|
Election time again (pg. 11)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
My point (and someone elses who I have forgotten) about the fundraising is that the government funding does not go to facilities, if it did we would have had our pool years ago. The funding goes to education (repeat - EDUCATION).
However, remember what I said, not every private school is a Kings or a Scotch. You realise that every denominational school you see is private? Do you know what the fees at many of these schools are? In many cases they are less than $1000/year, some are very low. So you think these schools should not receive any funding? How would they survive in providing low cost education without government funding? There are many (and not just denominational) schools that are very low fee schools, and it is these (from what I can gather) that will be the big beneficiaries from the Labour policy. |
um yes, of course i know not all schools are kings or grammars etc. and yes i know that denominational schools are private. hehe, but i disagree with that purely on religious grounds as well, but thats another story ;)
given that its roughly a 60/40 pub/priv divide in australia (last time i checked anywayz) i dont see why then private schools receive more funding (which they do).
and i wanna keep saying, private schools are a business. if they cant make it on their own they shouldnt be subsidised by the public. and if they dont survive, they can go the way of the dodo.
the argument that the private system takes stress off the public is bollocks.
as far as the 2 parties' plans for education, im not walking into that, coz i simply dont know the facts just yet. just gonna carry my hatred of the private system to my grave :p |
|
|
| Trance Nutter |
You've been believing too many Union ads if you believe Private schools get more funding than Public schools.
Education funding is primarily the domain of the states. Its in the Constitution (or actually its not, thats why it is a state issue). The VAST majority of funding for schools comes from the states. The federal funding is a top up, and is really miniscule in comparison to state funding. To the best of my knowledge, the states DO NOT FUND PRIVATE SCHOOLS - ZERO, none whatsoever. If they do, it is incredibly small amount (there was an article in the paper a few weeks ago about it, I've forgotten the figures).
As a result, state schools get something like six or seven TIMES the amount of funding per student than private schools (I remember that one perfectly;) ), and on top of that they receive funding for the buildings/grounds and other things that private schools do not.
Another thing, private schools are not businesses (at least not here in SA). There are no owners, no creditors, no share holders - they are not for profit, same as a charity. Everything goes back into the school. You saying they are businesses is absolute bull .
No where in my posts does it say anything about private taking pressure off public - don't try to pin that on me.
ANyway, to repeat my comment, EVERY child has the right to receive government funding for education. |
|
|
| batemanscott |
What ur forgetting pkcraistlin is that public schools can't possibly accommodate all those students.
As you pointed out it's about 40 ercent of australian students in private schools. Imagine the student to teacher ratios if there were no private schools because people took advantage of free education.
It's in the public schools/students interest that private schools be equally well funded so that the numbers in private schools don't flood the public system.
On another note, just looked out my bedroom window, there is ing huge poster taking the piss out of latham on the corner or bourke and swanston in the city. I don't know who to blame for ruining my view, liberal for putting it there or latham for being such an ugly tool. What a sight to wake up to.:whip: |
|
|
| Trance Nutter |
| quote: | Originally posted by batemanscott
On another note, just looked out my bedroom window, there is ing huge poster taking the piss out of latham on the corner or bourke and swanston in the city. I don't know who to blame for ruining my view, liberal for putting it there or latham for being such an ugly tool. What a sight to wake up to.:whip: |
Just don't have sex anytime before the election - imagine getting amongst it with some chick, looking out the window and seeing that ungly mutha....:D |
|
|
| batemanscott |
I'm guessing it says "good luck".......what a ing waste of money.
 |
|
|
| batemanscott |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
Just don't have sex anytime before the election - imagine getting amongst it with some chick, looking out the window and seeing that ungly mutha....:D |
Too late:clown: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by batemanscott
What ur forgetting pkcraistlin is that public schools can't possibly accommodate all those students.
As you pointed out it's about 40 ercent of australian students in private schools. Imagine the student to teacher ratios if there were no private schools because people took advantage of free education.
It's in the public schools/students interest that private schools be equally well funded so that the numbers in private schools don't flood the public system. |
nah man, we just wait til they go broke and we take the infrastructure away from them :)
and i dont see thats its necessarily in their interest if it creates two standards of education for the haves, haves mores & have nots. |
|
|
| rez |
PKC your use of vocabulary indicates a much higher level of intelligence than first thought
considering your from tasmania n all. :D :D :D :D :whip: :whip: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by rez
PKC your use of vocabulary indicates a much higher level of intelligence than first thought
considering your from tasmania n all. :D :D :D :D :whip: :whip: |
um, thanks rez :stongue: for the record im not *from* tassie, its just where i live at the moment, and a decent use of vocab is more often a sign of an education rather than intelligence ;) |
|
|
| lethal |
ust one point which i feel a lot of you private people seem to be throwing about (rather stupidly in my opinion).
So you guys fundraise to get your buildings - woop de in doo!
Dont you think that somewhere like lakemba high prolly does that too but guess how much the people in that area can afford to give to the school compared to those in your areas! Lets face it if your able to send your kid to a private school you are obviously already from a higher financial background then most anyway, which means you can spend more money on your kids.
Look at the situation from all sides before opening your mouth! :whip: |
|
|
| Trance Nutter |
If you read my post lethal, you will see why we keep bringing up that point!
People were claiming private schools have all the cos of government funding, we were saying government funding does NOT fund building projects, it funds EDU-ING-CATION.
How bout you read the posts properly before you open your mouth:whip: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
You've been believing too many Union ads if you believe Private schools get more funding than Public schools.
Education funding is primarily the domain of the states. Its in the Constitution (or actually its not, thats why it is a state issue). The VAST majority of funding for schools comes from the states. The federal funding is a top up, and is really miniscule in comparison to state funding. To the best of my knowledge, the states DO NOT FUND PRIVATE SCHOOLS - ZERO, none whatsoever. If they do, it is incredibly small amount (there was an article in the paper a few weeks ago about it, I've forgotten the figures).
As a result, state schools get something like six or seven TIMES the amount of funding per student than private schools (I remember that one perfectly;) ), and on top of that they receive funding for the buildings/grounds and other things that private schools do not.
Another thing, private schools are not businesses (at least not here in SA). There are no owners, no creditors, no share holders - they are not for profit, same as a charity. Everything goes back into the school. You saying they are businesses is absolute bull .
No where in my posts does it say anything about private taking pressure off public - don't try to pin that on me.
ANyway, to repeat my comment, EVERY child has the right to receive government funding for education. |
"This is despite the fact that 55 per cent of independent school students attend schools where the total average resource level for each student is higher than the average resources in government schools, according to a study by Dr Louise Watson of the lifelong learning network at the University of Canberra. And it is despite the fact that the total resources for each student available to Catholic systemic schools is arguably higher than for government schools"
-nuff said. |
|
|
|
|
