife if you haven't any underpinning intellectual rational thinking proving what you say.. Next thing you'll be warning all and sundry to watch out for the boogy man. I bet that was the sort of crapola that you taught your sprogs, wasn't it??

You and your sort give any credence to the believe, that the internet was going to bring about a shift in consciousness in the world into grave doubt.  nice person...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 16th, 2012 at 8:09pm by Dooley »  
 
IP Logged
 
Sir Spot of Borg
Gold Member
*****
Offline


WE ARE BORG

Posts: 19321
Brisbane
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #307 - May 17th, 2012 at 8:23am
 
Lol
Back to top
 

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a 
nice person!
- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope
WWW PoliticsAneReligion  
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30618
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #308 - May 17th, 2012 at 10:18am
 
Dooley wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 7:15pm:
it might help if you actually posted some evidence. Perhaps the 'elitism' you refre to is not quite what yuo think it is. If - as the evidence suggests - private schools give better educational and life outcomes than public schools then isnt it more likely to be true that public schools promote failure and medocrity? it is an equally valid point unless you subscribe to the soviet approach that everyone should be reduced to the lowest common denominator.

ahhh - the good ol' "soviet" slur - sort of like the nazi slur isn't it??  What I'm sure you'll find if you get your hand off your pudding, is the world is slowly but surely moving into an era where catcheisms like that are redundant before you open your mealy mouth ratbag.

Further - you are the mental equivalent of a hatfull of arsehholes and just as ugly.

You won't find me complaining about any insults you make you dickless wonder as I've dealt with buggernucles like you before on BB's like this one and on the many construction worksites as a steel erector.......... Wanna take another swing ol' mate??

That shroud of paranoia you unveiled before with the soviet slur is just the sort of "reds under the beds" tinfoil hat psyhcosis that can get you into real strife if you haven't any underpinning intellectual rational thinking proving what you say.. Next thing you'll be warning all and sundry to watch out for the boogy man. I bet that was the sort of crapola that you taught your sprogs, wasn't it??

You and your sort give any credence to the believe, that the internet was going to bring about a shift in consciousness in the world into grave doubt.  nice person...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


so in summary...


(nothing at all)


You are your own worst enemy in what you laughingly call 'debate'. Why dont you get yourself some medication and/or an education and then come back and try again with a coherent argument this time. Your last few posts look more like your dictionary had thrown up on the screen.
Back to top
 

SKippys' prediction: "If Abbott and Gillard are the leaders Gillard will win the next election"
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30618
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #309 - May 17th, 2012 at 10:20am
 
Dooley wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 7:15pm:
it might help if you actually posted some evidence. Perhaps the 'elitism' you refre to is not quite what yuo think it is. If - as the evidence suggests - private schools give better educational and life outcomes than public schools then isnt it more likely to be true that public schools promote failure and medocrity? it is an equally valid point unless you subscribe to the soviet approach that everyone should be reduced to the lowest common denominator.

ahhh - the good ol' "soviet" slur - sort of like the nazi slur isn't it??  What I'm sure you'll find if you get your hand off your pudding, is the world is slowly but surely moving into an era where catcheisms like that are redundant before you open your mealy mouth ratbag.

Further - you are the mental equivalent of a hatfull of arsehholes and just as ugly.

You won't find me complaining about any insults you make you dickless wonder as I've dealt with buggernucles like you before on BB's like this one and on the many construction worksites as a steel erector.......... Wanna take another swing ol' mate??

That shroud of paranoia you unveiled before with the soviet slur is just the sort of "reds under the beds" tinfoil hat psyhcosis that can get you into real strife if you haven't any underpinning intellectual rational thinking proving what you say.. Next thing you'll be warning all and sundry to watch out for the boogy man. I bet that was the sort of crapola that you taught your sprogs, wasn't it??

You and your sort give any credence to the believe, that the internet was going to bring about a shift in consciousness in the world into grave doubt.  nice person...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Does anyone here speak 'dimwit' and can offer a translation? babelfish just says it is incomprehensible.
Back to top
 

SKippys' prediction: "If Abbott and Gillard are the leaders Gillard will win the next election"
 
IP Logged
 
bludger
Full Member
***
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 244
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #310 - May 17th, 2012 at 5:23pm
 
To add to my topic:
I know for a fact a private school bought and sold real estate and made $3,000,000 in a year. This is business.
Have you noticed how all the top cushy jobs go to private pupils educated from my taxes? The ABC is full of 'em.
The old boys network.
So much for a level playing field. Angry
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
hawil
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 836
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #311 - May 17th, 2012 at 8:08pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 5:28pm:
hawil wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 5:11pm:
freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:32pm:
hawil wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:29pm:
freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 8:18pm:
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 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.


I,am not confusing anything, it is you who is trying to confuse the subject.
I claimed that private schools foster elitism, and I still stick to that claim.
What i find a little confusing is, that I have posted the "elitism" claim before, yet my post seems to have somehow disappeared.


it might help if you actually posted some evidence. Perhaps the 'elitism' you refre to is not quite what yuo think it is. If - as the evidence suggests - private schools give better educational and life outcomes than public schools then isnt it more likely to be true that public schools promote failure and medocrity? it is an equally valid point unless you subscribe to the soviet approach that everyone should be reduced to the lowest common denominator.

What sort of evidence do you expect?
Do you think that anyone will admit to blatant elitism or discrimination.
I can give one example.
Long time ago I was looking for promotion in government employment. To get the promotion, the applicant had to pass an exam and afterwards go to an interview.
When attending the interview after sitting for the exam, I was told that I did exceptionally well at my exam, but some weeks after I was informed that in the view of the person who conducted the interview, I did not reach the required standard, but to keep on studiyng to qualify in the future for the position.
My reply was, as I cannot change the view of interviewer, plus the fact, that I,am a New Australian, something I cannot change, I will not bother to again apply for the position.
I expected that the department would  at least try to deny my allegation of discrimination on the grounds of being a migrant.
The reply to my letter was; "Your letter referring to the recent promotion exam and interview" has been received and noted.
My daughter, with a lot higher education standard than I, was once not directly told, but found after her application for a position, that the only people with private school education were giving interviews.
To try to proof this is completely another matter.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 17987
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #312 - May 17th, 2012 at 10:30pm
 
You will find that the European pupils that do best in a public education system are the ones from the most homogenious countries:Finland, Lichtenstein, Iceland. Outside Europe, the same. the most homogenious countries do best: South Korea, Taiwan, Japan.


When hugely diverse populations are all enrolled in a public system, that system will deteriorate or develop a hierarchy of its own. In NSW, this means opportunity classes, gifted and talented, selective public schools - and of course flight to private schools where parents still have some say in discipline and rigour and from where the dregs and disruptives can be expelled.

Back to top
 

No one has the right not to be offended.
 
IP Logged
 
Sir Spot of Borg
Gold Member
*****
Offline


WE ARE BORG

Posts: 19321
Brisbane
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #313 - May 18th, 2012 at 8:09am
 
Soren wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 10:30pm:
You will find that the European pupils that do best in a public education system are the ones from the most homogenious countries:Finland, Lichtenstein, Iceland. Outside Europe, the same. the most homogenious countries do best: South Korea, Taiwan, Japan.


When hugely diverse populations are all enrolled in a public system, that system will deteriorate or develop a hierarchy of its own. In NSW, this means opportunity classes, gifted and talented, selective public schools - and of course flight to private schools where parents still have some say in discipline and rigour and from where the dregs and disruptives can be expelled.



"dregs and disruptives". why should the public schools be stuck with them? They should be in the private schools if their parents pay.

what are "dregs" by the way?

SOB
Back to top
 

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a 
nice person!
- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope
WWW PoliticsAneReligion  
IP Logged
 
BlOoDy RiPpEr
Gold Member
*****
Offline


aussie-patriot.com

Posts: 2360
Sydney
Gender: male
Re: Should taxpayer pay for private education?
Reply #314 - May 18th, 2012 at 8:39am
 
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 18th, 2012 at 8:09am:
Soren wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 10:30pm:
You will find that the European pupils that do best in a public education system are the ones from the most homogenious countries:Finland, Lichtenstein, Iceland. Outside Europe, the same. the most homogenious countries do best: South Korea, Taiwan, Japan.


When hugely diverse populations are all enrolled in a public system, that system will deteriorate or develop a hierarchy of its own. In NSW, this means opportunity classes, gifted and talented, selective public schools - and of course flight to private schools where parents still have some say in discipline and rigour and from where the dregs and disruptives can be expelled.



"dregs and disruptives". why should the public schools be stuck with them? They should be in the private schools if their parents pay.

what are "dregs" by the way?

SOB

ones who never got their arse kicked into line, have no respect for others and have no manners.
Please and thank you and showing respect can get you a long way in life. Many in the public system never understand it as its something that is taught at home. Every kid has a right to an education so those who fall though the cracks because of lack of discipline at home will end up in the public system because no one else will have them. Only solution would be to bring back the cane. I got it a few times as a kid and hated it at the time, but we did get a choice of scab duty or the cane, most times i would still choose the cane because it was quick and i didn't have to spend half of lunch picking up rubbish. And we would get the cane for the simplest reasons, i even got the cane once because i was left handed and the ink in my pen slow dried and smugged my writing. swearing, talking back, cane cane cane.. one quickly pulls their head in if they know they are going to get wrapped across the fingertips with a cane in front of the class every time.
Back to top
 

host of the aussie-patriot.com site
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 
Send Topic Print