Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is a thread on this forum about Why Schools Should be privitized. One particular poster, who has no children, takes objection to the fact that he is paying taxes that then go towared educating Children in his community.
Brief History: Thomas Jefferson first recognized the need for a publicly funded education system in 1779. Some backers to that notion included George Washington. It finally took hold in the 18th Century. The current publicly funded school system has been in place for well over 100 years.
The cost for educating a child within a school district, of course varies from SD to SD. If you look at a site such as www.schoolmatters.com and look up your district, you can see what the district spends per child /per year and what they collect in tax revenues for the school.
For example, the SD I was living in (I'm currenly in the proccess of moving.. but for this we'll use what I know) it costs $16,640 a year to educate one child. Tax Revenues collected are $16,679. (That is particularly high, but it's important to note that I lived in Nassau County, NY on Long Island.. which has a higher cost of living and higher wage earnings).
School property taxes for my home was approx $7,000. Approx 65% of that tax bill was for education. For the sake of rounding out the numbers, that would mean that $4000 of my tax bill goes toward public education a year.
If the public school system was done away with and I wouldn't have to pay that $4000 / year in property taxes that would bring the cost for me to educate 1 of my children to $12,679 a year (after adding in the savings of $4000 I wouldn't be paying in taxes). If you make $60K a year, high end of the middle income bracket, that is approx 21% of a $60K a year income.
Average # of kids in a family is I believe 2.5. So for a family with two children.. the costs would double.
There are 53.3 Million children ages 5-17 in the U.S. If we said that it took approx $12K a year to educate a child per year in the U.S it comes out to about $696.3 Trillion Dollars.
Educating your children is MANDATORY in the U.S to the age of 16. So, if we suddenly did away with publicly funding schools to a privitized school system, would you be able to afford to educate your children?
Those in the lower income brackets would most likely recieve assistance. Those in teh upper brackets could afford it.. it's those in the middle that make too much, but not enough.
Total cost to educate 1 child for one year would be $12,679 a year. Two children would be $29,358. The question is meant to ask if you can do it without taking on extra credit debts or mortgaging your home.
Last edited by TristansMommy; 09-25-2008 at 03:34 PM..
Based strictly on your numbers, I think it would be tough for those in the middle class to afford the tuition. But, I think a fully privatized system would provide competition (very much needed in today's school system), which would soon offer a variety of costs and options. I don't think it would take long for multiple options to be available for parents to choose an education that fits their budgets and their educational desires.
Based strictly on your numbers, I think it would be tough for those in the middle class to afford the tuition. But, I think a fully privatized system would provide competition (very much needed in today's school system), which would soon offer a variety of costs and options. I don't think it would take long for multiple options to be available for parents to choose an education that fits their budgets and their educational desires.
Well.. how much more do you think could actually be trimmed. Should only those with the MOST money get the BEST educations.. because obviously the BEST educators will migrate to the highest paying schools an of course those would have to charge more.
While the wealthire of todays children already have advantages, wouldn't the fact that someone now has to buy a "lower costing" education or "nor frills" education that may not be of good quality put that advantage gap even higher.
As it is, the cost to educate students per child reflects the socio-economic dynamic of the neighborhood to a pioint.. where the disticts with a wealthier population has a higher cost to educate vs. a lower economic neighborhood. However, even for those in a lower income from the higher income costs are offset by commercial properties and all property owners including seniors and those without children in the system paying in to offset. Take out those numbers from a neighborhood and the gap would widen.
Private schools already exist to offer competition. The other thread has the arguments about the difference between a private or public school system and both the private and the public have been compared and offer the same quality..one is not better than the other as far as quality of education is concerned.
BTW.. health insurance has not offered many "affordable" options despite it's privitization.
Yes.. that affordability can be improved by allowing insurance to be bought along state lines.
However.. you can't neccesarily open schooling across state lines ... becaues children need to go to school near where they live..unless we all start shipping our kids off to boarding private schools.. then that adds to the cost..
OR ..unless you start having internet conferenced classrooms for students.. but then you lose the social aspect schools which is important to the overall developement of a child.
Anothing thing to consider Dan is if parents are paying the numbers it costs to educate their child for one year till their 16, how do you propose that they would be able to save for college or retirement with that. Because I can guarantee you that anything beyond what a family is paying in property taxes is going to be a strain.
As it is, particularly in my area, parents complain about the high property taxes here. becuase it is severekly squeezing them and their tight budgets.. . of which most of it is for school spending (65%). I do not believe that "competition" would cut the cost for students to educate them down by 23% to bring the cost of educaiton for private education in line with what families currently contribute in propery taxes (and can afford).. considering that a large portion of that bill is going to pay the salaries of our educators. (And remember.. parents take into consideration the local taxes when determing if a house/neighborhood is affordable or not)
How and what would a private institution be able to trim to bring costs to educate a child down by 23%?
A middle income family may then be able to educate 1 child if costs are brought down..but then what happens when you have a second child and tuition is double?
Right now we have a system that allows for all children to have the opportunity of an education despite socio-economic background. Not 1 child goes without being educated. With a private system you will then have children that can not get an education because of economic reasons.
And since education is MANDATED by law, how do you then punish those law breakers that can not comply with the law because they can not afford it?
Correction.. the 23% is actually the cost of per child education that a parent is paying if their tax bill is $4,000.. so in order to get education in line with what parents are currently spending on said education for their children costs would have to be trimmed by 77%! Just realized I goofed on that one!!
Last edited by TristansMommy; 09-25-2008 at 04:03 PM..
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular][SIZE=2][i]Left missing from most debates about education is the fact that despite their many weaknesses, public schools continue to offer one of the only sources of mobility and social support to poor and working class families in a society that remains stratified by race, class and gender. In all likelihood the implementation of a voucher system would only add to the disparities that presently exist in education.
[Mod edited for copyright]
Last edited by TnHilltopper; 09-25-2008 at 09:48 PM..
Reason: copyright
[i]Supporters of the privatization of education insist that school vouchers that allow students to purchase education in the free market will eliminate the inequities in education. However, if the right-wing gambit to finance education through vouchers succeeds, the debate will quickly shift.
[Mod edited for copyright]
Last edited by TnHilltopper; 09-25-2008 at 09:49 PM..
Reason: copyright
Total cost to educate 1 child for one year would be $12,679 a year. Two children would be $29,358. The question is meant to ask if you can do it without taking on extra credit debts or mortgaging your home.
Yes, by the numbers you give, I agree it would be a difficult to impossible financial situation, especially with more than one kid in school. I could not afford that cost.
But, those numbers will vary widely depending on location. Here in northern Nevada, the education cost per pupil in 2006-2007 was $8,234. Property taxes are also lower (mine are in the neighborhood of $3000 per year, probably a bit lower).
In the scenario you describe, I think we would see a big increase in home schooling. Faced with even the lower numbers I mention above, if it came to that, it's something my wife and I would seriously consider.
I think the assumption that a private institution would have the same costs of the current public school system is incorrect. There are alternatives to the public schools right now that cost much less than $12,679 per year.
Yes, by the numbers you give, I agree it would be a difficult to impossible financial situation, especially with more than one kid in school. I could not afford that cost.
But, those numbers will vary widely depending on location. Here in northern Nevada, the education cost per pupil in 2006-2007 was $8,234. Property taxes are also lower (mine are in the neighborhood of $3000 per year, probably a bit lower).
Yes..I gave the numbers for my particular area. I figured if you everyone went to the site I gave, looked at the amount per year needed to run their district per child, they'd figure out the math based on their area and their income.. everying is realitive to where you live. So, while the numbers are lower in your area.. so are the incomes for certain jobs.. a nurse here mightn ot make the same as a nurse there. .. a sectretary..etc etc.
In the scenario you describe, I think we would see a big increase in home schooling. Faced with even the lower numbers I mention above, if it came to that, it's something my wife and I would seriously consider.
Yes, homeschooling would become an option.. or would it? A lot of middle income and lower income families have two parents working to pay the bills. How do 2 parents work 8 hour days and then have enough time to give thier children a proper education? If the parents can not afford the schools then one parent will have to leave their job to stay home and be with the children who would otherwise be in school. That could significantly impact the families income and knock them out of middle class status into lower middle class.. The impact would be harder felt if both parents have a skilled job.
I think the assumption that a private institution would have the same costs of the current public school system is incorrect. There are alternatives to the public schools right now that cost much less than $12,679 per year.
One thing to consider about the current private schools and costs associated with them is that the schools are usually smaller with a smaller population. The larger an institute becomes the more it costs to run. those schools run on lower cost becasue they are not to the same scale as public schools. But let's say in a perfect world all parents could afford public schools and their children attended said schools.. then the size will grow to that of public schools and costs increase.
Not that public school costs can't use a little trimming.. but private schools would soon find their numbers higher..maybe slightly less than that of current numbers in public schools but not by much.
TM-----
I totally agree with you that education should be available to the public and not run like a Corporation!!!!!
But I see a problem with your reasoning. You think everybody else that is paying taxes for your kid's education is a fair system. I think the system isn't very fair. I'm single and I pay a good amount of taxes but get very little back because I can't write anything off.
I don't mind paying taxes if it's used for beneficial things like education, but you should consider the other side's view too. I like the idea of people with kids paying more taxes for schools than people without kids.
On the affordability part----
I know a mother that's sending her teen-aged kid to a private parochial school. She's a single parent, lives in a small apartment, and is able to afford it. She struggles a little with bills and drives an old car, but she's doing it so her kid can get a better education.
I think more people can afford it if they tried harder and cut back on the things they don't need.
The schools are really corrupt anymore, and I think people that send their kids to better schools and pay for their education are doing them a favor.
This is a supply and demand equation. There is currently limited demand due to the high cost of private education. By privatizing the school system, the supply of students would increase greatly. You are assuming that all private schools would be of equal stature and status to the current private schools, with the same selection criterea. After privatization, even the worst students would, by default, attend private schools. Prices would drop, as new schools seeking to capitalize on the massive supply of students would open overnight.
This is a supply and demand equation. There is currently limited demand due to the high cost of private education. By privatizing the school system, the supply of students would increase greatly. You are assuming that all private schools would be of equal stature and status to the current private schools, with the same selection criterea. After privatization, even the worst students would, by default, attend private schools. Prices would drop, as new schools seeking to capitalize on the massive supply of students would open overnight.
To answer your question: yes.
I refer you to posts 4 and 5..
and you didn't answer my question.. my question was NOT about what YOU thinkn Private schools would need to educate a child per year.. I was asking about the numbers I gave.. of what it takes across the board inthe U.S to educate a child.
Glad you can afford over $20K a year to educate 2 children. You must not be middle class then, but in the either upper middle or higher brackets.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
