What's your point? This has been a factor since the beginning of time, it doesn't change the fact that the "student" must be willing and able to learn those skills/info in order to operate in their society. If that individual desires to change societies, they onus is on them (as individuals) to take the initiative as opposed to pressure an entire society to bend.
The above suggestion is, in my opinion, entirely academic and philosophically-based. There is no "deprivation" of experiences or inputs, they are just different not unlike how that experience will differ dramatically based on individual perspectives and unique influences.
I cannot comment on BC's specific legislation, however, I can say this: All schools (incl home schooling) must comply with a provincially set curriculum. Those private/charter schools that operate outside the public system can augment or place a greater focus on whatever areas they please provided they satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
Further, these private schools do not "deprive" the public system of anything. They receive 40% of the funding that each family has paid through taxes where they could easily make the argument they should receive 100%.
In the end, the families that send their kid to private schools end up subsidizing the public system and not consuming that public service yet they kick in an extra 60% of their school tax for this.
And if you don't feed the horse, it dies and the sparrows get nothing.
the flip-side of your position (potentially) results in individuals and corp entities outsourcing their operations or physically moving away.
Haliburton is now based out of Dubai, the credit card companies have established many call centres in other nations and places like the Caymans are booming based on the money that is fleeing progressive tax regimes.
Theorize and postulate all you like, but in the real world, money talks and bullsh*t walks and the money, jobs and (nominal) taxes go to benefitting those communities/nations where it resides and not the home nation.
Fine by me, but in the spirit of fairness, those folks that elect to pay out of pocket for a private school be exempted from the muni/prov portion of their school tax... I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you'll find a good reason to punish those families that want to take the private school route, right?
... You guessed wrong!.. What's the consolation prize that we have for our loser Ed?
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-621-m/11-621-m2005024-eng.pdf
An excerpt for you:
"The results were conclusive. The one-tenth of taxfilers who were in the highest earnings bracket provided more than one-half of the revenue from federal income tax in 2002. And, their share of the tax pie has been increasing. In 1990, this 10% of taxfilers accounted for 46.0% of total federal income tax; by 2002, this group accounted for 52.6%. This increase reflects faster income growth and a smaller reduction in effective tax rates for this group relative to others.
At the other end of the scale, the one-half of taxfilers with the lowest incomes saw their share of the tax pie decline during the same period. In 1990, this group accounted for 6.7% of total federal income tax paid; in 2002, this proportion had declined to 4.4%. In fact, this group paid less federal income tax in 2002 than in 1990, in spite of higher incomes."
Ding! Incorrect! However prove me wrong - only accredited, politically non-affiliated sources being acceptable of course. Stats, numbers please - not anecdotal chalk board fantasies.
Yes, I am aware. In a society where all are equal and presumably treated as such, some are considered more equal than others.
Last edited:
