[geeks] geeks Digest, Vol 86, Issue 11

[Lionel Peterson]

On Jan 20, 2010, at 4:58 PM, Jonathan Patschke <jp at celestrion.net>  
wrote:

>> Did you just describe an 'optional' school tax to help those who's  
>> income won't support a self-funded education from the families  
>> earnings/resources?
>
> I think the term you're looking for is "charity".
>
>> And who will determine the needs? Discern 'stupid' from 'learning
>> disabled', for instance?
>
> Whomever is running the charity.

So instead of gov't you'd have a charity running schools for those  
that can't provide for/fund their own education, requesting funds from  
those who can afford to educate their own?

Aside from the ability to opt-out, how is this different from a public  
school system? I provide for my sons education outside the public  
school district, and I support the education of my neighbor's children  
through my tax dollars...

An optional tax/charitable donation would *likely* result in  
insufficient funds for the proper education of those with the greatest  
needs.

I've mentioned before the student that almost moved into my district -  
this child had needs so profound that his education would cost  
whatever district he lives in $250,000/year - almost 20x the cost of a  
general education student... The reality is few communities would  
*likely* be able to cough up that kind of money through any non- 
compulsory funding scenarios.

As I recall from your earlier post, I thought non-compete service  
providers was a concern of yours - this doesn't seem to address that  
issue.

Trust me, I'm all for lowering my property taxes, but the truth is my  
son's tuition costs more than I pay in property taxes... Public  
education is a bargain for parents of school-age children at the  
expense of those without school-age children. If everyone in my town  
had two kids in school my taxes would be insane ($30,000 to pay for  
two students PLUS my share of the community services).

Lionel