Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Why shouldn't they be funded the same? Their parents pay the same education taxes.

Economically advantaged students perform better in most metrics for education. So you are removing good students from system. When you remove good students from the system everyone remaining in the public system is harmed.

Actually they likely pay more in taxes as their properties and incomes are higher. The government provides minimum standards for education as a universal service. You should either choose to use it or not.

Charter schools which don’t charge additional tuition do receive full funding from the government as they fulfill that universality concept.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by AFireInside

If those private schools don't discriminate on who they accept based barriers like high tuition/fees or any other reason then sure fund them.

If wealthy families want their kids to go to schools that only other wealthy families can afford then they can pay for it out of their own pocket.

It's the same as the government subsidizing Teslas. Tax dollars shouldn't be subsidizing luxury items.

In the situation where the school is a special needs school then that could be different.

Who's subsidizing who here? Government treats all children equally eligible for the same funding, regardless of the provider of education, as long as provider teaches the approved curriculum among other subjects. The "children of wealthy parents and religious parents shouldn't receive funding" is totally irrelevant.

[Rando]

@PepsiFree and @CorsiHockeyLeague

It works!

Spoiler!

[nik-]

One 8. Ten equal signs. A capital D.

That's the proper way to respond.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by GGG

Economically advantaged students perform better in most metrics for education. So you are removing good students from system. When you remove good students from the system everyone remaining in the public system is harmed.

Actually they likely pay more in taxes as their properties and incomes are higher. The government provides minimum standards for education as a universal service. You should either choose to use it or not.

Charter schools which don’t charge additional tuition do receive full funding from the government as they fulfill that universality concept.

Oh, I totally understand this line of logic. But you have to admit, it is just a step away from why shouldn't wealthy (pick your $ threshold) people pay extra for their hospital stay? Why should they receive CPP if they don't need it? In the eyes of the society, children are all equal, because they have no money of their own; hence, the logic of same education funding available to all. One can argue that private schools relieve the pressure on the public system by teaching the same curriculum.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by nik-

One 8. Ten equal signs. A capital D.

That's the proper way to respond.

Ten? You think highly of yourself.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Oh, I totally understand this line of logic. But you have to admit, it is just a step away from why shouldn't wealthy (pick your $ threshold) people pay extra for their hospital stay? Why should they receive CPP if they don't need it? In the eyes of the society, children are all equal, because they have no money of their own; hence, the logic of same education funding available to all. One can argue that private schools relieve the pressure on the public system by teaching the same curriculum.

No it’s like saying the government should fund me getting a private MRI with no wait with the same amount of money that each public MRI gets so I can cue jump for less money.

Or when we finally allow a private heath care stream demanding that the government still give the per procedure benefits to the private hospitals and Ill just pay a top up.

Private schools right now do relieve some pressure but they take the cheapest students to educate out of the system. So even with their current funding level may be a net loss.

As for CPP that is a pension your are buying into. A better example of a means tested universal program OAS which phases out at 75k per year or so of retirement income. Even in your health example it isn’t correct as the person is still using the public service. No one is forced to use a private school.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Rando

@PepsiFree and @CorsiHockeyLeague

It works!

Spoiler!

That's actually the best thing I have seen today.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Ten? You think highly of yourself.

Eventually, we all come round to the fact that most of us are just 5 = signs.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by GGG

...
Private schools right now do relieve some pressure but they take the cheapest students to educate out of the system. ...

This is rabbit hole discussion then, because it inevitably leads to "rich must shut up and pay more to help the poor" on all aspects of life funded through taxation. I disagree that private schools suck away the best students. But, regardless, if you stop funding children going to private schools, how can you ethically justify forcing parents to pay education taxes into the public system? At least give them an option to opt out.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

But, regardless, if you stop funding children going to private schools, how can you ethically justify forcing parents to pay education taxes into the public system?

The same way you can ethically force people without kids to pay education taxes? It's in the collective interest of society to have an educated population.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by rubecube

...It's in the collective interest of society to have an educated population.

Absolutely. Which is why all children should be eligible to receive the same amount of school funding.

P.S. Except for children with special needs, who should receive additional funding based on their individual needs, of course.

P.P.S. This topic is not very relevant to the thread though. I commented on Cliff's post and, in hindsight, I shouldn't have.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Absolutely. Which is why all children should be eligible to receive the same amount of school funding.

In your opinion should everybody qualify for welfare too?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Ten? You think highly of yourself.

life sized

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

In your opinion should everybody qualify for welfare too?

and here we go...

Sorry, I didn't mean to be sarcastic.
Welfare is such a vague word. Is education welfare?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

and here we go...

Sorry, I didn't mean to be sarcastic.
Welfare is such a vague word. Is education welfare?

Income assistance. I know you’re being intentionally obtuse but you are correct in that I should have been more specific.

No education in it’s literal sense is not welfare. Public education could be considered as such though.(See how productive this makes the conversation?)

[CaptainYooh]

OK. So, here you are, at the top of the money pile, distributing the collected tax cash. How do you decide which children shouldn't get it?

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

OK. So, here you are, at the top of the money pile, distributing the collected tax cash. How do you decide which children shouldn't get it?

Easy, I just use my ego - if any of those kids parents have a nicer car than me then they have to pay their own way. It's only fair.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

OK. So, here you are, at the top of the money pile, distributing the collected tax cash. How do you decide which children shouldn't get it?

Outside of certain circumstances all children are able to attend public schools. The entire reason a public system was invented was because most parents could not afford to have their children educated in private schools, it makes little sense to subsidize a model that doesn’t need to be. While it may seem unfair that a parent who chooses to place their child in private school doesn’t see their tax contribution go to their child’s school, as has already been pointed out it is the same situation as a taxpayer with no children getting no direct benefit from their tax dollars that are allocated to public education.(besides living in a more educated society) It’s worth mentioning that allocating funds to private schools in no way guarantees a cost savings to the parents of the students attending private schools. The government would give the school the money and the school would still be free to set the tuition as they see fit, there would be nothing requiring the school to reinvest the government money into improving the school or the programs it offers.

[PepsiFree]

I haven’t read all the posts, so forgive me, but this seems like a pretty short-sighted argument.

Money that goes to public schools is available to everyone, since everyone can go to public school. So by directing money (more, all) to fund public schools over private, you’re making it available to ALL children.

Pretty simple.