Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: net.sci,net.politics Subject: Re: privatization of education Message-ID: <2413@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Sat, 19-Jul-86 19:09:17 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-smok.2413 Posted: Sat Jul 19 19:09:17 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 21-Jul-86 03:36:41 EDT References: <3719@decwrl.DEC.COM> <136@cci632.UUCP> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 21 Xref: watmath net.sci:1305 net.politics:17501 In article <491@bnrmtv.UUCP> timlee@bnrmtv.UUCP (Timothy Lee) writes: >A student attending public school has his education paid for by his family's >taxes. One who attends private school pays tuition IN ADDITION to taxes ... One thing I forgot to mention in my original response to Tedrick's request for my opinion: I consider tax credits or vouchers for education as merely an interim measure to be followed by complete removal of the tax burden for education. It is unfair for a person to be forced to pay for somebody else's child's education; the idea that someone's hard work is going to pay for what are properly others' responsibilities can hardly be considered just, unless one adopts socialist notions or a spurious appeal to pragmatism. (At least, I've never heard any other justifications for this. It's similar to the complaint one often hears about being forced to support the children of a welfare family, while the parents irresponsibly continue to produce more children for others to support.) In summary, fully privatized education would not require that the government handle educational funding at all, although since it does at present it would have to be involved in the conversion to completely private education.