You argue that the schools in Utah work and that if we lived somewhere where they didn’t you would be supportive of vouchers. I can accept that position. I do find it ironic that the major groups opposing vouchers are the same groups that are always saying that our schools are underfunded. If our schools are working then they must not be as desperately underfunded as we are constantly told.

For myself, I don’t think our school system is totally broken, but I don’t see it moving in the right direction either. Part of the draw of vouchers, for me, is that they would be a wakeup call to the public school administrators (say, district level and above) that we are willing to leave if they don’t change direction.

I’d accept your contention about the value of a program like this if we transplanted our argument to Washington DC or some other locale where the public school system was actually broken. We’re in Utah. Our schools work. Why should we subsidize those who decide for one reason or another that their kids are too good for public schools? They should be free to pay for the “upgrade” themselves if they so choose but I don’t see why I should be saddled with the bill. How does society benefit when government takes my hard earned tax dollars to pay for your kid’s private school tuition?

The money spent on public education benefits society by giving all people access to education. If we had no public education system, but instead taxed people to provide tuition for those who could not afford it at the private schools would that be the same benefit to society? (providing access for everyone to education)

Vouchers seem to be a hybrid between those two scenarios. They add an element of choice in education for those who otherwise had no choice besides public schools. Or am I missing something in your thinking?

I’m not trying to be picky here – I either don’t understand you or else I do understand you and see vouchers as a natural alternative/compliment to public schooling

I think anyone who wants to put their kids in private school or any other alternative to public schools should be free to do so and pay for it themselves. I don’t think they should be entitled to a portion of my tax dollars to pay for it.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear in earlier comments.

Your logic does not seem to work. Public schools benefit everyone by providing the opportunity for the populous to be educated. Insofar as vouchers provide access to education they also benefit everyone through the same logic.

My understanding suggests that you are trying to argue that vouchers impede access to education – and thus do not benefit society. If that’s the case then you must make the case of why they impede the education of the populous.

Your wrong. Public schools benefit everyone…even those without any kids in public schools. We all benefit from a populous which has access to a free public education. Voucher schemes subsidize only those who use the vouchers…not society as a whole.

Using your argument that it’s not right to use your tax money to subsidize a private education, does it not follow that you have no right to use the tax money of, say, a childless couple to pay for public education?

When you do that the average looks to be around $5000-$6000. Sound fair?

I don’t think it matters since I think a subsidy of $10 is too much. You still don’t have a moral right to use my tax money to pay for your kid’s private school tuition.