If you think that, what do you think of my idea about education:<quoted text>That is exactly why I believe that VOUCHERS are proper
Home schooled children have a descent success rate. But as I mentioned earlier, not all people can afford to sacrifice a full or part-time income to teach their own children. We also know that many public schools are failures. The last average per pupil per year that I read about in the country is around $12,000.
It's clear that it would benefit us all to have more home schooling. But if a mother of two children can successfully teach her own children at home, why can't she teach other neighborhood kids as well?
If a home school mother can possibly teach other children, why can't we pay her to teach others? Again, using the average of $12,000 per pupil, we could voucher him or her with $8,000 per year per child they decide to teach. That saves the taxpayer $4,000 per year per pupil.
The children are likely to get a better education. It eliminates the concern that teachers and unions have expressed about smaller class sizes (even though they are just trying to expand their own unions) and also concerns of other critics who state that home schooled students are robbed of social values because they are not with other children.
I think it's a great idea except for one thing: unions. Unions would have a conniption over the suggestion.