🚀 go-pugleaf

Hyperion Systems wrote:
> 
> In article <35ADF112.175F7712@ibm.net>,
> Chuck Wright  <caTwArXigh@ibm.net> wrote:
> >What services?  Do you mean government schools that actively protect
> >incompetent teachers?  Do you mean the government schools that leave
> >more then one in five Americans illiterate?  Are those the services
> >you're talking about?
> 
> Stop being so narrow minded.  There are many services that I enjoy:
> roads, parks, libraries, fire and police response, schools fo my kids
> (yes, the same schools that supposedly protet incompetent teachers).  I am
> glad that I don't have to pay for roads each time I use them, or for parks
> or libraries.

What do you mean government schools "supposedly" protect incompetent
teachers?  It's an undeniable fact.  Are you not paying attention?  Once a 
government school teacher has tenure, it's next to impossible to get rid of 
them regardless of how badly they perform.  Once a government school teacher
obtains tenure, unless they do something stupid like assault a student or 
steal from the school, they've got a job for life with regular pay raises no 
matter how incompetent they are.  

Recently there were articles in Colorado newspapers that stated that over 
the past three years only five government school teachers had been fired in 
Colorado.  

What an insane system!  But what's more insane are apologists like you that 
tolerate and defend a system that actively protects incompetent teachers.

When I attended a government High School, there was a math teacher who 
had brain surgery.  The surgery left this man with little more than the 
ability to eat, walk with a pronounced limp, and speak with slurred speech.  
He was not capable of doing any math except basic arithmetic (addition and 
subtraction).  Unfortunately he wanted to continue to teach as if nothing 
had happened to him, and the local school district had to let him teach his 
old classes, algebra, geometry, and trigonometry.  Usually this teacher 
spent much of his classroom time gazing at the wall, but the school board's 
hands were tied. And this government High School was rated as being the best 
in the state.  

> Regarding schools...  I view it as a parent's responsibility to ensure
> that their child is getting the education that they (the parent) desires.
> If you do not do that, you are not doing your job as a parent; no one else
> is going to do it for you.  

Unfortunately not all parents are as altruistic as you are.  Because 
government schools are free, parents do not have a financial motivation
to pursue quality education for their children.  To make an analogy,
would you care more about the quality of a lunch you got for free, or
would you care more about the quality of a lunch you paid $15.00 for?
Which one would you be more motivated to demand high quality for?   

> If your local public school is not doing the
> job, you DO have several options.  You can teach your kids yourself, you
> can see what other teachers may be available, you may be able to select
> another public school, or you can send them somewhere else where you have
> to pay.

You assume the parent is motivated to follow up on the quality of the 
school.  Unfortunately most parents assume that the government is taking 
care of everything and they don't have to worry.  Also, because the tax 
burden is so horrific, for many parents paying for a private education is
not an option.   
 
> I don't see it as a failure of the school system that (in your world) 20%
> of adults are illiterate.  

I didn't make up the figure of 20 percent.  The US Dept. of Ed says,
"The Department of Education currently estimates the adult illiteracy rate 
at 21 to 23%." This quote was taken from the following US Dept. of Ed
web page: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OVAE/AdultEd/InfoBoard/f-4.html   
Look it up if you don't believe me.

> I see it as a failure of their parents to do
> their most basic duty and ensure that their kids can function in a society
> where it is assumed that adults can read and write.  It's those parents
> who allow their tax-funded schools to graduate people who cannot read in
> the first place.

Why do parents fail to do their duty?  Because government "free" education
leaves them with no financial incentive to see to it that they're getting
quality for their money.  Parents abdicate their parental responsibility 
to the government.

> >> You can opt not to be bound by it by leaving.
> >
> >This argument is incredible hollow.
> 
> But incredibly true.

Right, as incredibly true as it was during the Vietnam War.  Support the
War or leave the country.  What idiocy!

Chuck Wright
http://www.reason.org/