Public vs Private School funding

[Sttew]

I didn't lose any argument. You may be projecting there.

Your plan to aquire private school land is sh*t for reasons already outlined, and wouldn't be supported by voters. You're a LWNJ. You, not everyone.

Only a socialist government would contemplate compulsorily acquiring private property and turning it into a state enterprise. Luckily we don't have governments like that in this "lucky" country....

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Only a socialist government would contemplate compulsorily acquiring private property and turning it into a state enterprise. Luckily we don't have governments like that in this "lucky" country....

Do you define luck by how much money your parents can spend on schooling?

Lucky country for some, perhaps.

 

[Sttew]

Do you define luck by how much money your parents can spend on schooling?

Lucky country for some, perhaps.

Not at all. I sent my two children to a private school. I had to extend the mortgage to pay it. It set us back $$$ wise, but it was a choice we made to ensure they had the best opportunities. Looking back it was money well spent IMO. I'd say we are lucky that we have choice in this country.

There are plenty of Australians who can't afford private education or private health and we have a public system to cater for them. There are plenty of people too who would refuse to send their kids to private school, even if they could afford it, because they don't rate or value what it offers.

 

[Gralin]

So you're against funding choice for parents who otherwise wouldn't be able to afford private schooling. Interesting.

yes, if they want to send their kids to a private school they should pay the full amount, why should we subsidise that choice over and above what we pay to the public school they could send their kid to

because that is what happens, we pay more towards the private school kid than the public

If government funding of private schools was abolished, a large percentage of families who send their kids to private schools, many of who are average families where both parents work and one parent's income goes to school fees, would be forced to bail out and the children enrolled in government schools because of the resultant rise in fees. Is that fair? Firstly the state system would not cope. Secondly, why should families who pay their share of taxes as PAYG be penalised because they choose to send their kids to private school?

if they took that money and put it into public schools maybe the issue would go away

I have no interest in the but whataboutisms re spending tax dollars

tax dollars get spent whether you have kids or not, people without kids are helping pay for children to go to school already, why does being a parent of a private school kid entitle you to money?

We currently put more tax dollars, per student into private school funding than public school funding. Why is that?

 

[Evolved1]

yes, if they want to send their kids to a private school they should pay the full amount, why should we subsidise that choice over and above what we pay to the public school they could send their kid to

because that is what happens, we pay more towards the private school kid than the public


if they took that money and put it into public schools maybe the issue would go away

I have no interest in the but whataboutisms re spending tax dollars

tax dollars get spent whether you have kids or not, people without kids are helping pay for children to go to school already, why does being a parent of a private school kid entitle you to money?

We currently put more tax dollars, per student into private school funding than public school funding. Why is that?

Do you have supporting evidence for that claim?

"All levels of government now spend a total of $16,748 per student per year on average. Public school students receive a higher level of government funding, $19,328 if capital costs are included or $16,399 if excluded, compared with $11,813 for non-government schools."
(From the guardian one year ago.)

Australian government funding for private schools still growing faster than for public

Productivity Commission says spending on private students rose 3.3% per year over decade compared with 1.4% for public

www.theguardian.com

 

[Sttew]

yes, if they want to send their kids to a private school they should pay the full amount, why should we subsidise that choice over and above what we pay to the public school they could send their kid to

because that is what happens, we pay more towards the private school kid than the public


if they took that money and put it into public schools maybe the issue would go away

I have no interest in the but whataboutisms re spending tax dollars

tax dollars get spent whether you have kids or not, people without kids are helping pay for children to go to school already, why does being a parent of a private school kid entitle you to money?

We currently put more tax dollars, per student into private school funding than public school funding. Why is that?

Gralin it is difficult to argue rationally with someone who holds the view that a family who pay their full measure of tax should be penalised because they choose to send their children to private school.

How long would it take for governments to build schools for the $1M+ students currently attending private schools IF the private schools didn't exist. The same applies to private hospitals.

This country is built on a combination of publicly and privately funded core services. If you don't like that then frankly, maybe China or North Korea may be best suited to you?

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Where did I say that?

Lets do what Finland did.

Finland outlawed fee-paying 45 years ago and soared to the top of world rankings. Finland is widely cited as the model for a successful education system that “prohibits” private primary and secondary education.

If only we had a mining boom to fund things like education, infastcutre and other quality of life improvements.

 

[Pessimistic]

Gralin it is difficult to argue rationally with someone who holds the view that a family who pay their full measure of tax should be penalised because they choose to send their children to private school.

How long would it take for governments to build schools for the $1M+ students currently attending private schools IF the private schools didn't exist. The same applies to private hospitals.

This country is built on a combination of publicly and privately funded core services

Except public and private hospitals already overlap. I guess Jaime in summer heights high was an exchange student

 

[Gralin]

Where exactly do you propose the state government finds the money to build the schools that would be required to take in all the kids who wouldn't be able to afford non-government education without subsidisation? We have about 1,200 kids here and I would suspect at least 75% of them wouldn't be here without government support (and support from the school - one item left out of the discussion quite often is the support most Catholic schools provide to families in financial distress).

That would be a bran new primary school and secondary school that need to be built - Got a lazy $50m lying around for that?

I mean given you think those schools will just stop teaching I think you've answered your own question about where the facilities would come from.

My wife spent over a decade working as Marketing & Communications Director at an elite boys school in Melbourne, and the stories she told me about money being wasted (e.g., junket trips to China to attract students, and junket trips to NY, London etc by senior teachers to attend alumni "reunions") were appalling. Equally, though, at least 40% of students at this school came from average families where grandparents paid the fees and/or the parents "busted a gut" to pay the fees.

So you know that the private for profit schools are a massive grift that prey on people that can't afford the fees and you still think they are a good idea.

Think maybe that's just you justifying the money you spent

A lot of left wing nutjobbery here today.

Only a socialist government would contemplate compulsorily acquiring private property and turning it into a state enterprise. Luckily we don't have governments like that in this "lucky" country....

Socialism you say?

Gralin it is difficult to argue rationally with someone who holds the view that a family who pay their full measure of tax should be penalised because they choose to send their children to private school.

How long would it take for governments to build schools for the $1M+ students currently attending private schools IF the private schools didn't exist. The same applies to private hospitals.

Hey would you look at the very top of that article you posted



Explain to me how I'm suggesting people who choose private school would be penalized when they'd be living under the same funding as everyone else?

People with no kids at all don't get a tax rebate based on not using any of the school funding, why is someone choosing not to use the public system entitled to a hand out?

 

[Gralin]

I will happily heck around on this topic all day

 

[Evolved1]

Gralin and Ghost Patrol would prefer our government pay $17,000 than $12,000 for an education because they hate rich people and choice. Damn those parents in the outer suburbs who want their kids to get a better education!

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Gralin and Ghost Patrol would prefer our government pay $17,000 than $12,000 for an education because they hate rich people and choice. Damn those parents in the outer suburbs who want their kids to get a better education!

No, I want all kids to have the same opportunity.

Evolved1 wants privileged people like Christian Porter and Josh Frydenberg to have a leg up over those less fortunate.

 

[Opine]

Our schools are run by the states, so size/population is comparable.

We can afford it. Remove mining/fossil fuel subsidies and religious tax exemption, for starters. Though we can afford it without doing that...

Blah blah. lBtw Dan is Catholic, get rid of him.

 

[Deliverance]

My library had science books that were 20 years out of date. They had no staff to advise students on year 12 prep or uni prerequisites. They had teachers who needed students to run the physics and calculus classes because they didn't understand the course material themselves.

But yeah, we were the same as Scotch and Xavier

When you account for student socio-economic status, academic performance is the same between private and public schools.
The teachers all come from the same universities with the same degrees.
Text books all come from the same publishers as well these days.

 

[Opine]

Ah yes, lose argument then call everyone a leftie.

The snowflakery of pretend centrists never ceases to amaze me.

You Leftie you.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

You Leftie you.

Hey, at least my house doesn't smell like cat piss.

 

[Gralin]

Gralin and Ghost Patrol would prefer our government pay $17,000 than $12,000 for an education because they hate rich people and choice. Damn those parents in the outer suburbs who want their kids to get a better education!

I'd like the poorer public school to get the money that currently goes to places eith multimillion dollar trusts and better facilities that some professional sporting clubs.

Quite s**t of me isn't it

 

[Opine]

Hey, at least my house doesn't smell like cat piss.

At least ants in my garden don’t always march 20 degrees west of South: what does your stupid post directly above have to do with the discussion?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

When you account for student socio-economic status, academic performance is the same between private and public schools.
The teachers all come from the same universities with the same degrees.
Text books all come from the same publishers as well these days.

FFS you are delusional

1) thats because socio economic status dictates what school you can go to. Be it by geography limiting your public options, or cash limiting your private ones

2) teachers who barely pass were at our school, because the private schools cherry pick the best of the best by paying them well above govt rates

3) text books are the start of learning. when I was studying you needed to quote a minimum of ten external sources for a high school report. Your textbook is just one of them. FFS even for mandatory texts (not on the official text book list, but for a specific project), we usually only had 2 copies in the library for 60-120 students to fight over

the fact you think i got the same education in frankston as someone from scotch is beyond laughable

 

[Gralin]

FFS you are delusional

1) thats because socio economic status dictates what school you can go to. Be it by geography limiting your public options, or cash limiting your private ones

2) teachers who barely pass were at our school, because the private schools cherry pick the best of the best by paying them well above govt rates

3) text books are the start of learning. when I was studying you needed to quote a minimum of ten external sources for a high school report. Your textbook is just one of them. FFS even for mandatory texts (not on the official text book list, but for a specific project), we usually only had 2 copies in the library for 60-120 students to fight over

the fact you think i got the same education in frankston as someone from scotch is beyond laughable

But he also blames lockdown for disadvantaged kids dropping out
So you know

 

[Evolved1]

No, I want all kids to have the same opportunity.

Evolved1 wants privileged people like Christian Porter and Josh Frydenberg to have a leg up over those less fortunate.

All kids wont have the same opportunity irrespective of what you try. Removing private schools and taking their land wouldn't lead to better outcomes in the short term. It won't lead to better long term outcomes either unless there's more substance to your plan than anything you've shared here.

I suspect you just want to watch the world burn.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

At least ants in my garden don’t always march 20 degrees west of South: what on earth does your stupid post above have to do with the discussion.

Toxoplasma gondii and it's effects on mammalian brains. It's educational, check your sig.

 

[Evolved1]

When you account for student socio-economic status, academic performance is the same between private and public schools.
The teachers all come from the same universities with the same degrees.
Text books all come from the same publishers as well these days.

School culture is the main difference IMO. The parents in lower SES areas who send their kids to private schools care more about their education.

 

[Evolved1]

FFS you are delusional

1) thats because socio economic status dictates what school you can go to. Be it by geography limiting your public options, or cash limiting your private ones

2) teachers who barely pass were at our school, because the private schools cherry pick the best of the best by paying them well above govt rates

3) text books are the start of learning. when I was studying you needed to quote a minimum of ten external sources for a high school report. Your textbook is just one of them. FFS even for mandatory texts (not on the official text book list, but for a specific project), we usually only had 2 copies in the library for 60-120 students to fight over

the fact you think i got the same education in frankston as someone from scotch is beyond laughable

That's not true.

 

[Opine]

Toxoplasma gondii and it's effects on mammalian brains. It's educational.

I think you’re full of s**t; in a sweetly naive way