Quote:
Originally Posted by nekokami
. . . Let us hypothesize that an education of equal quality for all children could minimize this difference between the starting points of individuals, to somehow create a perfect meritocracy (or at least a closer approximation of it). What I often hear people say is that they don't want to have to pay for the education of other people's children. They want the best for their own children, to make them "able to compete," and though they rarely say so out loud, one gets the sense that if the "other" children don't have as many educational opportunities, so much the better for the kids lucky enough to be born into "good" families . . .
|
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. And I'm not sure how to ask for clarification in response, so I'll just open my mouth and see what comes out. I'll apologize in advance if it makes no sense.
Sounds like you're talking about the need for children to start out on an equal footing with basic education no matter what their socioeconomic status, but they're not getting that opportunity because some people are saying they don't want to pay for the education of "other" children, only their own. I'm not sure I understand that, if it's indeed what you're saying.
We all in the U.S. pay for basic elementary public education from grades K-thru-12 through our property taxes. Even if we have no children, or are retired and our children are grown, we pay these school district taxes. So, like it or not, we're paying for the education of
all the "other" children. I don't understand how, (aside from private schooling) the oppotunity for public education is not there for all.
I'm confused and I'm probably misunderstanding your whole point.