I Just Watched a Video of Paulette Braddock\'s Town Hall Meeting

Sorry Fox but not everyone are born public speakers. :whistle

I was there and for her first time in front of people, she did well in my opinion.

It is bad enough for a liberal hack owner elsewhere to mock her but seeing it here is uncalled for.
 
Fox, you're changing the argument. I am not arguing vouchers. All I am saying is that with the current system, if a child is not in public school they should not be participating in the extras available through public school. It's part of the package ... take it or leave it.

If you want vouchers, fight that fight.
 
Since we don't have vouchers, I feel that parents who are paying school taxes with their property taxes have every right to let their children participate in public school sports. If you don't want them to have that right, then support they get to keep that portion of their property taxes that help fund public schools.
 
Foxmeister said:
Since we don't have vouchers, I feel that parents who are paying school taxes with their property taxes have every right to let their children participate in public school sports. If you don't want them to have that right, then support they get to keep that portion of their property taxes that help fund public schools.

How about those of us who have never had kids? Who still pay school property taxes? I want my money back!
 
Winchester said:
Foxmeister said:
Since we don't have vouchers, I feel that parents who are paying school taxes with their property taxes have every right to let their children participate in public school sports. If you don't want them to have that right, then support they get to keep that portion of their property taxes that help fund public schools.

How about those of us who have never had kids? Who still pay school property taxes? I want my money back!
Thank you ... that's what I'm talking about. Where do we draw the line?
 
Winchester said:
Foxmeister said:
Since we don't have vouchers, I feel that parents who are paying school taxes with their property taxes have every right to let their children participate in public school sports. If you don't want them to have that right, then support they get to keep that portion of their property taxes that help fund public schools.

How about those of us who have never had kids? Who still pay school property taxes? I want my money back!

That's very valid point. My husband and I paid taxes that supported schools for 15 years in this county before we ever placed a child in the public school system. We did not utilize the pre-k program (opting instead for a private program).

Fox, wasn't your argument regarding the HOPE that the education of these kids is important for us all? I think the same holds true for those who can't afford private education. Does our system need to improve? Absolutely! I'm just still not on board that vouchers is the fix that others seem to think that it will be.
 
unionmom said:
Winchester said:
Foxmeister said:
Since we don't have vouchers, I feel that parents who are paying school taxes with their property taxes have every right to let their children participate in public school sports. If you don't want them to have that right, then support they get to keep that portion of their property taxes that help fund public schools.

How about those of us who have never had kids? Who still pay school property taxes? I want my money back!
Thank you ... that's what I'm talking about. Where do we draw the line?
To be really fair they should not have to pay either but if you can argue that they must in order to educate the children then it makes just as much sense to argue that children whose parents pay taxes should have use of what those taxes pay for. That would include the extra curricular activities but not necessarily the classes.
 
PCGOPExaminer said:
Sorry Fox but not everyone are born public speakers. :whistle

I was there and for her first time in front of people, she did well in my opinion.

It is bad enough for a liberal hack owner elsewhere to mock her but seeing it here is uncalled for.

Who the heck are you to make a statement like that? You loved pointing out how Obama can't give a good speech without the use of a teleprompter. I'm not mocking her. I'm simply pointing out the obvious. I'm also holding her feet to the fire; especially since I voted for her. She supports this tax reform that is actually a tax increase.

Let me ask you a few questions. Do you think because the majority of the people who participate in this forum are conservatives, we should not hold her feet to the fire? Are you saying that because we are conservatives and she claims to be a conservative that we should just keep our mouths shut to give everyone the impression we agree with everything she says?
 
unionmom said:
Or option 3 ... work towards vouchers.
Or option 4 ... sometimes life ain't fair.

So what you're saying is, those people whose chidren are home schooled or in private school are obligated to contribute paying for the education of the children in public school. While they are contributing financially to the education of those in public school, those who are home schooled are prohibited from using any of the resources of public school and from participating in the school's extracurricular activities.
 
Madea said:
Winchester said:
Foxmeister said:
Since we don't have vouchers, I feel that parents who are paying school taxes with their property taxes have every right to let their children participate in public school sports. If you don't want them to have that right, then support they get to keep that portion of their property taxes that help fund public schools.

How about those of us who have never had kids? Who still pay school property taxes? I want my money back!

That's very valid point. My husband and I paid taxes that supported schools for 15 years in this county before we ever placed a child in the public school system. We did not utilize the pre-k program (opting instead for a private program).

Fox, wasn't your argument regarding the HOPE that the education of these kids is important for us all? I think the same holds true for those who can't afford private education. Does our system need to improve? Absolutely! I'm just still not on board that vouchers is the fix that others seem to think that it will be.

I think the education of every child is important, however, our public school system is failing. It's been failing for a long time now and we continue to give them our money while they do nothing to fix it. Why should any of us be forced to continue giving tax dollars to something those in charge apparently have no real interest in fixing?

We elected a guy as the state school superintendent who campaigned on the fact the math curriculum used in our public schools was a failure and he was going to remedy that. Since he's been elected and serving in that capacity, he's now not as eager to change it because it would cost too much to change it. Why not then give the authority to each local school board to choose their own curriculum? Well, that's not going to happen because the state doesn't want to give up that kind of "control."

If a business does not give the service or quality product consumers expect for their money, they won't have many customers. The same should be for our public schools. If they're not giving our children the education we expect, then why should we continue to give them our money? Shouldn't we have the right to stop doing business with them and give our money to an education program that would?

Do you really think the state or our local school board care if parents pull their kids and send them to private school or home school them? I don't think they do because they look at it as solving some of their problems, by reducing the amount of kids in the classroom while they continue to get the money of those not in the public schools.

There is a large percentage of parents in this county and the state who are not satisfied with the education in public schools, but they can't afford to send them to private school or home school them. If they could have the vouchers to do so, they would pull their kids from the public school so they could have more control over their children's education. If this was possible, it would force our public school system to fix the problems in the curriculum to get those children and the money back. As long as we continue to throw money at the current problem without any changes, there won't be any changes to improve the education given in public schools.
 
Braddock pointed out the changes in the qualifications for HOPE. Students graduating with a 3.0 GPA will receive 90% for tuition. Those graduating with a 3.7 GPA and having a minimum SAT score of 1200 will receive 100% for tuition. Why have they set the SAT requirement at a level far below that of the state average of 1460? Is the message, "below average work is ok?"
 
So should home school kids be permitted to use to school counselors, the media centers, the graduation coaches? Should we assigning parapros to them?
 
Foxmeister said:
Braddock pointed out the changes in the qualifications for HOPE. Students graduating with a 3.0 GPA will receive 90% for tuition. Those graduating with a 3.7 GPA and having a minimum SAT score of 1200 will receive 100% for tuition. Why have they set the SAT requirement at a level far below that of the state average of 1460? Is the message, "below average work is ok?"

The message since NCLB is that mediocrity is the goal. Let's all be average.
 
unionmom said:
So should home school kids be permitted to use to school counselors, the media centers, the graduation coaches? Should we assigning parapros to them?

First, you have yet to answer some of my questions.

I see nothing wrong with home school students using the counselors or the media center as long as their parents are paying property taxes that help pay for it.


Why do you have such a problem with parents being able to use the school portion of their property taxes to help pay for their children's education whether it's private or home school?
 
Because they have opted out of the public school system and that includes all aspects of it. Period. As long as the system is as it is, no vouchers or some similar program, it is an all or nothing proposition. If you decide that your child is better off out of the public school system you are making a decision after weighing all pros and cons. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
 
unionmom said:
Because they have opted out of the public school system and that includes all aspects of it. Period. As long as the system is as it is, no vouchers or some similar program, it is an all or nothing proposition. If you decide that your child is better off out of the public school system you are making a decision after weighing all pros and cons. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.

You feel this way even if the public schools are an education failure?
 
Yes because they are not a failure across the board and as a parent I have a multitude of options to supplement my child's education. I can also choose to work to change the system instead of giving up on it and walking away.
 
Are Paulding's public schools successful when the average SAT scores are much lower than the state average?
 
I would like to know where homeschooling is an "all or nothing" option. When a parent makes a decision to teach his own children, why should they have access to other resources that are not available to them in other ways?

My oldest is a junior at South Paulding High School. He has been in the public school system all of his life. My youngest has been in a homeschool co-op, and he's now in 5th grade. Next year he will enter the public school system for middle school. That has been our plan from the start. Our reasons for placing him in a private school environment were mostly medical, but also included some spiritual reasons based on his unique personality. Since he is a resident of Paulding County - why should he not have access to certain educational resources our county provides to ALL children.

I realize UM that it is your opinion that it is "all or nothing" but I disagree. So who decides?
 
Back
Top