RIght on!!!

Actually I went to catholic schools up until 9th grade. I think my mother at the time thought the public schools were not that good. 10th-12th was in public school for me, and essentially worthless. If I had kids I wouldnt bother sending them to public school

That is a good idea, but I doubt that it would be accepted by the public. Still, maybe it could obtain some success, state by state.(reply to mhubb).

There was some question on the radio the other year about whether [public, I think] school teachers should be allowed to go on strike. I called in and said that when the school children were allowed to go on strike, maybe I would consider it. I said, "Until then, forget it."

Sorry, bobbictchen34, I can't go along with your defense of the idea. Maybe you did get what you could from it. Perhaps more rational influences existed in it at the time, but it eventually has to lead to government thought control. That is why I do not want it to exist. And do you want educators to be "more altruistic"? You say that in"Galt's Gulch"?

Maybe so. Perhaps it [public education] could be eliminated gradually, if not suddenly.

It can't be reformed "back" to something decent. It wasn't decent (as I recall) even in 1959-1960. It is wrong in concept, and irredeemable.

True.

Yes. And those aren't really parents but guardians. And I feel bad for those kids.

Kids are remarkably simple to understand. They want love. They want someone to care about them when they fall down. That's typically the role of Mom. They also want security, meaning a place of safety where their needs are met. That's usually the role of Dad. And when you have both of those, children are far more likely to end up being producing members of society. And that's before you end up attaching any particular value system to the equation! Children need BOTH their biological parents - preferably in that stable arrangement historically known as Marriage.


On another point, my mother-in-law taught kindergarten for several years. She had one student who was so bad he had been sent to several different schools. (Yes - a kindergartner.) He literally disrupted class for all of the other students but because of the school district's policies - and the mother's unwillingness to address the problem - it took months to get the child's bad behavior even evaluated by the principal.

I think that the idea of making education a universal goal is noble, but stupid. There is no point in trying to have a third party force kids to do something. They either have to want it themselves or it is wasted effort. Worse, it's a major distraction to all the other students in class who want to learn. It's very telling that you don't see discipline issues in private schools.

They should not!!!

Explain?

Bill Ayers dad was the Chairman of the Board at Commonwealth Edison. Bill Ayers , He pretended to be oppressed in the 60’s . Life was very tough having a silver spoon in his wretched mouth.
He groomed and handled Barry Soetoro in Chicago
Put him in with the Activist’s crowd and VJ.

Hello Liberty Belle,
I do disagree especially in principle as that is what I think is the only thing sound. But I am open to hearing your viewpoint if you have the time to expound.
Basically my premise is that I am a mutt with above average intelligence and it scares me to think of where I'd be without the public education I did receive.
I was lucky to live in a time when educators were more altruistic and actually were interested in imparting knowledge to young people and were actually open to disagreement. Not being from a rich family I had to depend on public education and there was a lot offered there if one took the initiative to get as much as they could from what was offered and available.
In 4th grade I had a teacher who on her own time spent hours after school to help me learn Japanese. I was on the debate team later in high school where I learned how to make a logical argument.
Bill Ayers was a criminal terrorist who is probably responsible for killing at least 1 policeman in San Francisco. Him and his wife were building bombs and mailing them out to people they wanted killed. He is also implicated as the ghost writer for Obama's autobiography.
His wife was convicted for her part in the bombings but he had connections with a parent high in tyhe department of education. And instead of serving time he somehow got a position in government education. I believe he is a major contributor to what has devolved into the current state of education.
PLEASE don't take my reply as confrontational to your views. Given the current state I completely understand why someone would feel as you do. But I had a positive experience and gained a lot. I had to apply myself to gain but I also don't know if there would have been an opportunity for me without public education as it was in the 50s and the 60s.
AS it exists now though I am completely in agreement that it has to go but the principle of educating people is not the problem it's the execution of it as a tool for changing our culture.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ay...
This article whitewashes things a lot. There are a lot of people who believe that people were killed by Ayers and his wife. Especially the case of the SF policeman. That was never resolved to any real degree of proof.

edited: added addition to a comment on the Wikipedia article stating my doubt of completeness.

i think that sometimes parents do want to send their children out of the house, to get rid of them for a large part of the day, rather than be bothered with them.

Bologna sandwiches? You were lucky! At my grade school the kids were fed slop. I mean, bread pudding with tomato squished up in it, sauerkraut, etc. But after New Year's, when I was in second grade, my mother started packing my lunch; usually I had a couple of sandwiches and an apple or something, or maybe a cookie or two. (She gave me 3 cents to pay for milk at school; later it was 4 cents. Eventually my parents got me a thermos jug to take milk to school, but later it got broken.)

Why should people who live on taxes confiscated from the citizens be allowed to be in a union, which "bargains" with that same government, which is supposed to represent the citizens?

But many parents can't do that, because they are already taxed to pay for the public schools, so they don't have the money left to pay for private-enterprise education. (also a reply to term2).

"Having each student work alone is racist." Only now? During my second-grade year (1959-1960) my teacher got very nasty with me for going away from others to work alone (I remember,once, during some sort of play assignment). That was her last year there. I think she was some kind of Deweyite. (And do you remember Equality-2757's remarks on his society's condemnation of thinking or working alone, in Anthem?

For many centuries, Europe had established churches, even during and after the Protestant Reformation. But after a while, the Americans did not just passively accept it. We don't, ultimately, have to just accept an Establishment of Education, either.

I don't believe it was ever a good thing. It think it is wrong in principle. But excuse me, who is/was Bill Ayers?

Ha, ha, of course not. But that kind of claim is a way for power-lusters to try to get power over the people.

Well, that idea about school voucher for everybody is interesting. But that would just be a way for government to insinuate its way into power over the citizens and their children.

In the military, the personnel have to be taught how to used the equipment (guns, surveillance of the enemy,etc.) That is why I would exempt that. But at least they are not indoctrinating children or forming (or ruining) their minds.