no because it ALWAYS turns to shit and propaganda
parents should be in control even if theyre kinda retarded

>>18481130

>Should the government run schools?


NO.

>>18481130
Yes, but not strictly. Too many retard parents who wouldn't provide their kids with an education on their own but if you can teach your kid yourself, you should be able to.

>>18481168


YOU DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE PRIVATE SCHOOLS, RIGHT?

in spite of everything, I'm really glad I live in world where most people can read

>>18481142
No, not kinda, they ARE retarded. Homeschooling would be disastrous for the nation. Public schooling exists for a reason, it provides everyone in the nation with a uniform education which is necessary for the modern economy.

>>18481175
You do know they're not free right?

>>18481197


IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD YOUR CHILD'S EDUCATION, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD A CHILD.

PUBLIC SCHOOLING IS NOT FREE, EITHER, JUST CHEAPER AND WORSE —DETRIMENTAL, EVEN.

GOOD QUALITY TRUMPS GREAT QUANTITY.

>>18481130
Yes, all citizens should receive some level of baseline education and there should be a national curriculum to ensure that some minimum standard is met by all. Some leeway should be given at regional levels but no ideally child should be held hostage by adults making retarded decisions for them.

>>18481130
yes since even if there are many fuck ups, the other options are even worse
>majority of homeschooling just ends up with social retards even if a parent is competent at teaching, this isn't even accounting for most cases where said parent doesn't have the ability to teach or doesn't have the time to teach
>churches are more than willing to exclude certain subjects just because book said no
>only giga retarded lolberts would even entertain the idea of businesses running schools

>>18481215
Blackpill & TRVTH NVKE

>>18481155
>>18481175
>>18481215
The church is a government.

>>18481215
>education
>should not be free or cheaper
TAKE YOUR PILLS.

File: IMG_9622.jpg (99 KB, 634x675)

99 KB JPG

>>18481130
>>18481155
>>18481175
>>18481215

Your kids will learn to read and do math and you will be happy

>>18481624


YES, BUT NOT AT THOSE IDEOLOGIZATION PRECINCTS THAT ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

>>18481624
>>18481168
See >>18481142
first post best post also leafs are evil

>>18481130
Yes. They may yet serve a useful purpose in training youths and shaping them into loyal and productive parts of the state.

absolutely not
however, they *should* issue stipends or vouchers to parents so that these parents can use these funds to select the best school for their child

so you can still have public funding of education, but without the direct involvement of the state and the teachers being literal employees of the state
what this will accomplish is encouraging more small schools to pop up, whereas now you have enormous central districts with 30 or more kids to a single classroom, meaning these kids will have more out of their teacher because said teacher might only have 10 or 15 kids in a class
basically, same number of students but more teachers and decentralized schools

>>18481216
>ideally no child should be held hostage by adults making retarded decisions for them
yes, yes, very good
however you're actually describing the current state of affairs under compulsory mass public education

>>18482019
>however you're actually describing the current state of affairs under compulsory mass public education
1. Should it not be compulsory? There's not really anything else the children can or should do with their time at that age so why not invest in their education?
>they could start working instead
Yeah right.
2. If there are issues with public education is it not better to solve the issues with the system instead of tearing the whole system down? We can't just lose all interest in the idea of public education whenever someone doesn't like the curriculum.

You already have private schools, as always. The government runs schools which are run by the government, and the government doesn't run schools which are not run by government. It's a stupid question

>>18481130
Should be set by the states

>>18482034
If you have to force people to send their kids to school, it's not a environment they would naturally want to choose for their kids to be in.

It's a violation of their right to freedom of assembly.
You might not like to hear that.

A kid who doesn't want to be in school, who hates it, actively refuses to play along or try other than simply avoid punishment, etc,and I've met many in my time, you actually aren't doing them any favors by forcing into a box they don't normally fit into. There isn't a one size fits all solution for kids, there simply can't be.

They would be better off being physically active and making friends *on their own terms* than sitting at a shitty desk all day and given 30 minutes to get some sunlight and some garbage prison tier food just so some glorified babysitters can feel important.
And frankly, considering the effective illiteracy rate for the youth in my country at this point the system could be considered actively detrimental to their cognitive development.

>just solve the issues
That has been tried.
The problem has only gotten worse.

Nobody is saying currently existing public schools have to close.
It's just that, with vouchers, parents of less means would actually be able to send their kids elsewhere if (and for a huge number of them it is incontrovertibly true) that school just sucks.

Giving parents the money directly after they opt in, which would have normally gone to bloated administrations and graft, encourages them to send their kids to school instead of forcing them to.
It also removes the sick incentive of attaching funding to test scores.

Anyone who would defend taking kids away from their parents just because the parents don't agree with the option the state presents them is insane.

Many public schools actually present an active hazard to youth, including exposure to gangs and drugs.
The education system serves more to indoctrinate and form compliance patterned behavior complexes than actually teach.

You know what would be really great for society as a whole?

If we, for nearly all of a person's formative childhood years and a large majority of their waking hours during that time, separated them from their parents and other family members and had them obey complete strangers who we tell them have authority instead together with a bunch of other kids who they're forced to interact with regardless of whether or not they like one another.
Also, let's do that to everyone we possibly can. And severely punish anyone who doesn't agree to hand their kids over to the state.

If some of these kids beat up or pick on others, even collectively, and the teacher usually doesn't do shit which is normal, that kid just has to take it.

I remind you now that communists have been historically opposed to the family unit ideologically.
And in fact, they used schools to get children to literally spy and inform on their parents.
Marx called for the abolition of the family, there are people who have kids and read that shit who say to themselves "nope nothing wrong with that".

>>18481155
>>18481175
>>18481215
You don't have to shout, dude

>>18481215
So what, only the rich should have access to education? Can't see what could possibly go wrong with this.

Public school needs reform, not abolishing.

>>18482241
Reform must take the form of taking the tax money that is currently subsidizing failure away from the administrators responsible for this state of affairs, and giving it instead to the parents directly to spend it as they see fit.

Be that on private tutors, large schools, or small schools.
There should be more options than a single district for every kid in a designated area.

Real estate prices shouldn't be the determining factor in how much money goes to your kid's education.
Ultimately, this effectively "abolishes" public education in that teachers would no longer be employees of the state, but instead accountable to the parents directly.

No more putting concerned parents who actually bother to attend parent-teacher association meetings to complain about the complete bullshit their kids are being put through on terrorist watchlists.

>>18482268
Because those parents totally won't commit fraud, misuse the money, and pop up children they don't want just for more? I think the welfare experiment with black Americans is evidence enough of this being a bad idea.

>>18482272
People commit welfare fraud quite commonly, sell foodstamps meant to help feed their kids for drugs, even just use them to buy pepsi and candybars, etc.

You're not going to tell me that program, which is essentially a voucher program, isn't suddenly important and better than literal government issued cheese rations.

There are control mechanisms in place to control that kind of misuse, even if corrupt state officials turn a blind eye in some of the most egregious cases.
Those officials need to be held to account, made a public example of, but I'm not willing to let people go hungry in the nation which is supposed to be a bread basket and in which about as much food is deliberately wasted as eaten.

Maybe we could talk about why agricultural subsidies make grocery store prices higher instead of the opposite.
But that wouldn't be on topic. Anyways, the same principle kind of applies to education.

Of we cut out the middle men, and gave the state funds directly to parents instead of administrators, that would be more cost effective and would probably result in a superior product.

Sure, the possibility exists that a "private tutor" just pockets the money and gives the parents a kickback.
Things like that happen all the time in all kinds of sectors.
Harsh, punitive justice should be applied in all those kinds of situations where public funds are misappropriated or outright stolen. Unfortunately, this is not how those in power currently operate.

>>18482188
>If you have to force people to send their kids to school, it's not a environment they would naturally want to choose for their kids to be in.
We force people to do a lot of necessary things, from paying taxes to driving on a specific side of the road or making a surgeon thoroughly wash his hands before surgery. Forcing someone to comply with some basic rules makes life better for everyone, even if it would be better if all people were simply reasonable and made the right choice on their own, but we don't live in a perfect world.

I'm not in favor of forcing all kids to default to the nearest public school, in my country education is free (in the sense that there's no tuition, it's all tax-funded) but if you opt out of the nearest school during the compulsory years (6-15) you will have to pay for your kids bus pass yourself, that's about it, but even in this system you should absolutely be compelled to educate your child. Nobody should end up as an illiterate retard who can't do basic arithmetic or understand how to act around other kids because their parents decided they were better off without school.

>>18482673
>Nobody should end up as an illiterate retard who can't do basic arithmetic or understand how to act around other kids because their parents decided they were better off without school.

The US education system is so bad that most HS graduates can't do the above. Ask the average American adult to do arithmetic above single digits or how to spell Massachusetts and watch the phone come out.

File: 1777246597687609.png (1.15 MB, 863x841)

1.15 MB PNG

>>18482685
Most adults can do basic arithmetic anon, sounds like you're projecting
> or how to spell Massachusetts and watch the phone come out.
Unless you live in Massachusetts, there is no practical need to have to spell that word for 99.9% of the population, so it wouldn't surprise me if most adults couldn't spell it without looking it up first. Wild strawman anon, simply wild.

>>18481624
You kids will learn to worship negroes, jews and troons

>>18481130
No, this should be church and familiar business, the state have no authority agains the private and spiritual life

>America becomes less than half white
>Education stats rocket right into the toilet
Who could have seen this coming

>>18481191
Humanity don't need public schools, these are pretty recent btw, it worked in the past without clown world bullshit and should world again... besides, literacy is irrelevant if you don't use for serious things or persuits, it is so irrelevant that you can teach a monkey or parrot how to read lol

>>18482710
>it worked in the past without clown world bullshit and should [work] again
I can tell you were home-schooled

I think the current system is fine, except school districts should have a minimum budget. The states provide additional funding to districts which can't meet the minimum from property taxes alone.

>>18481724
>>18481670
>>18482702

Trump is in charge, trannies. The schools will teach your kid to love this country, and you WILL send them there

>>18482780


I. PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE EQUALLY PERVERSE AND SHITTY EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD BEYOND RUSSIA, CHINA, AND NORTH KOREA, NOT ONLY IN UNITEDSTATES.

II. DONALD TRUMP IS A DEMENTED PUPPET MANIPULATED BY THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN: A GOLEM.

>>18482702
Rent free

>>18482019
>however, they *should* issue stipends or vouchers to parents so that these parents can use these funds to select the best school for their child
Always backfires badly.

>what this will accomplish is encouraging more small schools to pop up
That tend to be short-term thinking and often hinge off trying to hustle for vouchers as source of profit while working on the bare min. Worse for kids who lack options due to distance, crowding or only having one school.

File: Salutations - Copy.gif (2.12 MB, 320x320)

2.12 MB GIF

>>18482272
>welfare experiment with black Americans is evidence enough of this being a bad idea.
Welfare was working though. It constantly got stripped down over the years to the pint it stopped working due to the lack of funding and shitty requirements tied to it.
Welfare fraud is really not that common and statistically the vast majority of people on welfare and doing fraud would be white since the US IS majority white by large amount. People only said this because shit politicians used it as way to trick gullible idiots into voting against their self interests.

>>18482809
and both political parties engaged in gutting the welfare system for various shitty reasons.

>>18482288
>Of we cut out the middle men, and gave the state funds directly to parents instead of administrators, that would be more cost effective
You think parents can manage a school board and think up of a decent school curriculum? Have you seen school board meetings.

File: IMG_20260307_222604_320.jpg (57 KB, 570x434)

57 KB JPG

>>18481130
Yes, however I only say this because I'm a European living in a civilized society and my state is largely composed of high IQ, mature, emotionally well adjusted citizens (Switzerland).
I understand that the idea of a functional state is incomprehensible to those who have grown up in societies composed of stupid, fat, emotionally hysterical, peasants (e.g. Brazil, the USA, France, Germany, India, Mexico, etc...)

>>18481215
In Europe, public schools are almost always the superior and more academically rigorous ones whilst private schools are seen as failson spoiled bitch daycare.
e.g. France's greatest schools are places like the Lycee Henri IV or Lycee Louis Le Grand, or in Germany they're Gymnasiums.

>>18482825
>high IQ, mature, emotionally well adjusted citizens (Switzerland).
not even close lol.

>>18481142
>the billionaires should teach our kids!