Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
I think your argument has been superceded by the SCOTUS. They have clearly decided that one cannot decide to pay taxes only for those government functions that one approves of. Hence it is quite legal and justifiable to insist that everyone pay their school taxes, whether they have a child in the system or not. The argument is that the entire society benefits if the schools provide a well educated population, so everyone needs to be sure that they pay for the education of all the children. Those who choose to send their children to private schools are economically equivalent to those who pay but choose not to have children. Those who put lots of children through the public schools will obviously get a bargain, compared tot he cost of educating them all in private schools. Taxes are not equal for all, but presumably the benefits are.
I agree the Abington Hospital example highlights an unfair and undesirable situation, but don't agree that it is a valid analogy for the school voucher discussion.
You ignore the injustice of the current subsidizing of U.S. public education by taxes paid by a group of citizens who aren't using the system and who are paying for alternatives, and seem to feel that if you can't continue to pick the pockets of these other people, your rights are being infringed upon.