Two different issues:
1st: For Polarscribe - I believe Whydoicare gave you two examples. Yes, you can have both a modern, industrialized, technologically-advanced nation AND a highly-educated population without government financed secondary education.
2nd: I think my family and I (along with most of the middle class in the US) will not be any worse off in 20 years than we are now with the current FA policies that don’t address the needs of the middle class. </p>
<p>However, the poor would definitely be worse off and their children can ask their own parent(s) “why” instead of expecting the rest of society to pay more in taxes. I still believe that the exceptionally smart and high achievers within the poor population will have access to secondary education, along with those parents that start early saving and sacrificing for their children to have more (the same?) opportunities that they had.</p>
<p>It may be time for people to start taking responsibility for their own decisions and the welfare of their children…just my opinion.</p>
<p>As far as educating low income people, I am not saying that all financial aid should stop. If a prospective student can demonstrate need, I think it is part of the american dream to give these people an opportunity. There is a difference between providing for the less fortunate and providing state-subsidized education for EVERYONE. Temple, Pitt, etc. are open to anyone, regardless of need. You can make several million dollars a year and still receive a state-subsidized education at one of these schools!</p>
<p>^ So, private universities do not receive public subsidies?
Don’t they have nonprofit tax status?
Don’t they receive tax-funded research grants, which cover more than just the cost of the research?
Do their students receive tax-subsidized grants and loans?
Do they enjoy significant tax benefits on their investments?
Do they benefit from tax-funded infrastructure?</p>
<p>^^^
zapfino: Who pays the taxes for “tax-funded” and “tax-subsidized” college subsidies? If your point is that tax money is currently being used for secondary education…you are correct. Whether it should be or not is another question.</p>
<p>However, I would question whether the benefits of the current tax “subsidies” benefit the actual taxpayers in any semblance of the proportion of taxes they pay. To suggest that the middle class should pay MORE of any tax that will be used to disproportionately subsidize secondary education is unreasonable…IMHO.</p>
<p>ubujim~ well said. exactly what I believe to be taking place here in PA. Corbett also refuses to tax Marcellus shale but continues to cut all education. He’s just a pawn for big business.</p>
<p>China and India have huge and expanding systems of publicly-subsidized higher education. Both nations are increasing government investment in their university systems.</p>
<p>The public pressure is starting to work. A number of Republican legislators have said they will work to reduce the size of the cuts to the public universities in PA. However, even a 30% cut would still be extremely painful.</p>
<p>Can you? What is your evidence for this assertion? Where is the magic libertarian paradise that developed advanced modern industrialization without a public system of higher education? You state unequivocally that this is possible - so you must have proof, correct?</p>
<p>Of course, you can’t answer the question because there are none. No modern, industrialized nation currently exists that does not have a government-financed public higher education system.</p>
<p>What this suggests, of course, is that one is not possible without the other. A highly-educated population is necessary to provide the workforce capable of using, developing, managing and leveraging modern technology. A highly-educated population cannot exist unless that education is made at least reasonably affordable and accessible to the masses. As there are not nearly enough generous rich people donating money to make that possible, tax-subsidized universities pick up the slack.</p>
<p>The bottom line is-Corbett screwed up big time. Although he may have blasted PSU, he has only received further blasting from the entire state. I myself have been attending numerous rallies and observed the massive amount of unhappy PA residents- fighting for justice. I am not sure who on this earth believes his education cuts are a good idea, but the intelligent majority knows education is truly the future and solution to saving this dying economy. Instead of encouraging students to continue on in post-secondary education, Corbett has crippled many prospective students ability to pay for tuition. Rather than helping the generation that was born into debt rise above the deficits our predecessors left to us, Corbett has dug us deeper into it.</p>
So you were one of the three people that attended one of the anti-Corbett education policy rallies. Considering the efforts of the PA Universities to generate some enthusiasm for the gatherings, and the number of college students/parents affected in the state, I have been amazed at the apathy shown by PA residents.</p>
<p>I’m not sure if you are: sarcastic, stupid, stubborn or all of the above; but the number of those unfavorable towards the cuts far exceeds the selfish pro-education cut advocates. It is quite clear you know nothing of these rallies or are simply unable to do conceptual math. I wouldn’t doubt that Corbett himself has began to regret his blind actions.</p>
So that we can avoid arguing about “conceptual” math could you please include a link for how you determined the number of people that are pro post-secondary education funding cuts from those opposed? </p>
<p>BTW - the rallies THUS FAR have been a joke. If Gov. Corbett reinstates ANY funding it will probably be a token 10% just so the PA Democratic Legislators can claim they got “more” money for post-secondary education.</p>
<p>"When Gov. Tom Corbett announced his budget proposal March 8 he said it was consistent with what voters said they wanted in the November election.</p>
<p>The governor should revisit his understanding of what Pennsylvania residents want.</p>
<p>Last week a survey by Franklin and Marshall College found six in 10 residents support a tax on natural-gas drillers. An even larger majority nearly eight in 10 opposes deep cuts to public education."</p>
<p>At least he is looking ahead. In addition to slashing the funding for public education he is increasing the funding for the prison system by 11%.</p>
<p>I also liked this statement by Education Secretary-nominee Ron Tomalis, If it was all tied to money … (test scores) all should be going up, and were not seeing that". I didn’t realize test scores were the only way to measure improvement in education.</p>
Lets not confuse “residents” with either voters or taxpayers…and especially attendees at anti-Corbett post secondary education rallies.
I thought we were discussing post secondary education? I’m sure there is a lot of non-voters and poor that want to see more of other peoples money for their school systems.
If we don’t use test scores then which “standardized” method of measuring improvement in PA public schools is currently showing a correlation between state funding and academic performance?</p>
<p>I don’t need a damn link to anything. I was there. I saw it and felt the solidarity in the crowd. My heart ached as I listened to innumerable accounts on the negative effects this cut will have on the largest employer in the state and the largest part in a child’s development. You can ******** statistics all you want, you’ll never know what the public wants until your part of it-*****.</p>
<p>I think “mprovement in education” can also be indicated by increased participation levels in physical education classes, measuring the percentage of students that have access to instruction in music and the number of schools that have a staffed library, as examples. All of these indicators will certainly see decreases if the proposed budget goes through.</p>
<p>"Diane Ravitch, a leading education expert who served in the administrations of Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton writes, Its a disaster. It has turned our schools into testing factories.
Under NCLB every school must be at 100 percent proficiency by 2014. If a single child with a disability such as Down syndrome or autism fails the test, the entire school fails. Academic studies show massive numbers of schools nationwide failing between now and 2014.
If Park Forest Elementary School, one of only 19 schools in the country to be designated by the Education Commission of the States as a School of Success, can fail the PSSA, any school can.
Read more: [PSSAs</a> put burden on schools, students - Editorial Columns | Centre Daily Times - State College, PA | Penn State, Nittany Lions, weather, news, jobs, homes, apartments, real estate](<a href=“http://www.centredaily.com/2011/03/11/2575400/pssas-put-burden-on-schools-students.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1IadYLezL]PSSAs”>http://www.centredaily.com/2011/03/11/2575400/pssas-put-burden-on-schools-students.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1IadYLezL)</p>
<p>Correlating funding to such flawed testing is ridiculous.</p>