Public vs Private School funding

[Sttew]

You didn't answer the question asking why your argument was valid?

You think equality in funding is the answer, clearly that means you don't believe in equity

I want the priority in all education funding to be the public system and I want the most disadvantaged schools to get the biggest boost in funding

I don't want money getting thrown at for profits that don't need it.

I generally would like the private school system to be abolished because its a class system that is designed to create an advantage for rich people and they sucker the middle class into helping fund it and fight on their behalf to keep the haves with more

Gralin's question: Why do you deserve to have your kids private school education subsidized by the taxpayer when it was your choice to not use public schooling for them?
Sttew's answer: Because the tax "subsidy" ends up saving the government more than the value of the tax subsidy.

Why don't you address the issues I raised? You conveniently overlook anything that counters your position as though it was never said.

I think that you need to be upfront in your arguments. You don't rate education or the ability of education to assist Australians in working their way up the ladder of life. The fact that you believe the private school 'system' should be abolished says it all. It shows how little you really know about it. Sure schools like Scotch College, Xavier, and Melbourne Grammar are class based, but the majority of leading private schools like Caulfield Grammar, Wesley, and Haileybury are anything but class based. I would hazard a guess that up to 40-50% of families who send their kids to those schools are ordinary middle class folk, albeit aspirational families, with mother and father working full time to pay the fees.

 

[The Punter]

If we believe in equal opportunity then the allocating of our available resources needs to start with the child, not with the two people who happen to be their parents.

So starting with the child - $27k vs $18k is the relevant measure.

50% is a big gap.

What if we levelled that out?

(The private school would still be well in front due to donations and benefactors anyway)

Do you have a plan for getting that $15,000 out of the family that does not involve taxation?

Many countries in Europe can spend incredible amounts of money on education because NATO has their backs militarily.

 

[Sttew]

Because the goal is to give every child the most equal opportunity possible, not to have their opportunity dictated by who their parents are.

It’s not about the government or you as the parent. It’s about the child.

Says who? Why do we all have to be equal?

Isn't the role of the parent to nurture and guide their child until they are an adult capable of making their own decisions?

 

[Evolved1]

It’s probably more entitled to say that Johnny deserves more spent on his education than Janey, simply based on which nasty they fell out of and which bloke was in there nine months earlier.

That’s the whole thing… it’s the Right of the Child concept. It’s not about who their parents are. That’s the theory behind it.

How does that differ to communism?

 

[Sttew]

How does that differ to communism?

I'm getting really worried by the extreme views held by so many posters here. Abolish private school system. Everyone should be equal. FMD!!

 

[The Punter]

I'm getting really worried by the extreme views held by so many posters here. Abolish private school system. Everyone should be equal. FMD!!

It doesn't really matter how extreme the views are: Australia will abolish the Navy before the non-government education sector.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

How does that differ to communism?

How much jobkeeper money went to private schools, compared to public schools?

Closer to fascism when the feds keep topping up the haves, vs the have nots.

 

[Gralin]

I'm happy to pay higher taxes to bring public schools up to standard. I won't support taking money from the private school system as a means to make it happen.

But all that would happen with your higher taxes is more money would be funneled into the private system.

Feds don't want to fund tertiary education or public education but do want to fund private and catholic education, what does that tell you about their motives?

Gralin's question: Why do you deserve to have your kids private school education subsidized by the taxpayer when it was your choice to not use public schooling for them?
Sttew's answer: Because the tax "subsidy" ends up saving the government more than the value of the tax subsidy.

Why don't you address the issues I raised? You conveniently overlook anything that counters your position as though it was never said.

I think that you need to be upfront in your arguments. You don't rate education or the ability of education to assist Australians in working their way up the ladder of life. The fact that you believe the private school 'system' should be abolished says it all. It shows how little you really know about it. Sure schools like Scotch College, Xavier, and Melbourne Grammar are class based, but the majority of leading private schools like Caulfield Grammar, Wesley, and Haileybury are anything but class based. I would hazard a guess that up to 40-50% of families who send their kids to those schools are ordinary middle class folk, albeit aspirational families, with mother and father working full time to pay the fees.

on the contrary I think education is extremely important and I think what we are seeing in this thread is that people who go private think public education is shit and don't really care what happens to it as long as the gravy train for private school isn't interrupted

 

[Gralin]

I think it's important to talk about the fact that when the articles say on average that its pretty misleading as well.

The reality is the worst funded schools continue to be left behind and the best funded schools continue to get more than their fair share.

You can't even talk about freezing funding to private schools at current rates to allow public schools to catch up.

Nobody is interested in a little more money going to disadvantaged schools unless it magically appears from some new funding bucket.

States aren't spending enough on public schools and the feds are doing zero to pick up the slack, feds control a lot of revenue that the states use as well

 

[Bombermania]

But all that would happen with your higher taxes is more money would be funneled into the private system.

Feds don't want to fund tertiary education or public education but do want to fund private and catholic education, what does that tell you about their motives?


on the contrary I think education is extremely important and I think what we are seeing in this thread is that people who go private think public education is sh*t and don't really care what happens to it as long as the gravy train for private school isn't interrupted

State schools are state government responsibility.

People need to get a better understanding of the separation between the feds and the states.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I think it's important to talk about the fact that when the articles say on average that its pretty misleading as well.

The reality is the worst funded schools continue to be left behind and the best funded schools continue to get more than their fair share.

You can't even talk about freezing funding to private schools at current rates to allow public schools to catch up.

Nobody is interested in a little more money going to disadvantaged schools unless it magically appears from some new funding bucket.

States aren't spending enough on public schools and the feds are doing zero to pick up the slack, feds control a lot of revenue that the states use as well

From what I gather, the feds give states money, which is divvied up by the state between private and public. Then the feds give extra funding to the private and religious schools.

Then, take the Catholics for example. They don't fund their own schools equally from that money. Some Catholic schools get way above average, and others way under.

 

[The Punter]

The feds are constitutionally prohibited from directly funding state operated schools. They can, of course, come to an agreement to provide funding to the states for that purpose, but then other state funding can be redirected.

Also, and I know this may be a bugbear for those not necessarily married to the idea of democracy, but governments tend to want to get credit for doing things. Part of the reason the feds fund private education is so they can get credit for it, something they can do if the state is cutting the cheque.

 

[HPKS]

Do not have a problem with governments funding private school students learning but a ****en state of the art sports field for example is not funding education. If governments want to fund sport fund a sporting club that is a community organisation. Not this bs of private schools requiring hyperbaric chambers or whatever. It’s a joke in every way.

 

[Sttew]

on the contrary I think education is extremely important and I think what we are seeing in this thread is that people who go private think public education is sh*t and don't really care what happens to it as long as the gravy train for private school isn't interrupted

How can you say education is "extremely important" on the one hand and on the other hand argue that there is no place for the private school system. And you are yet to explain to me what the plan would be for the state to run education 100%. It will and cannot ever happen because of the sheer logistics involved, but I'd love to hear how it work under your masterplan? It will obviously cost $$$. Increase taxes on the wealthy earing more than $60,000?

 

[Hoops]

Given the discussion has moved to Schools and Education I'd be interested to hear what the views are on federal and state funding of Education in Australia, i.e., whether the level of government funding for private schools is adequate/excessive, whether governments should provide any funding to private schools?

In principle I'm against private school funding from governments, though I'm a pragmatist and see that it is here to stay.

I know state schools get more per pupil in government funding overall, but it is still favoritism that private schools get more in federal funding.

 

[Gralin]

State schools are state government responsibility.

People need to get a better understanding of the separation between the feds and the states.

I am aware of our shitty system where the feds have no real responsibility for education prior to tertiary

I am also aware that both levels of Government love the ability to finger point and not my job about all sorts of things

I also subscribe to the idea that we should push for better from both levels of government instead of shrugging

From what I gather, the feds give states money, which is divvied up by the state between private and public. Then the feds give extra funding to the private and religious schools.

Then, take the Catholics for example. They don't fund their own schools equally from that money. Some Catholic schools get way above average, and others way under.

Yes they distribute in such a way to make primary school cheap and use the high school fees to help fund it, they get them in and then keep them in

states also do not fund equally among schools and some of the ways they do it pretty much entrench inequality into the system

they also do really fun things like build new facilities and don't increase maintenance/cleaning budgets to cover and make that the schools problem

 

[Hoops]

Government funding of private schools is about right. The ideal situation is that private schools wouldn't be necessary, but in the current landscape many public schools are sh*t. Funding choice of schooling is a fair and reasonable use of taxpayer funds.

If you can afford that choice

 

[Opine]

My kids attended a private Christian school for several years and were exposed to discriminatory views that made me uncomfortable.

Me of all people.

That’s not good. Discrimination can obviously occur in all environments and shouldn’t be tolerated in regards to any of the protected attributes regardless of doctrine

 

[Gralin]

How can you say education is "extremely important" on the one hand and on the other hand argue that there is no place for the private school system. And you are yet to explain to me what the plan would be for the state to run education 100%. It will and cannot ever happen because of the sheer logistics involved, but I'd love to hear how it work under your masterplan? It will obviously cost $$$. Increase taxes on the wealthy earing more than $60,000?

Feds are quite happy to top up the coffers of private schools, it's not the states that provide the majority of their funding

The current problem has been created because every time they look to improve the funding of public schools the catholic schools and other large private schools scream blue murder that they aren't getting their slice of the new pie and unlike the state schools who can't really argue with the state about how much money they should get the others can

So we end up with more public money being diverted into schools that don't in general need that increased funding to keep things "fair" when its the opposite of fair.

We keep raising the ceiling without worrying about the floor

Look at people jumping up and down at the idea that their private school might be worse off under a redistribution or resources. How can you say education is extremely important and be happy with a system where the rich get richer?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Says who? Why do we all have to be equal?

Isn't the role of the parent to nurture and guide their child until they are an adult capable of making their own decisions?

It’s not about all being equal.

It’s about giving children equal opportunities no matter where they are.

It’s just a theory, or a concept if you like. That’s all.

 

[Hoops]

What should the formula be IYO?

The government funding per student at a school could look like this; standard funding per pupil - Fee/2.
Lets say standard funding is $10,000 then it would look like this

Fee	Government Funding	Total per student
$0	$10,000	$10,000
$5,000	$7,500	$12,500
$10,000	$5,000	$15,000
$15,000	$2,500	$17,500
$20,000+	$0	$20,000+

And then on top of that public schools should get extra funding for the disable, indigenous etc

 

[Hoops]

Because it ultimately saves the government $$$$. Imagine if there were no private schools or no private hospitals...

People would be happier to pay more in tax if they see equality in the system

 

[Hoops]

Ah yes, lose argument then call everyone a leftie.

The snowflakery of pretend centrists never ceases to amaze me.

One of the Rights virtues they love to spout is "equality of opportunity" and as soon as you make mention of ways to achieve that then all of a sudden it left wing nutjobbery.

We mean it, but not for everyone.

 

[Hoops]

Not at all. I sent my two children to a private school. I had to extend the mortgage to pay it. It set us back $$$ wise, but it was a choice we made to ensure they had the best opportunities. Looking back it was money well spent IMO. I'd say we are lucky that we have choice in this country.

There are plenty of Australians who can't afford private education or private health and we have a public system to cater for them. There are plenty of people too who would refuse to send their kids to private school, even if they could afford it, because they don't rate or value what it offers.

This is why government schools should be funded more. You admit more opportunities come from going to a private school yet not everyone has that "choice".

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

I know state schools get more per pupil in government funding overall, but it is still favoritism that private schools get more in federal funding.

It is not favouritism, it is a deliberate liberal party plan,

Libs fear education for all.

My high school got a lot of funding in 2008 and we all knew why we got extra funding.