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

[Sil Greene <quack AT ibiblio.org>]

from Lee Haslup:
.:
.:Help me out here, Sil, I'm struggling.  You said...
.:>
.:>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 send them to the public schools.

Remember, "everyone" pays $4k per year.  So effectively, Michael's kids 
can go to public schools tuition-free.  It's a tax, not tuition, and 
Michael pays it just like his neighbors with no kids pay it.

It thus costs him only $15k to send them to the private school of his 
choice -- funny, because at $7.5k per student, that's the yearly tuition 
charged by the school.  Don't try to add that $4k tax to the tuition and 
call it unfair; it's not a tuition.


.: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.
.:

Ah.  Yes, you seem to be overly sensitive to money.  It's apparently a 
common problem in this country.  (Heck, once in a blue moon I even show 
symptoms.)  Pay your fair share and get over it.  You don't like it, 
start a letter-writing campaign to get the laws levying the $4k tax 
changed.

--S