student loan forgivemess

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I’m waiting for someone to make the argument for universal government insurance, after all competition is good.

And by the way Jim, it’s likely that all of your taxes and some paid by others go to fund your childrens education and associated costs.
We do that in this country because we believe that it’s important to do the following:
Develop a productive workforce.
Create an informed citizenry.
Provide for social mobility.

social mobility, eh?

Is social mobility helped, or is it hindered, if more children are in good schools, and fewer children are in lousy schools?’

My town spends $15k to educate each kid. If you give me $2k of that to help me pay for catholic school, the town keeps the other $13k and now has one fewer kid to spend it on. so more spent per kid. That’s good for the kids who stay in public school.

It’s win win. Except for teachers unions, which is the only key reason democrats oppose it.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

social mobility, eh?

Is social mobility helped, or is it hindered, if more children are in good schools, and fewer children are in lousy schools?’It will make the public schools worse off having to give up revenue to subsidize a private school.

My town spends $15k to educate each kid. If you give me $2k of that to help me pay for catholic school , the town keeps the other $13k and now has one fewer kid to spend it on. so more spent per kid. That’s good for the kids who stay in public school. In another post you said you wouldn't benefit. Doesn't the $2K per kid benefit YOU?

It’s win win. Except for teachers unions, which is the only key reason democrats oppose it.100% wrong.

So if 10 out of 2,000 students leave a public school what will get cut?

will a teacher get laid off?
will the heat be lowered?
will the bus routes be changed?

The costs are still the same. There will be 24.2 kids in a class instead of 24.4 - that is it.

All is it does is subsidize you sending your kids to private schools. Most people can't afford the $15K it costs to send their kid to private school regardless of a subside.

Why don't the Catholic HSs take kids with handicaps and educate them instead of leaving them for the public HS?

[Jim in CT]

paul, public schools will give up revenue but what you conveniently left out, is there’s would be fewer kids.

if crappy teachers in crappy schools get laid off, boo boo. better to keep flushing money down the toilet forever?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

paul, public schools will give up revenue but what you conveniently left out, is there’s would be fewer kids.

if crappy teachers in crappy schools get laid off, boo boo. better to keep flushing money down the toilet forever?

I showed you the fixed costs will be the same. 500 kids at a high school in hartford aren't going to go to Xavier bc they get a $2K subsidy.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I showed you the fixed costs will be the same. 500 kids at a high school in hartford aren't going to go to Xavier bc they get a $2K subsidy.

variable costs won’t be the same. salary and benefits are by far the biggest line item of any school budget ( part of the problem). you can let teachers go. that drastically lowers costs.

The only downside is to public teachers. And if the schools would
just improve a bit families wouldnt want to leave anyway.

do you consider teacher salary and benefits to be a fixed cost or a variable
cost? if that’s a variable cost, which it really is, the fixed costs are quite low in a typical education budget.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

variable costs won’t be the same. salary and benefits are by far the biggest line item of any school budget ( part of the problem). you can let teachers go. that drastically lowers costs.

The only downside is to public teachers. And if the schools would
just improve a bit families wouldnt want to leave anyway.

do you consider teacher salary and benefits to be a fixed cost or a variable
cost? if that’s a variable cost, which it really is, the fixed costs are quite low in a typical education budget.

Both the fix and variable cost will be basically the same as you're never going to get a lot of people being able to afford private schools. With or without a subsidy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Both the fix and variable cost will be basically the same as you're never going to get a lot of people being able to afford private schools. With or without a subsidy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

well if not many people are participating, you’re also not losing much revenue. you can’t have it both ways paul, you can’t say that the schools will suffer from a meaningful loss of revenue and also claim that costs don’t change and that not many people will participate.

when school choice is offered,,there’s usually a ton of demand in cities with lousy schools

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

social mobility, eh?

Is social mobility helped, or is it hindered, if more children are in good schools, and fewer children are in lousy schools?’

My town spends $15k to educate each kid. If you give me $2k of that to help me pay for catholic school, the town keeps the other $13k and now has one fewer kid to spend it on. so more spent per kid. That’s good for the kids who stay in public school.

It’s win win. Except for teachers unions, which is the only key reason democrats oppose it.

So federal aid to education no longer is per student?

It’s not a winner, in the long term it will decimate public education.

You rant about about student loan forgiveness and then want the rest of us to pay for special education for your kids.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device