Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law)

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Lee Haslup <biglee AT haslups.com>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law)
  • Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:53:33 -0500

Help me out here, Sil, I'm struggling. You said...

... Michael's trying to argue that the existence of public education, and the fact that he pays taxes that fund public education, restricts him to using public education. I call BULLSHIT. Michael, Alan, and I all pay into the same public education funds with our taxes. I don't know about the other two, but I don't have kids. So there's no economic disincentive to keeping your kids out of the public system; EVERYONE pays those taxes.

Let's say, hypothetically, that "everyone" pays $4,000.00 a year to support the public schools. (All numbers are made up here; I don't know the actual figures but they wouldn't change the point -- just the arithmatic.) Let's also say that the tuition at Mother Imelda's School for Fidgetty Children is $7,500 a year per student. If Michael had two children then it would cost him $19,000 to send his children to Mother Imelda but only $4,000 to sernd them to the public schools. So, in terms of cash outlay -- ignoring the value of the education -- the difference is $15,000. Now, I may be overly sensitive to money but, for me, $15k starts to get into incentive range. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that if Donald Trump dropped $15,000 on the sidewalk, he's bend over to pick it up.

BigLee





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page