|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 09/02/2007 : 17:47:01
|
| I dont see that. I think this is a differnet subject but I would like to see what you are baseing your opinion on. And since it is the government that decides what part of our taxes go to education, you would have no control over how much you would get. |
You and I would get to KEEP what the government does not take in taxes. You and I would have total control over the monies that were not taken.
| History shows us that the government tends to allocate less money into programs where they dont have a say in how it is spent, so a private control over tax money for education would most likely suffer in the mix. I think this part should be discussed on a differnt thread. |
History shows us that government tends to allocate monies to the best funded lobbing groups.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 19:10:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
You and I would get to KEEP what the government does not take in taxes. You and I would have total control over the monies that were not taken. |
Average cost of non-religious private schooling for grades 1-6 in the 1999-2000 school year was nearly $11,000. Now, 2.4% of my Federal taxes last year plus all of my Virginia taxes don't add up to $11,000. So I would have control of all those monies with which I would be forced to give my kid an education I don't want him to have (a private religious school). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 20:12:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
You and I would get to KEEP what the government does not take in taxes. You and I would have total control over the monies that were not taken. |
Average cost of non-religious private schooling for grades 1-6 in the 1999-2000 school year was nearly $11,000. Now, 2.4% of my Federal taxes last year plus all of my Virginia taxes don't add up to $11,000. So I would have control of all those monies with which I would be forced to give my kid an education I don't want him to have (a private religious school).
|
You must understand that these schools are competing against a monopoly. If there was a free market with competition the price would drop dramatically and the value of your education dollar would increase dramatically.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 20:14:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
You and I would get to KEEP what the government does not take in taxes. You and I would have total control over the monies that were not taken. |
Average cost of non-religious private schooling for grades 1-6 in the 1999-2000 school year was nearly $11,000. Now, 2.4% of my Federal taxes last year plus all of my Virginia taxes don't add up to $11,000. So I would have control of all those monies with which I would be forced to give my kid an education I don't want him to have (a private religious school).
|
You know full well that most of public school funding does not come from the federal level; your presentation of 2.4% is extremely disingenuous.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 20:29:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
You know full well that most of public school funding does not come from the federal level; your presentation of 2.4% is extremely disingenuous. |
And your response, by neglecting the fact that I said "plus all of my Virginia taxes," is bordering on being quite obviously dishonest. Yes, a pitiful 2.4% of my Federal taxes goes to eduction, and most of that to grants for college and special ed programs. If all of my Virginia taxes plus 2.4% of my Federal taxes don't add up to $11,000, then it's a sure thing that all of my Virginia taxes plus the much lower amount of my Federal taxes that actually come back to general Virginia public eduction don't add up to $11,000 either.
You also wrote:| You must understand that these schools are competing against a monopoly. If there was a free market with competition the price would drop dramatically and the value of your education dollar would increase dramatically. |
First, tell me how private schools are not competing against each other in a free market. Then prove your assertion. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 20:42:33 [Permalink]
|
Dave said:
First, tell me how private schools are not competing against each other in a free market. Then prove your assertion. |
When the vast majority of consumers of a particular product are by circumstance barred from participating in the market place there is no free market, thus your question is a straw man.
edit:fix quote
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
| Edited by - JEROME DA GNOME on 09/02/2007 20:43:37 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 21:09:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
When the vast majority of consumers of a particular product are by circumstance barred from participating in the market place there is no free market... |
Thanks for answering my question.| ...thus your question is a straw man. |
How so? You made the implicit claim that private schools don't enjoy a free market, and so I aksed why. You answered it just fine. Where was the straw man?
Of course, it seems obvious to me that you've just shown that there's no free market for quite a lot of products, as most people are priced out of luxuries like PlayStations and sports cars and single-family detacted homes due to the circumstance of not having enough money. Is the "invisible hand" really so fickle?
And what you didn't reply to was my request for you to substantiate your assertion:| If there was a free market with competition the price would drop dramatically and the value of your education dollar would increase dramatically. |
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 21:45:58 [Permalink]
|
Dave said:
Of course, it seems obvious to me that you've just shown that there's no free market for quite a lot of products, as most people are priced out of luxuries like PlayStations and sports cars and single-family detacted homes due to the circumstance of not having enough money. Is the "invisible hand" really so fickle? |
These luxuries of which you speak are not the superior alternative to products that a monopoly sells. You must keep in minD the monopoly in this case has the power to force you to purchase the product and force your consumption of the product.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 21:49:42 [Permalink]
|
Dave asked: about my assertion:
And what you didn't reply to was my request for you to substantiate your assertion:
If there was a free market with competition the price would drop dramatically and the value of your education dollar would increase dramatically. |
This is common knowledge in economic theory. This theory has been proven throughout history. This is not a debatable point.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 22:05:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave asked: about my assertion:
And what you didn't reply to was my request for you to substantiate your assertion:
If there was a free market with competition the price would drop dramatically and the value of your education dollar would increase dramatically. |
This is common knowledge in economic theory. This theory has been proven throughout history. This is not a debatable point. |
It should be debatable, because I have no desire to be dogmatic about economic theory. If you prefer to avoid skepticism on the subject, you shouldn't forget where you are. (I've got a prediction about how you'll respond to this, don't let me down.)
I see free market prices for other goods and services fluctuate dramatically all the time. Your assurance that my education dollar would increase dramatically compared to the value derived from public taxation contradicts my experience with free markets. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 05:39:17 [Permalink]
|
I suspect you have read Wealth of Nations. I would suggest that you refresh your memory and then correlate what you read with economic history.
What government monopoly that sells a service or product provides higher quality at a lower cost?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 06:52:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I suspect you have read Wealth of Nations. I would suggest that you refresh your memory and then correlate what you read with economic history.
What government monopoly that sells a service or product provides higher quality at a lower cost?
|
The US Military? I'd rather they do things than a company like Blackwater. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 06:57:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I suspect you have read Wealth of Nations. I would suggest that you refresh your memory and then correlate what you read with economic history.
What government monopoly that sells a service or product provides higher quality at a lower cost?
|
The US Military? I'd rather they do things than a company like Blackwater.
|
I would suggest that armies are not a consumer product.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 09/03/2007 : 07:08:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I suspect you have read Wealth of Nations. I would suggest that you refresh your memory and then correlate what you read with economic history.
What government monopoly that sells a service or product provides higher quality at a lower cost?
|
The US Military? I'd rather they do things than a company like Blackwater.
|
I would suggest that armies are not a consumer product.
|
Are they not? Heh, tell that to any town with a military base close by!
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 08:20:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I suspect you have read Wealth of Nations. I would suggest that you refresh your memory and then correlate what you read with economic history.
What government monopoly that sells a service or product provides higher quality at a lower cost?
|
The US Military? I'd rather they do things than a company like Blackwater.
|
I would suggest that armies are not a consumer product. |
My point was more to suggest that there are some things that the government can do better and at a lower cost than the private sector. I'm still not convinced that education is something that is always best done by the private sector. In the case of universities, I'd wager that one gets a better deal with public (lower cost) colleges than with private ones. But perhaps that goes outside the realm of this discussion. |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 08:49:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
You and I would get to KEEP what the government does not take in taxes. You and I would have total control over the monies that were not taken. |
Average cost of non-religious private schooling for grades 1-6 in the 1999-2000 school year was nearly $11,000. Now, 2.4% of my Federal taxes last year plus all of my Virginia taxes don't add up to $11,000. So I would have control of all those monies with which I would be forced to give my kid an education I don't want him to have (a private religious school).
|
You must understand that these schools are competing against a monopoly. If there was a free market with competition the price would drop dramatically and the value of your education dollar would increase dramatically.
|
Not true. From someone who lived under that system, two natural consequences:
- good schools charge high;
- cheaper schools can hardly balance themselves;
- diploma mills - schools that don't care about the quality, only quantity.
What happens is, people with money can get good education, people without money can't (and thus can't compete with people with money... see where I'm getting at?), the government takes its monies anyway, society is majorly screwed because a large chunk of it are quasi illiterate.
It sounds sweet on paper, but reality sucks. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
 |
|
Penyprity and Thoughts of Scholl Taxes
