Conservatives, why do you want to privatize education? How will the poor pay for it?

You don't have you facts right. Education will still be provided by State and local governments who would continue to use tax revenue to pay for it. The only difference is that they would be paying private companies to provide it. Many States are already doing this with prisons, police, ambulance service, road repair etc. Such schools would have to meet certain criteria. But they would be run for profit and compete for students. Each and every student would have his or her tuition paid by the taxpayers up to a certain amount. Anything over that amount (the more expensive schools) would be paid by the parent.

Right now, parents who opt to send their child to private schools must pay the full tuition themselves even though they pay taxes for the public schools. That means only the wealthier parents get to send their kids to the better schools, just as Barack and Michelle Obama do. Under the privatized system, even low or middle class parents can afford much better schools. The poorest of the poor still get their education for free.

Get it? Conservatives so not lack brains. They simply know that no student will go without an education because it is required to be provided by law. It is only a question of how the money is best spent.

You owe Conservatives an apology. If you are not a Liberal you will apologize but we know Liberals never apologize. They simply attack harder.

We shall see exactly what you are made of, won't we?

*

nicely if Democrats properally funded education, we does no longer have any issues. yet with the aid of fact the final time we had a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress, they shrink education investment. proportion develop in education investment: Reagan - 40 two.8% 14 billion to 20 billion Bush Sr. - 60% 20 billion to 32 billion Clinton - 31% 32 billion to 40 two billion Bush - fifty 9.5% 40 two billion to sixty seven billion And the only reason Clintons became into that top, became into with the aid of fact for the 2001 funds, Clinton asked 39 billion in education investment and the Republican Congress larger it to 40 two billion. Plus the very undeniable fact that u.s. spends extra according to student on education than any united states in the international, different than the Netherlands. So needless to say, funds isn't the situation, if have been spending extra beneficial than all of us else. Gasp, how dare those republicans attempt and determine, that math instructors, fairly comprehend the thank you to do easy math. How dare republicans fairly say that inner city little ones can learn only besides as suburban little ones.

Didn't you know?

That is the objective of the conservatives - to eliminate the poor and lower class citizens of this nation. They don't like welfare. They don't want health care for them available. They don't want to make it affordable for them to have a home. They don't want the public school system to succeed.

And for any of you yutz's that speak of the voucher system - that is one huge joke!! The voucher system does not work, either. All you are doing is further keeping those in low-income families from getting an education and working their way up in the world.

That is the ideal world for a conservative - one with no poor in it. I think everyone would like to see that, but not by process of elimination.

If tax money was used to allow people to decide what school to send their children to, through a voucher system, people could send their kids where ever they wanted. Yes, poor people could still go to school, too. It has nothing to do with rich or poor. It benefits lower income people anyway, because their the ones stuck with the crappy public schools we have now full of ignorant teachers who's only mission in life is a paycheck.

A really really smart liberal who doesn't know what the voucher system is. Priceless.

I don't want to privatize all education, I would like to see the unions thrown out and teachers who have talent rewarded and those that hinder our children's progress tossed aside in favor of those who are willing to work.

If I can't buy a car, then winding up with a car I didn't pay for is stealing.

If the poor can't afford an education, then somehow winding up with one anyways without paying for it is theft.

It's just the simple fairness you libtards are working so hard to destroy. Just cause the government steals my money doesn't make it ok.

When you show me a voucher system that pays the whole deal for poor kids to go to good schools, maybe I'll start listening to ya.

Where did we say. Show me one place where a mainstream conservative (Neal Boortz isn't a conservative) claimed that we needed to abolish public education. Educating the populace is necessary for capitalism to succeed. Wanting to reform education by making schools compete is not privatization, you need to learn the difference. Maybe you could learn the difference at a school.

We all know a voucher system can work. Before public education, Americans were fabulously well educated and universally literate.

Apparently you are entirely uniformed on the Voucher Programs. Of course with a name like the one you adopted, it isn't a surprise.