This is good to see. Over the long term, to be honest, I think we’d be better off with less and less state government control over all sectors, with more being split between federal and local councils.
Regarding this story in particular, it’s disappointing that the only mention of private schools is in a single uncontextualised quote right at the bottom. The government should not be providing private schools with one cent of funding, let alone the current situation where the federal government provides more funding to private schools than it does to public.
The government should not be providing private schools with one cent of funding
If they’re going to do that - we need a lot more schools. Half the schools in this country are private and they already don’t have enough teachers for the number of students.
They also need to pay teachers a lot more, I know at least one school that hasn’t got enough teachers because nobody can afford rent near the school on a teacher’s salary.
We do need more schools anyway. A lot of schools are already at or nearing their capacity.
But as far as far as private school funding is concerned, I’m not suggesting they be banned. Just that they fund their damn selves. We don’t need the government giving them money so their board can get executive bonuses, or fund a refurbishment to their private gym.
Then perhaps they shouldn’t. Private companies shouldn’t be getting over half their funding from the government. An unprofitable business shouldn’t exist. Let the far more efficient state school system take over.
They can transition to being public schools if they want to continue getting public funds. I don’t understand why there’s been this global trend of governments just shoveling money to the private sector without any oversight or conditions.
I mean, I do know why it’s like that, I just don’t understand why the public’s been going along with it for so long.
The rich demand it because they save money paying for their essential over paying tax. Basically the cost of essentials do not scale at the same rate as rises in income or wealth. Therefore the rich pay proportionally less of their income on essentials than the poor. Therefore any cost at the point of service for essentials is effectively a regressive tax. It’s why the rich love things like GST as well.
The rich also run the companies that get all those sweetheart contracts and subsidies. They pretend they’re libertarians, but pretty much every billionaire made their fortune because they got a real nice government contract, usually something involving a monopoly that should’ve always been a public resource to begin with.
The government should not be providing private schools with one cent of funding, let alone the current situation where the federal government provides more funding to private schools than it does to public.
It isn’t explicitly that the government (whether it is state or Federal) is giving money to the schools, it’s the students that are funded. Every kid in Australia is entitled to $x per year in education funding. I’m the product of public schools, and my kids also go to public schools. But, I don’t begrudge people the choice of sending their kid to a private school also getting their $x in government funding. They pay their taxes, they are entitled to the funding. It gets a little more complicated than this, as schools get funding for major upgrades like new libraries etc.
As to the argument on whether people should get government funding if they elect to send their kid private, that has precedence. For 100 years, the private schools lost government funding and were on their own. In the end, that lead to the Golburn School Strike. The government agreed that it was in no shape to actually take the 36% or so of students who attend private schools.
Yes, the federal government does give more money to private schools than it does to public: That’s actually been a bit of a cherry-picked statistic. This is because most of the public school funding has been coming from the state governments. At least, to now. If all the states sign on to this, we should see some transparency on this matter.
It isn’t explicitly that the government (whether it is state or Federal) is giving money to the schools, it’s the students that are funded
I don’t care what mechanism is used, the fact is that we have an incredibly efficient public school system, but it’s struggling under the weight of its current demand with its current funding level. If our public schools are not funded to the point that they don’t know what to do with their existing funds, private schools should not be seeing one cent of that money. Not when we spend years after deciding to build a new schooljust trying to figure out where to put it because the government can’t afford to buy a site. Not when students of supposedly-free public schools spend thousands of dollars per year on various fees, equipment, and other school necessities.
They pay their taxes, they are entitled to the funding
No, they are not. I don’t have kids. Where’s my cut of that money? Where’s my cut of the roads budget because I choose to cycle or take the train? Where’s my cut of welfare?
Tax money goes toward funding government services. That’s what it’s for. You don’t get a refund on any other service you don’t use*. This should be no different. (* Okay that’s not quite true. They do the same shitty thing with Medicare, and I oppose it just as virulently there—probably more so, considering in many cases you end up seeing the same damn doctors anyway.)
If private schools think they don’t have enough money to run privately, then they could start by trying to run a bit more efficiently. Cut executive bonuses. Build facilities that meet the needs of students, not the wants of their marketing departments. Heck, maybe don’t have as much of a marketing department.
You’ll forgive me if a temper tantrum thrown by an offshoot of the world’s largest paedophile protection racket does not convince me that we should fund them.
I don’t care what mechanism is used, the fact is that we have an incredibly efficient public school system, but it’s struggling under the weight of its current demand with its current funding level. If our public schools are not funded to the point that they don’t know what to do with their existing funds, private schools should not be seeing one cent of that money.
You’re still focusing on the schools and not the kids. $x per year per kid. If over a third of the student population is in private education, redirecting that money to public schools and then bringing those hundreds of thousands of kids to public schools is not going to solve anything. I happen to agree with you, I am happy with public school education, which is why I participate in it. I only disagree on the point where a kid going to a private school is not entitled to their funding.
Where’s my cut of that money?
Presumably, you’ve already benefited from 13+ years of government funding into your education. Education is an investment into the next generation of the population.
Where’s my cut of the roads budget because I choose to cycle or take the train? Where’s my cut of welfare?
Unless you are riding to work through open bushland, I assume you’re using roads and paths that the government at some level has built. The same goes for the train: The government has funded building that train line. As for welfare, think of that as insurance. You pay into a fund that will be available to you in an emergency. If you hit that wall, you’ll be happy welfare is there for you. Health falls into this category, also.
If private schools think they don’t have enough money to run privately, then they could start by trying to run a bit more efficiently. Cut executive bonuses. Build facilities that meet the needs of students, not the wants of their marketing departments. Heck, maybe don’t have as much of a marketing department.
I still believe a private school with 2,000 students is due to receive ($x times 2000) in government funding. You haven’t convinced me that any kid in this country is not entitled to that support from the government. If parents want to fund executive bonuses, swimming pools and whatever else above that, that’s their right.
You’ll forgive me if a temper tantrum thrown by an offshoot of the world’s largest paedophile protection racket does not convince me that we should fund them.
Presumably, you’ve already benefited from 13+ years of government funding into your education
Nope. I got most of my schooling overseas.
I assume you’re using roads and paths that the government at some level has built
Roads and paths that cost a shit tonne less to maintain for cyclists than they do for heavy cars and trucks. Trains which are subsidised to a much lesser degree than cars are.
If parents want to fund executive bonuses, swimming pools and whatever else above that
But you can’t split it up like that. If a school spends 40% of its budget on marketing and executives (number entirely made up), then for every dollar the government is giving them, 40 cents of taxpayer money are going to fund private school executive bonuses and marketing. Even if that money went through a carefully-controlled process where it goes in a special trust account only to be spent on specially-approved student services, it’s still in effect subsidising those other things, because it means the non-trust money doesn’t need to be touched to spend on student services and can instead focus on the less productive purposes.
You’re still focusing on the schools and not the kids
No, I’m focusing on the money. I’m focusing on getting the best outcome for our education system. And that’s to spend every cent we have on the students, not on executive bonuses and excessive marketing.
To the extent that I’m focusing on anything other than the money, I am focusing on the kids. I’m focusing on the kids who can’t afford to pay for private school. I don’t support funding private schools for the same reason I didn’t support the original stage 3 tax cuts. It’s a hand-out to the wealthy that they don’t need.
It’s just absurd on the face of it to support funding a highly profitable private sector when the equivalent public sector exists, is underfunded, and gets much greater bang for its buck. There is no angle on which one can approach it and justify spending public money on private schools other than corporate greed.
But, I don’t begrudge people the choice of sending their kid to a private school also getting their $x in government funding. They pay their taxes, they are entitled to the funding.
No, they do not. If we want to make it about tax, those kids are dependents and whomever is claiming them is getting the tax rebates and revenue they are entitled to. Tying individual entitlement to education funding is nonsensical if you think about it for half a second, downright absurd if you think about it in the context of Australias profoundly prejudiced and unequal system.
Never mind the notion that we’re funding religious indoctrination camps with little to no oversight or accountability… go ask women at universities how they like dealing with the cloistered, Tate-farmed freaks produced by these indoctrination camps.
This is good to see. Over the long term, to be honest, I think we’d be better off with less and less state government control over all sectors, with more being split between federal and local councils.
Regarding this story in particular, it’s disappointing that the only mention of private schools is in a single uncontextualised quote right at the bottom. The government should not be providing private schools with one cent of funding, let alone the current situation where the federal government provides more funding to private schools than it does to public.
I must have missed that class in school, but isn’t the point of a private school is meant to be privately funded.
Oh makes sense, I went though public education so I probably wouldn’t understand.
If they’re going to do that - we need a lot more schools. Half the schools in this country are private and they already don’t have enough teachers for the number of students.
They also need to pay teachers a lot more, I know at least one school that hasn’t got enough teachers because nobody can afford rent near the school on a teacher’s salary.
We do need more schools anyway. A lot of schools are already at or nearing their capacity.
But as far as far as private school funding is concerned, I’m not suggesting they be banned. Just that they fund their damn selves. We don’t need the government giving them money so their board can get executive bonuses, or fund a refurbishment to their private gym.
Yes you are - most of them get at least half their funding from the government. They couldn’t possibly stay open.
And they can’t “fund their damn selves”. They are funded by parents. Parents can’t afford that (at least, not enough to fill a school).
Then perhaps they shouldn’t. Private companies shouldn’t be getting over half their funding from the government. An unprofitable business shouldn’t exist. Let the far more efficient state school system take over.
If we’re going to spend public money on schools, it should be on public schools.
They can transition to being public schools if they want to continue getting public funds. I don’t understand why there’s been this global trend of governments just shoveling money to the private sector without any oversight or conditions.
I mean, I do know why it’s like that, I just don’t understand why the public’s been going along with it for so long.
The rich demand it because they save money paying for their essential over paying tax. Basically the cost of essentials do not scale at the same rate as rises in income or wealth. Therefore the rich pay proportionally less of their income on essentials than the poor. Therefore any cost at the point of service for essentials is effectively a regressive tax. It’s why the rich love things like GST as well.
The rich also run the companies that get all those sweetheart contracts and subsidies. They pretend they’re libertarians, but pretty much every billionaire made their fortune because they got a real nice government contract, usually something involving a monopoly that should’ve always been a public resource to begin with.
I agree on the fuck private schools sentiment but there is a lot of oversight and conditions for private schools.
so what? Why is public money being spend to fund religious extremism? You want to make your child a maladjusted head case, pay for it yourself
It isn’t explicitly that the government (whether it is state or Federal) is giving money to the schools, it’s the students that are funded. Every kid in Australia is entitled to $x per year in education funding. I’m the product of public schools, and my kids also go to public schools. But, I don’t begrudge people the choice of sending their kid to a private school also getting their $x in government funding. They pay their taxes, they are entitled to the funding. It gets a little more complicated than this, as schools get funding for major upgrades like new libraries etc.
As to the argument on whether people should get government funding if they elect to send their kid private, that has precedence. For 100 years, the private schools lost government funding and were on their own. In the end, that lead to the Golburn School Strike. The government agreed that it was in no shape to actually take the 36% or so of students who attend private schools.
Yes, the federal government does give more money to private schools than it does to public: That’s actually been a bit of a cherry-picked statistic. This is because most of the public school funding has been coming from the state governments. At least, to now. If all the states sign on to this, we should see some transparency on this matter.
I don’t care what mechanism is used, the fact is that we have an incredibly efficient public school system, but it’s struggling under the weight of its current demand with its current funding level. If our public schools are not funded to the point that they don’t know what to do with their existing funds, private schools should not be seeing one cent of that money. Not when we spend years after deciding to build a new school just trying to figure out where to put it because the government can’t afford to buy a site. Not when students of supposedly-free public schools spend thousands of dollars per year on various fees, equipment, and other school necessities.
No, they are not. I don’t have kids. Where’s my cut of that money? Where’s my cut of the roads budget because I choose to cycle or take the train? Where’s my cut of welfare?
Tax money goes toward funding government services. That’s what it’s for. You don’t get a refund on any other service you don’t use*. This should be no different. (* Okay that’s not quite true. They do the same shitty thing with Medicare, and I oppose it just as virulently there—probably more so, considering in many cases you end up seeing the same damn doctors anyway.)
If private schools think they don’t have enough money to run privately, then they could start by trying to run a bit more efficiently. Cut executive bonuses. Build facilities that meet the needs of students, not the wants of their marketing departments. Heck, maybe don’t have as much of a marketing department.
You’ll forgive me if a temper tantrum thrown by an offshoot of the world’s largest paedophile protection racket does not convince me that we should fund them.
You’re still focusing on the schools and not the kids. $x per year per kid. If over a third of the student population is in private education, redirecting that money to public schools and then bringing those hundreds of thousands of kids to public schools is not going to solve anything. I happen to agree with you, I am happy with public school education, which is why I participate in it. I only disagree on the point where a kid going to a private school is not entitled to their funding.
Presumably, you’ve already benefited from 13+ years of government funding into your education. Education is an investment into the next generation of the population.
Unless you are riding to work through open bushland, I assume you’re using roads and paths that the government at some level has built. The same goes for the train: The government has funded building that train line. As for welfare, think of that as insurance. You pay into a fund that will be available to you in an emergency. If you hit that wall, you’ll be happy welfare is there for you. Health falls into this category, also.
I still believe a private school with 2,000 students is due to receive ($x times 2000) in government funding. You haven’t convinced me that any kid in this country is not entitled to that support from the government. If parents want to fund executive bonuses, swimming pools and whatever else above that, that’s their right.
Don’t get hung up on the example in Golburn being Catholic education. The sombre findings of the Royal Commission into child abuse 6 years ago brought home that that abuse happened everywhere. Public schools, private schools, scout groups, orphanages, churches (of every flavour), sports teams. Anywhere adults were entrusted to the wellbeing of kids. Just a look at the headlines in the last day or so will show you a convicted paedophile from Sunshine Coast was working as a lifeguard with kids unsupervised in the UK, as well as Jehovah’s Witnesses covering up reported child abuse even after the royal commission changes.
Nope. I got most of my schooling overseas.
Roads and paths that cost a shit tonne less to maintain for cyclists than they do for heavy cars and trucks. Trains which are subsidised to a much lesser degree than cars are.
But you can’t split it up like that. If a school spends 40% of its budget on marketing and executives (number entirely made up), then for every dollar the government is giving them, 40 cents of taxpayer money are going to fund private school executive bonuses and marketing. Even if that money went through a carefully-controlled process where it goes in a special trust account only to be spent on specially-approved student services, it’s still in effect subsidising those other things, because it means the non-trust money doesn’t need to be touched to spend on student services and can instead focus on the less productive purposes.
No, I’m focusing on the money. I’m focusing on getting the best outcome for our education system. And that’s to spend every cent we have on the students, not on executive bonuses and excessive marketing.
To the extent that I’m focusing on anything other than the money, I am focusing on the kids. I’m focusing on the kids who can’t afford to pay for private school. I don’t support funding private schools for the same reason I didn’t support the original stage 3 tax cuts. It’s a hand-out to the wealthy that they don’t need.
It’s just absurd on the face of it to support funding a highly profitable private sector when the equivalent public sector exists, is underfunded, and gets much greater bang for its buck. There is no angle on which one can approach it and justify spending public money on private schools other than corporate greed.
No, they do not. If we want to make it about tax, those kids are dependents and whomever is claiming them is getting the tax rebates and revenue they are entitled to. Tying individual entitlement to education funding is nonsensical if you think about it for half a second, downright absurd if you think about it in the context of Australias profoundly prejudiced and unequal system.
Never mind the notion that we’re funding religious indoctrination camps with little to no oversight or accountability… go ask women at universities how they like dealing with the cloistered, Tate-farmed freaks produced by these indoctrination camps.