Does anyone agree with the original article that there’s something wrong with sending your kid to a $30k private day school, or that you should feel guilty if you do?
I thought the author’s point was that in the UK it would not go over well with constituents for a politicians child to attend a private school rather than one open to all. And that in the U.S. we take it for granted politicians and upper middle class only utilize the “good” publics or private. I thought the point was the cultural difference, and what average folks find acceptable in different places. My takeaway is that the British voter thinks, “if it’s good enough for my kid, it’s good enough for yours” Whether that is true or not, I have no idea.
If you can afford a BMW and choose to buy a BMW, I can’t imagine why I should care.
I really can’t.
I think (and maybe I’m misreading) that he is saying in the UK there is at least the fiction all students have access to good education. Thus, public education should be adequate and appropriate for the PM’s children, even if they can afford BMW education. I agree it is a pretty strange idea to most in the U.S… It was surprising to me when foreign friends, living in the U.S. asked me in disbelief, “you have to buy an expensive house for your kid to have access to the best elementary school?” And my immediate reaction was… Duh? Then I considered it some more.
^I think it’s a little more than that. If public schools were just as good as privates, it’s not clear why anyone would care the PM wastes money paying tuition for an education not any better than the public schools. There seems to be an idea it’s hypocritical to support a meritocracy, but then try to provide your kids with educational advantages, not available to the general public.*
*I’m using public and private, as they are used in the US, although I recognize the terms have different meanings in the UK.
The private “public” schools in Britain have very strong class connotations. That’s the reason why PMs can’t be seen to be sending their children to them.
No different than having to spend a bunch of money for the best car, best clothes, etc. Also, why are they the “best” schools anyway, is it just the money?
Okay, now that’s funny :))
The private HS we sent our kids to had generally very qualified teachers who were very motivating. Many had advanced degrees and loved teaching and inspiring students. They offered more AP courses and would teach the course if at least 2 or more students wanted it. The students were very well-behaved and stood whenever an adult entered the classroom.
No time was needed to be spent on disciplining unruly students.
School hours were longer, starting promptly at 7:45 and running to 3pm every day. Public school in our state starts about 8 and ends at 2 or on Wednesdays 1:30 or earlier.
The kids were very well-prepared for college and didn’t need any remedial courses there. Many received merit awards which were larger than the tuition paid over the years.
The private schools offered FAid to all students demonstrating financial need according to the form completed with tax info as well as asset into. They have a full tuition 4 year scholarship as well for students entering in HS.
I understand that the public school system in HI left much to be desired. This is why I live where I live.
It’s not true that the majority of federal income taxes go to Medicaid, Medicare and defense. All health programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and some other programs like Tricare and the VA, are about 29%; defense is 16%.
And it’s bizarre to put forward Medicare or defense as programs that benefit the poor specifically, since both of them go to all. Medicaid, also, is much more of a middle class entitlement than we often think. Most people in nursing homes are paid for by Medicaid. About half of all long term care in the US is paid for by Medicaid. About half of all Medicaid spending goes to seniors and people with disabilities.
I didn’t mean specifically.
No one is saying otherwise. The point is rather that the selfishness of the upper class is unfortunately effective. With dwindling average middle class, there’s no segment to contain it. I fear where it may lead.
Could lead to torches and pitchforks or the Hunger Games 
The people at the top have more power than those at the bottom and it appears that current policy and economic conditions have accelerated the gap between the two.
Apropos to Medicaid discussion above:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/opinion/youre-probably-going-to-need-medicaid.html?src=me&_r=0
Well, it’s all coming together. With AHCA’s caps on coverage, less people will need those nursing facilities since they’ll just be dying a lot sooner.
Vicious cycle or virtuous cycle depending on your point of view. People with power driving policies beneficial to themselves making them more powerful. I put soda/cigarette tax in that category. To solve general budget problem they introduce soda/cigarette tax. Funny that they never bring up gas/pollution tax. Pollution is just as bad to your health. It would certainly bring more money necessitating a lower tax for the same amount of revenue.
Just the facts … you can read up on the history of this site. No political bend.
to see a top end day care, not 30K, but pricey.
Re: feeling guilty for sending a child to private school. We lived in a bad school district (LA Unified) and sent our daughter to private school from 6th grade on. No guilt and no regrets. Why should I sacrifice the well-being of my own child to make some point? It doesn’t mean I can’t support public schools (and we did) but for my own child? We do what we think is best for her.