We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Private education
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberty Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: February 2182
Description[?]:
| The State paying for education is not contrary to the demands of capitalism, since education can rightly be seen as an advance against future taxes. As such, and to guarantee the availability of reasonable education, regardless of the ready financial wealth of parents, vouchers should be available to all children, rather than just the ones the State determines as poor. Also, the government should stay out of providing education. Everything the state does, it does badly (which is why parents will do anything to get their kids into a private school instead of suffering the state system). Even if, by some miracle, the state managed to efficiently run a school system, we would still have to suffer the indoctrination of pupils by the State. The sensible solution is to have private schools, with vouchers provided by the government. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The education system.
Old value:: There is a free public education system alongside private schools.
Current: There is a free public education system and a small number of private schools, which are heavily regulated to ensure they teach adequate skills and information.
Proposed: Education is private, but the government subsidises the cost of it for everyone
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:59:32, February 04, 2006 CET | From |  Tirgith Populus Party | To | Debating the Private education |
| Message | The majority of the time, private schools are not much better than their public counterparts. Only the speacilzed schools that limit who they let in are better on a regular basis. The private schools would be run exactly like the state schools because they are just state schools by a different name. |
| Date | 05:22:29, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Private education |
| Message | "The majority of the time, private schools are not much better than their public counterparts." Even if that were true, 'not much better' is still better than 'not at all better'. "The private schools would be run exactly like the state schools because they are just state schools by a different name" What do you mean? State schools are run by the state and therefore teach what the state tells them; pursue an admissions policy imposed by the state; employ teachers at the command of the state, at salaries dictated by the state; they have no control over their income (how they raise funds, how much they charge) and little control over their expenditure, since budgets are imposed by the state. Contrast this with private schools, which would be independent of the state and therefore teach what they think is most important; pursue an admissions policy of their own choosing, employ whomever they want at whatever rate they feel appropriate, they have absolute control over their income and their expenditures. As far as I can tell, private schools are utterly unlike state schools. |
| Date | 17:45:36, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Tirgith Populus Party | To | Debating the Private education |
| Message | Private schools would become the state schools if everyone was given a voucher to get in. It would essentially be the state who is paying the salary of the teachers, administrators, and staff. The private school would get to choose what they tought, but it would still reflect the beliefs of the teachers, the same as it does in state schools. What I meant by them being state schools by a different name was that if the state is giving everyone vouchers, and, letting everyone go to school for free, it is the state who is paying for the schools, not the individuals. Why have private schools if the state is going to pay? Isn't the whole point of a private school to get your child a different type of education? Most kids are would rather be in state schools than being inserted in a religious school. Also state schools allow children to get more prespectives on life, wheras going to a private school with one veiw prevents the child from forming their own opinions on life. |
| Date | 18:12:32, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Private education |
| Message | "Private schools would become the state schools if everyone was given a voucher to get in." No they wouldn't. "The private school would get to choose what they tought," That is one of the many things that a private school could determine that a state school could not. Add to that budgets, admissions policies, employment policies. Basically, a private school can entirely control its own destiny, a state school is just a puppet of the state. I'm not sure how many times I can say this so that you will understand but there really is a big difference between, e.g., being able to set your own curriculum (private school yes, state school no). "Why have private schools if the state is going to pay? " Because private schools are independent. "Isn't the whole point of a private school to get your child a different type of education?" Yes, and this is what this system achieves. There would be no nationally imposed curriculum, so parents can send their kids to a school that teaches what they think is important. The schools can choose their own policies on any issues, including fee amounts. "Most kids are would rather be in state schools than being inserted in a religious school." Private does not equal religious. "What I meant by them being state schools by a different name was that if the state is giving everyone vouchers, and, letting everyone go to school for free, it is the state who is paying for the schools, not the individuals." No. The State is essentially paying individuals to choose a school. This is an important distinction from your suggestion that the State is paying for the school. Moreover, if the state operates schools, they all have a total income of the amount imposed by the state. Under a voucher system, all schools can price themselves at whatever they feel they are worth. Many will price themselves at the exact value of the vouchers to maximise their potential market. Other schools will choose to position themselves in a different part of the market, like many of the private schools of today. Since parents are able to top-up their vouchers, parents have a far wider range of school options under a voucher system than under a fully state or state+private system. This is largely because of the lower marginal costs of moving up the market under this system than the alternatives. "Also state schools allow children to get more prespectives on life, wheras going to a private school with one veiw prevents the child from forming their own opinions on life." Where do you come up with this stuff? If all schools were private, how would private schools prevent children from 'forming their own opinions on life'? I think you'll find that plenty of people from private schools have opinions on things. And how can you possibly imagine that a state school system, where all the schools are controlled by a single, monopoly entity is going to provide students with more perspectives on life. |
| Date | 19:07:33, February 06, 2006 CET | From | Fasces Kromina Conservatives | To | Debating the Private education |
| Message | sounds ok |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 220 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 287 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 48 |
| Random fact: Selucia is Particracy's modern take on Ancient Rome, located on the continent of Majatra. |
| Random quote: "Politics have no relation to morals." - Niccolo Machiavelli |