"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Matthias Julius wrote: >> Curt Howland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >>>For $200, you can get the Robinson Curriculum, a complete K-12 home >>>study kit, except math books. Math books are $50 each, new, approx >>>one per year depending on student speed and aptitude of course. >>> >>>So even at the slowest, full 13 years worth of math books and the rest >>>of it, is $850. Total. And you get to resell or reuse the math books. >> >> >> How do you do that when you have to go to work? >> > How do you do it *now* when you have to go to work?
I send them to school? > >> >>>The public schools in the United States spend MORE THAN $10,000 (TEN >>>THOUSAND DOLLARS) per student EACH YEAR, EVERY YEAR, and it's only >>>going up. >> >> >> Why is that so? Just because it is a public school? Why is a public >> school by definition so different from a private school? Is there no >> way of making a public school more (cost-)efficient? >> > No. That is the point. By definition, government has no incentive to > be efficient. If it did, half the problems (number pulled from my hat) > that exist in American government would likely cease to exist. If > schools were run more like the Postal Service, that would be a step in > the right direction. But wait, we actually have to *pay* postage. So > if people want to continue to be able to send their kids to school for > "free," there is no way to make it efficient. I don't think any government likes to be beaten for increasing debt or raising taxes. And improving the public school system could be a very good reason for reelection. What the public school system lacks is an equivalent of revenue, some benchmark other than the grades of its graduates. Those are cheap. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
