I have no problem with equalizing the income with a base subsidy from all taxpayers in the state--agreed. A public system needs an element of equity across class/income status lines. But control follows the dollars, and people who get used to something for nothing, no direct taxes to support the local school, no out of pocket for use of school books and payment for lost/damaged books, no market price for school lunch, no market price for school buses,... after awhile people with no 'skin in the game' start acting detached and indifferent to the schools. Then the teachers wonder why parents are so uninvolved.<quoted text>
This is a pretty interesting post and I could agree with it but for one thing. The suggestion that we have locally elected school boards with taxing authority is wrong minded. That would soon result in a situation of wealthy and poor school districts. As a resident of Haleiwa, you would live in a poor school district because your population density is very low, either that or you will have a higher per capita tax rate to keep up with the wealtheir areas. Maybe you can affor that and if so, good for you. But not everyone has the extra money your proposal would require. And you wouldn't see a commensurate drop in the state taxes you currently pay.
In high school it was like pushing on a rope to get my son to study or take initiative to ask questions. Now, at community college, he paid the tuition out of his own pocket. He hounds the teachers at their office hours, lines up the tutors and study-groups, and tries harder. He has some skin in the game.
Maybe 'free' public education is a big part of the problem. Our kids, per testing, get stupider and stupider the longer they stay in school!
The whole system conspires to rob them of their 'ownership' of the process. Sometimes 'free' isn't really free, it's a kind of robbery.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.