Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 18:31:06 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu (Annelise Anderson) Cc: scott@statsci.com, ac199@hwcn.org, jmb@FreeBSD.ORG, hoek@hwcn.org, softweyr@xmission.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FTC regulating use of registrations Message-ID: <199708102331.SAA29591@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970810154149.1039A-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu> from Annelise Anderson at "Aug 10, 97 03:53:41 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > On Sun, 10 Aug 1997, Scott Blachowicz wrote: > > > Annelise Anderson <andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu> wrote: > > > > > But it may improve the public schools. They'd have to compete for > > > students. > > > > How do they compete if they have less money? Don't the vouchers imply less > > money for the public schools, which in turn probably implies cutbacks and no > > means to expand the curriculae? > > Most proposals involve new public funds, so the schools wouldn't get > less money (or less money per student). Ultimately there's no reason > why a voucher system should cost (overall) more than people are > currently paying in taxes plus what they pay for private tuition. > > There's also no evidence that what students learn correlates with > the amount spent per student. > Imagine the taxes that we "are" paying for those who are undereducated or are a burden on society. Seems like improving the schools by competition is a long-term strategy, and in the long-term will pay off by more productive people. (In the sense of those who fit the needed job slots better.) John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708102331.SAA29591>