# Start Here > Guest Forum >  Time to admit who I am

## Boshembechle

I am (was) a troll on this guest forum. A lot of you (especially NorthCarolinaLiberty) caught on. I am a "moderate" liberty lover; I support a very very small and last resort safety net, some regulation, and some services for lower income folks. I trolled (played the devil's advocate) this site, spouting common socialist beliefs, so that I could gain new knowledge and insight. With that out of the way, I do have a legit question: 

Public k-12 school in this country no doubt sucks for many lower income folks, and is brutally expensive. Last time I checked, we spend more on education per capita than any country. But one thing I often wonder is why the government has been able to avoid shortages and "queues" in administering education for all kids up until 18 years old. How does the "economic calculation" problem factor into this? One would think that the government would not be able to calculate the quantity of education needed, but it seems like everyone, even though the quality is often $#@!, is given a slot. 

Or would it be an example of "overproduction"? 

Again, I apolgize for lying to y'all. It won't be happening again, and I will now start to fight against the other unpopular poster on this forum (the guy with 56 in his name).

----------


## thoughtomator

nobody cares, go away

----------


## jllundqu

In B4 someone calls you BS or government COINTELPRO!

Well played.  And just for the record, I called you out as a "must be trolling, no one is THAT ignorant" a long time ago

----------


## Original_Intent

I think the answer (perhaps an overly simplistic one) to your question is that education of children is something that many people support "no matter what, price is no object!" So it is very easy to meet all demand because a pretty much unlimited amount of money can and is thrown at the problem. So of course the per student spending is way off the charts. Of course this opens the door for graft as there is plenty of money to hand around to politically connected friends. And at the end of the day, if classroom sizes are expanded too far, then that provides the perfect pretext to tell the taxpayer that we need more money for education! Classes are too big! We need more teachers.

I ran for state legislature back in 2000, and education was central to what I ran on. The truth is that administrative costs and the amount of administrative personnel in public education is multiples of the same in private schools. Private schools spend a much bigger chunk of their budget on teachers, less on administration. The problem is that of course even if you send your kids to private school, you still have to pay for public education via taxes.

So I don't think it is a question of overproduction, or a case of government properly calculating the quantity of education needed. They simply make due with what is currently available, and if the pain level gets too high use that as a pretext to demand more extortion, I mean taxes to improve the terrible state of affairs.

----------


## Boshembechle

> I think the answer (perhaps an overly simplistic one) to your question is that education of children is something that many people support "no matter what, price is no object!" So it is very easy to meet all demand because a pretty much unlimited amount of money can and is thrown at the problem. So of course the per student spending is way off the charts. Of course this opens the door for graft as there is plenty of money to hand around to politically connected friends. And at the end of the day, if classroom sizes are expanded too far, then that provides the perfect pretext to tell the taxpayer that we need more money for education! Classes are too big! We need more teachers.
> 
> I ran for state legislature back in 2000, and education was central to what I ran on. The truth is that administrative costs and the amount of administrative personnel in public education is multiples of the same in private schools. Private schools spend a much bigger chunk of their budget on teachers, less on administration. The problem is that of course even if you send your kids to private school, you still have to pay for public education via taxes.
> 
> So I don't think it is a question of overproduction, or a case of government properly calculating the quantity of education needed. They simply make due with what is currently available, and if the pain level gets too high use that as a pretext to demand more extortion, I mean taxes to improve the terrible state of affairs.


Also, we have to account for the fact that k-12 is, after all, compulsory. There is an argument that supply and demand are not even factors, as no market exists.

----------


## fisharmor

> Public k-12 school in this country no doubt sucks for many lower income folks, and is brutally expensive. Last time I checked, we spend more on education per capita than any country. But one thing I often wonder is why the government has been able to avoid shortages and "queues" in administering education for all kids up until 18 years old. How does the "economic calculation" problem factor into this? One would think that the government would not be able to calculate the quantity of education needed, but it seems like everyone, even though the quality is often $#@!, is given a slot.


I graduated from High School 22 years ago, and I distinctly remember having several classes in trailers outside the main building.

I also remember being in classes with as many as 40 other people.

I remember when my brother, two years younger than I, was compelled to go to a different high school than I was - we were living in the same house - and I remember going through a pretty arduous process to be able to go to the same school - even though a student living in the same house as I was already going there - because my original high school couldn't figure out how to schedule me to be in band and art.

I remember every single day being its own deadline, and God help you if you got really sick, because once you got behind, it was up to you to catch up... there were no do-overs, and absolutely zero leeway for going off schedule.  If you didn't get it the first time, you had to do summer school.

I wouldn't call these "avoiding shortages and queues".  I'd call these massive shortages, and the queues are evident everywhere from the wait for the bus to the bathroom to lunch to gym class to the bus going home.

----------


## squarepusher

Its a priority, so it will be done even if not efficiently.

----------


## pcosmar

> Its a priority, so it will be done even if not efficiently.


It is a priority.. And it is doing just as it is intended. 
Education is not the intention.
Programing is.




Oh,, and I was convinced you were playing the troll deliberately,, just not very well.

----------


## Ronin Truth

The government isn't in the education business it's just in the creating "good citizens" business.  And from the drop out rate they're doing a very expensive and crappy job of that.

----------


## amy31416

> Also, we have to account for the fact that k-12 is, after all, compulsory. There is an argument that supply and demand are not even factors, as no market exists.


There are some exceptions, but I really think that schools can often turn out people who are worse off and less willing to learn after having been forced to go to them. And it's used like a daycare, an excuse for parents to not be responsible for what their kids are up to for most of the day. And the teacher unions...wow. Talk about atrocious--keeping pedophiles and child abusers on the payroll.

I know this doesn't really answer your questions, but the parents should be responsible for their kids, 100%--some are cut out for academia and the book learnin' (these kids can be destroyed by a public school system), and many others would do far better in apprenticeship-type situations, where they're kept physically and mentally busy all day (these types are often the bullies). Generalizations, I know--so take it for what it's worth. And many teachers were mediocre students themselves who went into "education" because it's a relatively easy thing to major in at most colleges.

The educational system is just as much a failure as the war on drugs. Shriekingly expensive, and it puts many kids at risk.

----------


## William Tell

And here I thought you were going to say you are Eduardo or somebody.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> ...(played the devil's advocate) this site, spouting common socialist beliefs, so that I could gain new knowledge and insight.


LOL





> Again, I apolgize for lying to y'all. It won't be happening again, and I will now start to fight against the other unpopular poster on this forum (the guy with 56 in his name).



"Okay, okay, I confess.  You got me.  Now, let me tell you the _real_ story."

----------


## euphemia

The shortage is most noticeable in the huge numbers of parents who are on waiting lists for their kids to get out of pigpen schools and into charter schools.  In NYC alone, 50,000 families are on waiting lists for charter schools.  

There is not a shortage for a seat in a government run school.  There is a shortage of quality education, and it's not just K-12.  Colleges are turning out graduates that can barely read, but they are thoroughly indoctrinated in progressivespeak.

----------


## green73

cool story, bro. zzz

----------


## Origanalist

> I graduated from High School 22 years ago, and I distinctly remember having several classes in trailers outside the main building.
> 
> I also remember being in classes with as many as 40 other people. [snip]


They were called "portables" here.

----------


## acptulsa

> They were called "portables" here.


'Pre-fabs'...

----------


## Root

3/10  I hoped for better based on the thread title

----------


## Dary

> ...why the government has been able to avoid shortages and "queues" in administering education for all kids up until 18 years old.


Lotteries?

----------


## oyarde

> I am (was) a troll on this guest forum. A lot of you (especially NorthCarolinaLiberty) caught on. I am a "moderate" liberty lover; I support a very very small and last resort safety net, some regulation, and some services for lower income folks. I trolled (played the devil's advocate) this site, spouting common socialist beliefs, so that I could gain new knowledge and insight. With that out of the way, I do have a legit question: 
> 
> Public k-12 school in this country no doubt sucks for many lower income folks, and is brutally expensive. Last time I checked, we spend more on education per capita than any country. But one thing I often wonder is why the government has been able to avoid shortages and "queues" in administering education for all kids up until 18 years old. How does the "economic calculation" problem factor into this? One would think that the government would not be able to calculate the quantity of education needed, but it seems like everyone, even though the quality is often $#@!, is given a slot. 
> 
> Or would it be an example of "overproduction"? 
> 
> Again, I apolgize for lying to y'all. It won't be happening again, and I will now start to fight against the other unpopular poster on this forum (the guy with 56 in his name).


You should just let me run your school district . I would solve every problem . I would start by cancelling public school and property taxes for two years  ,  and issuing shovels , hoes , rakes and seeds to the kids on the way out .

----------

