Heroscapers

Heroscapers (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/index.php)
-   General (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Decision 2016 (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=53250)

dok December 7th, 2016 01:25 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by keglo (Post 2124402)
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2124378)
If Swamper or keglo would just say "I'm OK with the government funding religious schools", I'd simply point to these rulings, and we could agree to disagree about whether the ruling is a good one and/or what constitutes a "true choice". What's been frustrating is these arguments that a voucher program is *not* government funding of those schools, when it very plainly is.

Well you won't be getting me to say that because I completely disagree with you. You say it very plainly is the government funding those schools and I say it very clearly is not.

So if I don't have kids, none of my taxes are going to a religious school?

keglo December 7th, 2016 01:31 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
[quote=Ranior;2124368][quote=keglo;2124337]
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2124315)

I'm not sure you know how food stamps work in the modern day?

His analogy works just fine. For at least the last decade, anyone that gets benefits through SNAP (which we commonly call food stamps) gets money loaded onto a debit card and they can use those funds at most grocery stores and some other places such as farmers markets and what not. The items they can purchase with those funds are typically limited to food items. Household products, pet foods, alcohol, and tobacco are generally prohibited.

The point being though is if for some reason Beer were allowed, say person X gets 100 dollars a month loaded onto their card. If they go to the store and spend that money that is supposed to be for food and purchases beer there would be no difficulty in seeing it as government money buying this person alcohol.

From what I understand of vouchers, they basically would be government funding of religious schools. I don't actually know the laws that well, but it seems like this is actually legal. But either way as others have pointed out clearly it is government funding of religious schools. I personally feel that shouldn't be legal, but others probably do think it should be and it perhaps may actually be legal. I really don't know nor do I know how to really figure this stuff out. My cursory google searches aren't helping find any good article to actually lay out what I'm looking for.

No I completely understand how the food stamp system works. I also understand what you and @dok are trying to say. But I stand by my original statement that it is a bad analogy.

@Dad_Scaper was closer to it but I completely disagree with his conclusion that it is government funding religion.

dok December 7th, 2016 01:37 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by keglo (Post 2124410)
No I completely understand how the food stamp system works. I also understand what you and @dok are trying to say. But I stand by my original statement that it is a bad analogy.

OK, but you said "The government is giving vouchers for beer" in that case. But they wouldn't be doing that literally. They'd just be loading up a debit card that can be used for bread, or milk... or beer. And people could decide they preferred beer to milk, and buy the beer.

This is exactly the same as the government giving you a debit card that can only be used for education, and some people deciding that they'd rather buy catholic school than public school.

So if "the government is giving vouchers for beer" in the first case, "the government is giving vouchers for catholic school" in the second case. It's just as you said.

Aldin December 7th, 2016 01:37 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
dok,

The public good is satisfied when kids get an education that satisfies government-defined educational standards. That's why it is possible to send a kid to a religious private school instead of sending them to a public school - it satisfies that standard. Public schools are the lowest common denominator. They are the minimum which is necessary to satisfy the public good.

School vouchers would be used to pay to fund that public good. If they are used at a religious private school, then they are being used to fund the public good. If the amount used is what the government has determined is the basic stipend for ensuring the public good, and the school satisfies it, that's all that matters.

Just clarifying that last point, the government determines that the amount of the voucher is the minimum amount required to satisfy the public good (and would presumably be the exact amount all public schools charged). Therefore, from a bureaucratic standpoint, the voucher cannot provide religious instruction as it is paying the exact amount, and not a penny more, as the minimum required to satisfy the public good.

~Aldin, soloing

Hahma December 7th, 2016 01:39 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
I wonder how the vouchers would be dispersed? Would everyone across the board get the same amount, or would it be based on what town you live in?

Is the money going to be based off your property taxes, or some other formula?

Education is kind of messed up in general IMO. While I know it would be difficult to give all students in the country the same education, I don't see why a state couldn't have the exact same opportunities for every one of its students. It kind of frosts my ass when politicians talk about improving education, because it's still going to end up being mostly a matter of where a child is born or how wealthy the parents are that will often determine the educational opportunities for that child.

I don't believe there should be a need for private schools to to a better education. If it's a matter of it being faith based, then that's different. But I think it's sad that we are having a hard time keeping up with other countries.

Aldin December 7th, 2016 01:40 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
@Hahma The government already has an amount per child which goes to schools. I imagine any voucher would be based on that number in any given area.

~Aldin, guessingly

dok December 7th, 2016 01:44 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Swamper (Post 2124404)
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2124378)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranior (Post 2124367)
The court ruled that the Cleveland school voucher program was constitutional as it offered true choice between private religion, secular private, or public schools. Now in Cleveland there was actually a secular private school as an option though, so I'm not so sure how that would be ruled for communities where vouchers could only be used on a religious school or the public one.

Yeah, it seems like a "true choice" is the operative thing there. In a small community there simply isn't a true choice.

If Swamper or keglo would just say "I'm OK with the government funding religious schools", I'd simply point to these rulings, and we could agree to disagree about whether the ruling is a good one and/or what constitutes a "true choice". What's been frustrating is these arguments that a voucher program is *not* government funding of those schools, when it very plainly is.

I don't see how choosing between a private Christian school and a public school with vouchers is not a "true" choice. It's more choice than a lot of people currently have. If I;m poor and can't afford to send my kids to a private school, then I really have no choice. With vouchers, at least I have more choice than I did before.

Sure, I get that. This is the reasonable debate, like I said before. You're saying your OK with funding religious schools with government money, and hey, a choice between two schools is better than no choice.

One issue is that, in a small community, it may not be realistic to support multiple options. What happens if in a tiny, homogenous town (which there are many of in this nation), 95% of the families opt for the Protestant/Mormon/Catholic/whatever private school? Do you keep a public school open for the remaining tiny sliver of kids? Many small communities already struggle to support local schools. What if you're told that you can go to the community Christian school, or drive your kid to the public school 35 miles down the road? Is that still a "true" choice? Or at that point is the local community, effectively, endorsing Christianity as its official religion?

I'm not saying I think the Supreme Court's ruling is necessarily perfect, but you can see the concerns they were trying to weigh.

dok December 7th, 2016 01:49 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aldin (Post 2124412)
dok,

The public good is satisfied when kids get an education that satisfies government-defined educational standards. That's why it is possible to send a kid to a religious private school instead of sending them to a public school - it satisfies that standard. Public schools are the lowest common denominator. They are the minimum which is necessary to satisfy the public good.

School vouchers would be used to pay to fund that public good. If they are used at a religious private school, then they are being used to fund the public good. If the amount used is what the government has determined is the basic stipend for ensuring the public good, and the school satisfies it, that's all that matters.

Just clarifying that last point, the government determines that the amount of the voucher is the minimum amount required to satisfy the public good (and would presumably be the exact amount all public schools charged). Therefore, from a bureaucratic standpoint, the voucher cannot provide religious instruction as it is paying the exact amount, and not a penny more, as the minimum required to satisfy the public good.

~Aldin, soloing

I don't see how any of this even tangentially counters my argument that this amounts to the government funding the religious school. If you are willing to stipulate that that's true, then I have no further disagreement with you on any of the things you're talking about here.

Yes, they are funding a religious institution in order for it to provide education. That's still funding a religious institution. It's not like a Catholic school says "welp, they funded us at 'the minimum'. Looks like we'll have to take down the crucifixes, no money for them in the budget." It's still a religious education.

Hahma December 7th, 2016 01:52 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aldin (Post 2124414)
@Hahma The government already has an amount per child which goes to schools. I imagine any voucher would be based on that number in any given area.

~Aldin, guessingly

True Aldin, but that changes. Our district went from getting X $ per student to Y $ per student for no apparent reason. We dropped to one of the least amount of $ per student in the state. So then teachers get laid off, aides get laid off, larger number of students in each class, etc.

So I guess my point, is the rich may get richer based on where you live.

Sorry, didn't mean to get off track here. I just have a sore spot when it comes to education, and the voucher talk kind of brought that out.

Raider30 December 7th, 2016 03:11 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2124416)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aldin (Post 2124412)
dok,

The public good is satisfied when kids get an education that satisfies government-defined educational standards. That's why it is possible to send a kid to a religious private school instead of sending them to a public school - it satisfies that standard. Public schools are the lowest common denominator. They are the minimum which is necessary to satisfy the public good.

School vouchers would be used to pay to fund that public good. If they are used at a religious private school, then they are being used to fund the public good. If the amount used is what the government has determined is the basic stipend for ensuring the public good, and the school satisfies it, that's all that matters.

Just clarifying that last point, the government determines that the amount of the voucher is the minimum amount required to satisfy the public good (and would presumably be the exact amount all public schools charged). Therefore, from a bureaucratic standpoint, the voucher cannot provide religious instruction as it is paying the exact amount, and not a penny more, as the minimum required to satisfy the public good.

~Aldin, soloing

I don't see how any of this even tangentially counters my argument that this amounts to the government funding the religious school. If you are willing to stipulate that that's true, then I have no further disagreement with you on any of the things you're talking about here.

Yes, they are funding a religious institution in order for it to provide education. That's still funding a religious institution. It's not like a Catholic school says "welp, they funded us at 'the minimum'. Looks like we'll have to take down the crucifixes, no money for them in the budget." It's still a religious education.

Using your argument the government 'funds' a variety of things I am not pleased with. Such is life in the wide and varied society to which most of us belong. Given that, what is the point here again?

Unless I misunderstood you and you are really arguing that 'funding' is the same as 'endorsing'.

- Raider30

Aldin December 7th, 2016 03:11 PM

Re: Decision 2016
 
@dok I think we see this in a fundamentally different way. I see the vouchers as funding the education and you see them as funding the schools. Meh. I see your point. I just don't agree with you. Schools, in and of themselves, don't satisfy the "basic good" requirement of providing an education whereas a satisfactory education, however derived, automatically does. Therefore, the funding must be to provide the education and not to pay for a delivery platform since one satisfies the requirement and one does not.

@Hahma Fair enough. My wife is in education as well and I've seen how crazy government funding can be (I imagine we could tell one another some "fun" stories). It's one of the reasons I'm looking for a fix. The current system is not functioning as it should.

~Aldin, who wants to use some smart sounding latin phrase here but can't think of any that apply at the moment

Dysole December 7th, 2016 03:19 PM

Bumpy
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dysole (Post 2124329)
Huh.

Now I may just be horribly misinformed here, but doesn't that happen on some level in higher education with like school loans for private institutions with a religious background and whatnot? Am I just completely misunderstanding everything or is there a difference in how it works or is there no difference and we should be looking into this?

~Dysole, who has a degree from a school with a religious background

Asked this last night while everyone was asleep. Anyone want to enlighten me?

~Dysole, looking for answers


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.