JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

OffTopic

Surf a Flood of random discussion.
Edited by SpiRits: 10/8/2017 4:54:54 PM
16

Abolish Public Education. On public education, For a New Liberty by Murray Rothbard

This book is from the early 70s and alot of what is said is still holds true today. Paragraphs will be staggered, as I am simply summarizing his points. State education also forces minorities groups into mainly English speaking schools. This can strip away earlier generations of different nationalities in any given district area. Basically anyone who controls the schools can injure other nationalities and benefit his own. Also, how do the other nationalities see it. The seemingly growing school power in a given district pushing out different different nationalities, the ones being pushed out still yet are coerced into paying for the school, that doesn't even speak their language. They will see each other as enemies...is this how you bring a community together? Government bureaucrats must propose a large set of uniform rules to the schools. If he did not and looked at everything from an individual case, he would cast out as someone who doesn't respect all the taxpayers in an equal/uniform manner. And then to further this, he would be looked at as discriminatory. Because of this, it is MOST efficient to simply throw down a blanket rule set in the given district. If we analyze these rules at a micro level, we see that they are derived from what should and should not be specifically taught. For example: Sex ed or not? Free markets or socialism? Traditional or Progressive? No matter what is decided, including all the different parts within each of these questions, someone parent/student is going to feel they are deprived of the specific education they want. So, based on this logic, let me add the multiplier effect, The bigger the public education, the more unpleasant families. Also another point, if these questions of what should be taught are STRICTLY in the hand of the state, then those who want the children to be taught a specific way will always be fighting state control. Yet again separating the community, not bringing anyone together. So lets draw another conclusion from this, the more the state has the power to make these decisions, the more divided a community will be. Let me use an analogy to show how a free market education system, would essentially work. Lets take another form of education: Books and magazines. In fact, these are very important forms of education. Both the magazine/book markets are very free. We have liberal, conservative, all-purpose, and all kinds of different genres. Same goes for books. If you were to free the the schooling education and abolish public schools, the free (varied) book/magazine market, would be parallel by the "school market." So, if there were only one book/magazine per city or state, What would it be about? This would end up in battles about what should be put in these books/magazines. But yet again, as I said earlier, NO MATTER what was agreed upon to put in, it would deprive numerous people of they want to read. So let the school system be as free and varied as the book/magazine market. After all, both these are simply forms of education. Also, think about this----What if we decided that the magazine and book system were to be setup like the current public education system. Lets say federal or state taxpayer money was used to setup a public nationwide magazine. And then, it became compulsory for all the citizens to read it. What would you think of this proposal? And than on top of this, the state decides to outlaw (or heavily regulate to keep the analogy as close to current school system) any other magazine. Maybe better said, if the magazine doesn't keep up with the states standard, they are kicked out, and we all know this is by the monopoly power on legislation. What would the nation think of this proposal? --------the ENTIRE NATION would deem this with HORROR. YET, this is EXACTLY what the state does with the current day school system. Following this, a compulsory press would been seen as an invasion to freedom of the press. And yet scholastic freedom is MORE IMPORTANT than press freedom simply because the schooling system has the ability to shape unformed minds. Also, think about this----What if we decided that the magazine and book system were to be setup like the current public education system. Lets say federal or state taxpayer money was used to setup a public nationwide magazine. And then, it became compulsory for all the citizens to read it. What would you think of this proposal? And than on top of this, the state decides to outlaw (or heavily regulate to keep the analogy as close to current school system) any other magazine. Maybe better said, if the magazine doesn't keep up with the states standard, they are kicked out, and we all know this is by the monopoly power on legislation. What would the nation think of this proposal? --------the ENTIRE NATION would deem this with HORROR. YET, this is EXACTLY what the state does with the current day school system. Following this, a compulsory press would been seen as an invasion to freedom of the press. And yet scholastic freedom is MORE IMPORTANT than press freedom simply because the schooling system has the ability to shape unformed minds. And if we examine, post world war 2, we see a large amount of the population want to move to surrounding suburban areas. As more younger families move to the suburbs, the largest cost seems to be the cost of the public education. So how are these schools financed? An ever growing property tax. Property tax largely falls on suburban residents. The more expensive your house is, the greater your contribution to the local school district will be. Because of this we see the current suburban individuals encourage the inflow of wealthy residents and buy expensive homes. On the flip side, they discourage an inflow of poorer citizens. Basically this leads to a break even point in which the residents will pay for the children's education in its property tax. So, what happens if families in newer houses dont pay the tax needed to finance their children's education? The other residents will pick up the tab, by means of the exiting residents. Because of this, we see suburbs develop zoning laws, that prohibit the erection of housing below that minimum cost to finance the children's education. This essentially stops any poorer families from moving out of the city, into the suburbs.. Since statistically, the black population is poorer than the whit population, blacks are unable to make the suburban move. Through this we see a lot of inner city jobs have now moved to the suburbs. This results in an increased pressure on the unemployed black community. Essentially, the abolition of of public schools would end the property-school burden property tax link. Therefore zoning laws would be removed. And also bring the whites and blacks together instead of separating them. Along with the public school system we see a complex network of coerced levies and subsidies. Most of these are networks cant be justified on any ethical grounds. Parents who send their children to private institutions are coerced into paying for the public system while paying for the private tuition. The heavily regulated private firms are thrown out by the VERY competitive tax financed high salaries. Since the public school, must be secular, yet religious parents are forced into subsidizing them. This also brings up unmarried and childless couples, who are coerced into subsidizing the public school. Where are any of the ethical principles here? We see poor single individuals and poor childless couples coerced into subsidizing the wealthy families education. Does that make any ethical sense? EVERY CHILD HAS THE [b]RIGHT[/b] TO AN EDUCATION, at the expense of the coerced. This is in fact not what a right is. A right is something that is embedded in human nature and reality. Something that is universal and can be preserved/maintained at any age or any time. It is also that is practically achievable. Something that is compatible with the necessary presuppositions of argumentation. Examples of these rights would be [b]self-ownership[/b] and the defense of you body and property. "A right to a job" "A right to three meals a day" "A right to 12 years if schooling" These can not be guaranteed and are not rights. Also, the right of [b]self-ownership[/b] is one that is compatible with the criteria listed, but also requires no special coercion upon others. As I have said before now many times, schooling is only a fraction of your total life education. If everyone truly had the "Right" to an education, than the state shall subsidize newspapers, books, and any other form of education. Many private schooling firms are operating "illegally" due to failure to meet the requirements of the state. The oversupply of children into these compulsory schools by families who don't have to pay for the education, end up showing no interest or who are unsuitable in school. These kids could be better off at home or working. The result of this mass schooling is the imprisonment of children who are under the impression that they must finish high school to become employed. I quote Arthur Stinchcombe [quote]Is there anything that a high school can teach which employers of manual labor would be willing to pay for, if it were learned well? In general, the answer is no. Neither physical abilities nor reliability, the two main variables of interest in employers of manual labor, are much influenced by schooling. Employers concerned with securing reliable workers may require high school diplomas as evidence of good discipline. Otherwise they can train workers better and cheaper than a high school can, on the job.[/quote] Part of the blame for compulsory attendance and mass public schooling must also be laid at the door of the labor unions which, in order to reduce competition from young, adolescent workers, try to force the youth out of the labor market and into education.

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I understand you and/or your buddies are high school dropouts but you took it to another level. [spoiler]dont pee your pants its a joke[/spoiler]

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Public education doesn't just teach you specific details of concepts and events. It teaches you how to question and learn. If you abolish public education, you destroy one of the few things that gives you the ability to learn. We cannot account for every race, nationality, and minority and all the variations of their languages. You would have to hire personal translators for every student that doesn't speak English. This takes up precious class time and costs a lot of money. While it is disappointing that we can't account for everybody's differing situations, it makes the most sense to teach the language that is most likely spoken by the majority of the class: English. And, those non-english speakers will gradually pick up English as they learn in class. If we really need to, we could give extra classes to those students specifically to teach the English language. Public education isn't supposed to only teach certain concepts over others. That's brainwashing. You can't please everyone. Get over it. If my conservative parents new what I had to read in high school, they would have been pissed when I read articles that are considered "left leaning" and proud when I read Ayn Rand, who leans right. The class doesn't teach what is in these books. It teaches how to comprehend and form an argument for or against the work of the author. It teaches you to learn. As for the magazine thing, what are you even saying? The public education system is not the same as the regulation of magazines. Finally, NEVER use words and phrases like entire, all, all of, etc. No matter what the argument, you will most likely be wrong. If the public education system is the same as magazines, and if the "entire" nation would be outraged by the regulation of only having one magazine, then the entire nation should be pissed right now. But they aren't. Many people have qualms with the public education system, myself included (although for different reasons that actually make sense), but not everybody. After this, I gave up on you. I don't even know what's happening now. You said something about many African Americans being unable to move to suburban areas, but that goes much deeper than the costs of public education. Also, affirmative action is still a thing. I'm very sure that the state or whatever entity regulates affirmative action will help minorities have an education. Finally, this is why we need public education. So that people like you can make coherent arguments. I mean, seriously. You seemed to work away on one topic for multiple paragraphs, even repeating yourself, and then suddenly switch topics without any introduction to the next topic. When you start a new paragraph, you state what the paragraph will address. Good day.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • ha ha ha ha anarcho-capitalism!

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

    1 Reply
    • If they would just teach Intelligent Design, instead of the "theory" of evolution which is a trick by Satan, then everyone would be so smarterer!!

      Posting in language:

       

      Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

    • Bump for later.

      Posting in language:

       

      Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

    • Honestly, the most important, and sometimes only relevant thing K-12 schooling teaches you is how to learn. How about instead of, y'know, getting rid of public education or whatever, we improve it so students will learn more relevant things, have the motivation to do so given, and for god's sake make college less expensive lol

      Posting in language:

       

      Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

    • TL;DR

      Posting in language:

       

      Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

      1 Reply
      • This entire write up and book can be thrown in the trash. The most out of touch shit I’ve ever read. Figures it comes from an anarchocapitalistic private school boy. And yes, I realize I’m not creating an actual argument. I don’t feel like putting in the effort to argue with someone who thinks anarchocapitalism is anything but self-defeating and unrealistic. Also, just a hint: the only time America has done anything that could be called great has been a result of math, science, and engineering. The years leading up the moon, NASA was getting almost 5% of the federal budget. Now it gets 0.5% and people wonder why we haven’t been to the moon since the 70’s, much less outside of low earth orbit.

        Posting in language:

         

        Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

        6 Replies
        • Four things. 1. You don't understand what "nationality" means. Minorities aren't separate nationalities. 2. What you've described is the relative superiority of a school system that is based on teaching differing beliefs and opinions. You mentioned how locking different ethnic people out by language causes polarization. Having schools that are based on differing beliefs inherently encourages those differences and widens the gap between groups. You are arguing for a polarized education system by badmouthing a polarized education system for being polarized. 3. You act as if our current public education system is the only possible system that could exist and therefore, if it is bad, public education systems as a whole are bad. This is characteristically false. 4. You don't seem to understand what is/should be the point of a public education. [u]If[/u] a system is comparable to all the things you attempted to compare it to (news, etc) then it has failed its own purpose. An education system should be designed to help the mental development of children and young adults so that they have the tools to think critically and the basic understanding of a variety of things they might need for the future. This is why we teach communication, mathematics, the sciences. History classes help to put contextual understanding of the human existence, but I'd argue that it is of secondary importance, personally. What an education system [i]shouldn't[/i] do is teach things that are not generally true. Beliefs and opinions should have no place. The capacity for disagreement between the teachings of one school and the teachings of another should not exist. So [u]if[/u] the system can be compared to the news as you have attempted it, the system itself needs to be revolutionized. You have said nothing of the inherent quality of a public education system.

          Posting in language:

           

          Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

          1 Reply
          • The moment you strip away public education is the moment democracy dies. Oh wait, I forgot, you're an anarchist.

            Posting in language:

             

            Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

            1 Reply
            • Edited by tjustie: 10/8/2017 4:41:56 PM
              I got four paragraphs into this and it was honestly too incoherent for me to bother continuing.

              Posting in language:

               

              Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

              2 Replies
              • 1
                Im just glad my kids wont go to school with urban ghetto trash.

                Posting in language:

                 

                Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

              • Public education should just teach the basics. Everything else should be left to colleges, universities, and trade schools

                Posting in language:

                 

                Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

              • That's very interslesting and I think you raise some good points here. I also enjoy how you managed to point out how the current public school system may be racist.

                Posting in language:

                 

                Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

              • 1
                Frik school I'd rather stay home and scream "PIKEL RIK"

                Posting in language:

                 

                Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

              • 1
                [u] [/u]

                Posting in language:

                 

                Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

              You are not allowed to view this content.
              ;
              preload icon
              preload icon
              preload icon