On May 1, 2006, at 8:54 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Monday 01 May 2006 14:29, Steve Lamb wrote:
Matthias Julius wrote:
So there are people without children who pay for public education.
This means the average parent who has kids in a public school is
paying less than what he would have to if he had to pay it all by
himself.
Yes, because the childless person just doesn't need that money
at all.
Nope. They exist solely to subsidize the lifestyle choices of
those with
children.
You directly benefit (even without kids) by being surrounded by
(relatively)
educated people. Just like freeways: While bicycles may be
allowed on most
of them, odds are bicyclists are paying for miles of urban freeway
that is
closed to bicycles. Is it fair that people who get around by
bicycle on
roads that, in many states they have a constitutional right to ride
on, have
to pay for freeways that you have to earn the priveledge of a driver's
license to use? Yes, because odds are they indirectly benefit by
the freeway
being there by the availability of goods that would otherwise be
stuck at the
rail depot, seaport, or entirely different city without urban
freeways.
Er...they also VOTE!
I, for one, definitely prefer an educated electorate to an ignorant
one. It's kinda' important, even though all indications are that
emotional arguments usually win.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
