Grading The Schools

In recent months there have been a number of suggestions as to how to fix Bermuda's underperforming public school system.

In July last year a Royal Gazette editorial suggested that Bermuda should look at the education reforms being conducted in the UK, which involve giving schools the independence to run their own budgets, recruit staff and expand. In an opinion piece in October, Robert Stewart stated his belief that the public school system is failing due to protection from competition and insulation from failure. And yesterday, Christian Dunleavy called for individual elected school boards, free to hire the principal of their choice, who in turn would be able to recruit their own teaching staff.

These are all sensible suggestions which would do much to improve the public education system without the need to completely roll back the changes made by the UBP in the 1990s.

But these reforms would be pointless without a way for the public to measure their success. To achieve this, the Government should publish league tables of the exam results achieved by the Island's public schools. Parents could use these to help them decide where to send their child and to measure the Government's success in improving underperforming schools.

For example, currently only the overall results of the Terra Nova tests are made public. The issue of whether to publish these on a school-by-school basis was discussed with the Bermuda Union of Teachers and the Association of School Principals at the start of the 2003/4 school year; last May, Education Minister Terry Lister said that the concerns they raised were being examined. It would be nice to hear Mr. Lister's current thoughts on this.

Public schools need an incentive to better themselves. League tables would provide this.

Comments

[big bad wolf on 09.02.05 at 11:33]

Give the money to private schools and close all public schools. The Private schools can educate our children alot better than the Government. The rest of the education budget should be put in an endowment fund to cover school fees for families that cannot afford private fees and for college education for families on a economic needs bases also. There problem solved!

[John on 09.02.05 at 11:45]

The curriculum also has to change so that high school graduates can achieve qualifications which are internationally recognised and allow entrance into decent universities. As I understand it, a current Cedarbridge graduate's piece of paper is worthless in the real world and those who wish to further improve must apply to one of the private school's graduate programs.

[J Galt on 09.02.05 at 13:45]

"The rest of the education budget should be put in an endowment fund to cover school fees for families that cannot afford private fees and for college education for families on a economic needs bases also"

If you are going to take money from me I would rather it go to students based on merit not based on economic need.

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 14:05]

Government should "give up" and privatize the schooling system. That sounds like a George W suggestion big bad wolf. And I don't mean the compassionate George W.

Such a suggestion sadens me, because for some to suggest it the public system has obviously gotten to the point that some believe it can not be rehabilitated. One of the few real responsibilities, in my humble opinion, a government should be given is education. How else can education be available widly and free to all children to ensure that they can "be all that they can be." Sounds corny but this is a very very important difference between a compassionate society and the "everyone look out for yourself" form we see growing in the U.S and elsewhere.

By "be all that they can be" I don't mean go to university and come back with a degree. The university route is not, and should not be perceived, as the right route for every one. Unfortunately people have been indoctrinated with the belief that degree = valuable and no degree = second class.

We need different programs for different children. Some may be academically inclined and others not. Those who are not should get some level of skill that they can use "in Bermuda". This idea I believe is not currently popular because to have differnt programs you need multiple schools, and you can't dump everyone in one or two locations (the caretaker approach) to minimize overheads. The other reason often given for not "streaming" is to avoid the stigma to children of going to "non-academic" schools. The result is that some are pushed beyond their levels, are unhappy, and score poorly on standardized tests. Which is worse, the stigma of being streamed or the stigma of failing. At least when streamed they may come out with some skills and be stigmatized, as opposed to being pushed through an academic program and churned out.

Private schools are very good at academics but they don't take care of the non-academic children. That is government's responsibility and they are failing miserably (UBP and PLP).

This all ties into the myth that Bermuda will thrive because we have a thriving offshore business. All well and good if you are a "degreed" professional, but SOL if not. And government has no plans for developing industries for these individuals to go into. A little planning on that side, whether revitalizing tourism, light manufacturing, or who knows what, would give the schools an idea of what our children could be trained and counselled toward earlier.

Lots of ranting, but the school system is working and I think in part because it is aiming at the wrong goals - sending children abroad to university - to the detriment of our children.

[Tiger Bay on 09.02.05 at 14:29]

"aiming at the wrong goals - sending children abroad to university"

And they're failing at that. Roll your own curricula. Only 25 percent graduate.

Is the percentage of Bermuda public school students continuing to attend 4 year accredited college overseas tracked or published?

[Onion on 09.02.05 at 14:40]

The education system has always been stratified along racial and class lines.

As far as the black schools go However, institutions like Berkeley, Howard Academy and the Technical Institute produced first class graduates. Graduates of the old Berkeley Institute are some of the brightest minds in Bermuda who went on to top universities in Canada, the States and UK. Berkely was certainly on par if not better than Saltus and BHS during much of its history. Howard Academy was perhaps less academic but, again, graduates were well equipped to do well either in university or in a solid trade.

The Technical Institute produced first class tradesmen in Bermuda. If you look at many today you will see that they have done well in business in Bermuda. So why was the Technical Institute disbanded? Some might say the school was becoming too successful.

Why did Berkely allow itself to fall prey to this mega school concept? I partially blame alumni from this school. But I do know that it was never the intention of the "old guard" to develop a top level of education for blacks, Portuguese and non-privileged whites. The idea of a public mega school is unlikely to achieve the level of excellence required to succeed in today's world. Too often we allow our standards to fall to suit to cater to mediocrity. We invest in a building but not in building education. We call ourselves a bastion of sophistication, superior to our caribbean cousins down south. But do you reaslise that the level of public education in Barbados and Trinidad is far superior to that which we have in Bermuda?

Education will only improve in Bermuda if we stop spending millions on building schools with mini split airconditioners/heaters, state of the art this and that, and start focusing on the basics of a good old fashioned education!

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 14:47]

The percentage is low because many university-bound children have already been put in private schools by their parents who have scrimped and saved to ensure they get the best chance.

If these children had staid in the public school system the percentage would be much higher. In fairness to the teachers they may well be doing a good job with what they are given.

This however supports my point. We aren't providing the right type of education to too many of our children. A high number of those in the public school system shouldn't have been made to try to go to university. And the fact that they failed should not surprise us, and shame on us for stygmatizing them by making them try.

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 14:51]

Damn I hate it when we are talking about our children's futures that we start talking about black and white. I am not sure, but I would be surprised if the number of Bermudian's with university degrees is split betwen black and white individuals in any different proportion to the general population.

Can we all just admit that government is failing all our children??

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 14:53]

Someone mentioned public school boards. Great idea, it may actually give some control back to the parents who actually seem to care. The beauracrats are too easily sidetracked with this theory or that. Meanwhile a generation of children is being brutalized.

[Onion on 09.02.05 at 15:01]

Intrigued,

I am merely giving you this historical context of our education system. You say you hate when we talk about race. How many white kids were at Robert Crawford or Prospect School for girls? How many blacks are at BHS. C'mon man. I said blacks, Portuguese and non-privileged whites have suffered the most from our public education system. The elite, most of whom are white, have suffered the least. The Berkeley Institue was the last bastion for elite educatin for blacks. That school in its present state is no longer what is was. So those academic but non-wealthy students who would previously have gone to the old Berekely now must go to the "new" less academic Berkely or Cedarbriddge.

So in a nutshell I have agreed that our public education is failing everyone except the elite, most of whom are white.

[Somers on 09.02.05 at 15:42]

"So in a nutshell I have agreed that our public education is failing everyone except the elite, most of whom are white."

Onion, I have to say that that is a pretty "misguided" statement. I shall remind you that I am a member of the public also, and the taxes I pay towards public education is the same taxes you pay. If a good education for children is not the result of my tax dollars, than the public school system is letting me down as much as it is letting you down.

[Onion on 09.02.05 at 16:05]

Somers, yes in that sense it lets us all down. The point I was making is that those who actually go to a public school suffer a double whammy because they themselves do not benefit from a top class education.

I agree that the elite child suffers because his parents tax dollars are not being maximised. However because he or she is in private school or is sent away to boarding school that kid will still gain a personal advantage over the Cedarbridge graduate, and will probably get a better job down the road.

[H Reardon on 09.02.05 at 16:31]

"If you are going to take money from me I would rather it go to students based on merit not based on economic need."

Posted by: J Galt | February 9, 2005 01:45 PM

It is amazing how often we see eye to eye, Galt.

[Tiger Bay on 09.02.05 at 17:35]

The competitiveness of the public schools is hampered by union activity. As a result, institutional behavior is often directed towards what's best for the teachers instead of what produces the best education for the kids. I don't believe the private schools are unionized; they certainly are more performance/acheivement driven.

Publishing the numbers (graduation rates, college attendence) and coming clean about the state of public education is the first step towards saving it.

Look at http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/home.asp?mode=o&so=-&ot=5&o=164&view=tst

Virtually every state government in the US provides this.

Why does Bermuda humandhaw so long?! Embarrassment?

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 18:01]

Onion:

A couple things. Your right, Robert Crawford and Prospect School were primarily black, portugeuse and poorer whites. So what? What does that have to do with the discussion. You will note in my statement that I lament what is happening with our public schools today. The problem is not a black or white issue it is a government incompetence issue. I believe that the public schools should be centres of excellence, competitive with any private schools. I just think that excellence should be measured by preparing the students for their best shot at the world given their intellectual content. They aren't doing that, they are funelling everyone through the same system and unfortunately a whole lot of children (of many races and backgrounds) are being let down.

I am a product of the government system and I have done exceptionally well. I went to Bermuda College and on from their. I am from a poor white family - my mother brought us up on $10,000 a year with no father. You needn't lecture me on the history of Bermuda's education system. Been there done that.

I was lucky, today's children are not. What do we do to improve the system Onion? Dwelling on the past sure isn't very constructive.

[big bad wolf on 09.02.05 at 18:06]

Yes I agree help should be based on economic need and merit but if the whole education system was privatized....about half of it already is !! I would like to insure that those parents who struggled to make the school fees would be helped by an educational endowment fund which would be a partial diversion of the present education budget from Government. Bermuda tax payers are presently paying more per student for a public school education per child than the private schools and the results overall do not come near the results of the private schools.There are some well run primary and middle schools in the public system but over all the results are not as good as the private schools. If the system was ever privatized the good teachers in the public sector would be part of the new private system.

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 18:10]

Funding on merit not economic need????

So we should privatize schools and then say to the children that can not afford them that because they are not smart enough they have to go to some cheap school that is effectively a holding area until they are 18?

Damn this country has become uncaring and greedy. No desire to improve the lot of the have nots, unless they are really bright have nots who we can hire as professionals to do our bidding for us.

Its one thing to privatize, but unless you take care of those who can not afford it government will have abdicated one of its major responsibilities - education.

My god, how do we expect to move ahead as an island with out strong, universally available eductaion. Which never is the result of privatization.

[Pitts Bay on 09.02.05 at 18:24]

My understanding (and I can not recall where I heard or read it) is that the average student in the public system costs the government $18,000 per annum. BHS & Saltus are about $12,000 per annum. What economies of scale??

If the entire public education system was privatized, then government funding should be means tested, and it should be available to students at all schools. Merit based funding has no place in such a system. In connection with Scholarships & bursaries etc, yes, a merit based system has its place, but not when dealing with the basic education of Bermuda's population. Those who can afford should pay the going rate, and government should subsidize those who can not. I am sure that there are numerous models for such a system - New Zealand I believe has essentially privatized it's education system (or at least made it independent from the government).

[big bad wolf on 09.02.05 at 18:37]

Merit for higher education at College...you did not read my earlier post re Government funds also to be used for endowment fund for college fees.Means test for funding of families that do not have the fees for new private system.There would have to be some slide rule fee structure so that the middle class families do not carry the brunt of the cost of the private system and poor families relative to Bermuda standards get the help they need re school fees...My policy would be no child left behind..and that includes specil need students too!! The devil is in the details I'm floating general concepts for constructive change....thats all.

[jake on 09.02.05 at 18:47]

If we are going to privatise the system, then we should allocate a voucher system. For each child you have, you receive a voucher that entitles them to $15,000 in school tuition at accredited schools. Rich or poor - no means testing - no merit testing. Everyone gets a voucher for their child, and when given to a school, can be turned into cash (by the school).

That way we provide an incentive for the private sector to provide education and to compete. That way we can grade the school results, and have niche schools formed for trade skills, the arts, or the saltus bhs model. Whatever the market determines.

Those that are good will grow. Those that are poor will lose parental support, and thus funding and will go out of business.

A base standard would be provided by the accredidation process.

Howzat!

[Pitts Bay on 09.02.05 at 18:54]

Jake

Works for me!!

[big bad wolf on 09.02.05 at 18:55]

Thats it Jake run with it ...ideas are starting to flow on solving challenges with a new private system....keep them coming people.

[Intrigued on 09.02.05 at 19:09]

Believe it or not I am for free enterprise as much as possibble. However, I am not sure it works for education. The problem with a voucher system, the very same promoted by the most compassionate George W, is that you end up with two tiers of schools. The good ones simply increase their fees and offer more. The haves can afford it and the rest of the population ends up with a second rate solution.

[big bad wolf on 09.02.05 at 20:12]

Intrigued I understand your worry but in a small place like Bermuda , a strong independent education board can make sure that all schools adhere to high standards.There would be no tolerance for any atempts to marginalize those in weaker positions economically. The new system would have to lift all educational boats or it would be a failure.

[J Galt on 09.02.05 at 23:29]

"So we should privatize schools and then say to the children that can not afford them that because they are not smart enough....."

No Intrigued we should say to the children, in Bermuda effort and hard work are rewarded, based on your own merit you will recive the best that Bermuda has to offer, when you finish school it is through your hard work and effort that you will earn the things you want in life.

How disappointing will it be for all of those who where rewarded based on their need as opposed to their merit, when they enter the real world and find "needing" a cell phone, an apartment, or food is a lot different then earning them. Will you as a land lord give up your rent based on your tenents need? Would you accept less salary, for the same work performed, Should a fellow employee who has more children then you, recieve more pay because his need is greater?

Please explain to me why you think need should be chosen over merit.

I for one am confident that a school body based on merit will out perfrom one based on need.

[Onion on 10.02.05 at 00:26]

Intrigued,
I am not disagreeing with you. I am merely saying that the way public education has been developing, it is not preparing our kids for the world in which we live. Public education in Bermuda has had its highs and lows in terms of standards. Private education has always been relatively good. Again, I will reiterate the point. Only those who can afford private education rise above this. The elite will always afford private education. In fact, they have never sent thier kids to public education. The elite in Bermuda have mostly consisted of whites. Now there are a sprinkling of blacks and Portuguese.

Also, I am not dwelling on the past. Read my email carefully man. In order for the present system to improve we as a country must change our mentality and stop accepting mediocrity. 3 football players got banned for not showing up to take a drugs test. Instead of reprimanding these players their club made the excuse that they were "victims" of some conspiracy. This type of lack of accountability is what exists in our mentality today. Parents do not teach their kids accountability and so by the time they get to school the teachers a=have to become social workers, rehab workers, mommy and daddy!! This is where the problem lies.

PS I too went through the public school and did well. Like I said, the public schools have had their high and low points. I was fortunate to come through at the right time.

[Tiger Bay on 10.02.05 at 08:40]

A look at the Massachussetts public school system statistics shows how off base we are here.

Massachussetts (public + private schools) has 1.2 million students out of which 82 percent are in public schools. 28 percent are low income. Average cost per student is $6100. 95 percent graduation rate. 75 percent of students go on to attend college. Test scores for every school are posted on the internet, along with the plans to improve schools that are below average.

[AP on 10.02.05 at 09:43]

You can not treat education as simply another commodity to be traded. The idea that a voucher system would weed out the poorer performing schools on a supply and demand basis is dangerous. In reality, what would happen would be that some schools would start to decline in standard and those parents who are able to would move their kids to other apparently better schools. These schools would fill to their capacity (which is finite: even if they want to take in more paying punters they will be restricted by available physical space) and there would then be no alternatives available to those parents of kids who remain at the original school. This school now has a bad reputation and will continue to decline. But hey! Let's all cheer for the success of applying a purely monetary solutiuon to the provision of education!

As for league tables, they are fine in principal but are wide open to misinterpretation. Just look at the recent history of school league table in the UK. They have been blatantly abused by politicians wishing to "spin" the reality. And don't get me started on the way that real estate agents use them....

What Bermuda needs is a publicly funded education system that is independent of political control.

The trouble with education is much the same as with sex: everyone thinks they are an expert.

AP

[Tiger Bay on 10.02.05 at 09:58]

"What Bermuda needs is a publicly funded education system that is independent of political control."

Yes - but it must be answerable to the public/parents. A major problem is that the Department of Education often acts without accountability ... one way to address this is to release performance statistics based on international standards. Parents can't make informed decisions without them - or they simply jump to the private school system ... Saltus reports a 95% college attendance rate.

[Intigued on 10.02.05 at 10:10]

"No Intrigued we should say to the children, in Bermuda effort and hard work are rewarded, based on your own merit you will recive the best that Bermuda has to offer, when you finish school it is through your hard work and effort that you will earn the things you want in life.

How disappointing will it be for all of those who where rewarded based on their need as opposed to their merit, when they enter the real world and find "needing" a cell phone, an apartment, or food is a lot different then earning them. Will you as a land lord give up your rent based on your tenents need? Would you accept less salary, for the same work performed, Should a fellow employee who has more children then you, recieve more pay because his need is greater?"

Is the only way to instill a sense of responsibility and work effort making twelve year olds compete for limited bursaries? I agree these are all important attributes that to some extent should be nurtured in school (although they ultimately are the responsibility of the partners). I just don't believe that at the non-university/college levels you can ignore need.

I also believe that a voucher system doesn't work as supported by the many excellent points raised above.

Finally, it is a long reach to suggest that because a child without means is assisted with education that they will learn to expect everything to be given to them. I was such a child and I have never waited to be given anything. I in fact am greatful and work harder to prove those who assisted me that they were right.

Another myth is that private = better. There are many private schools in North America that don't come close to beating the best of the public schools. And as someone pointed out above, once a school starts to slide under such a system it is difficult to reform it. It is quite feasible that you would end up with private schools that are cheap that are attended by the have nots and the high end ones attedned by the haves.

The solution is more public involvement in the schools and less politics as stated by so many.

I think it is all well and good to compare dollars per head, and needed, but right noe the issue should not be to improve costs, we have a melt down in the system and we need to make sure that the kids are taken care of. Then we can worry about costs.

[jake on 10.02.05 at 11:02]

There is no need to see the provision of education on a private basis as limited or fixed.

New private outlets for education are springing up all the time. Home schooling has become a new rage with parents willing to take smaller environments and make them suitable for their children. Judy Smith's school (I cannot recall its name) takes many of the children from Saltus and BHS that cannot do well in that system and does well with them.

If there was a credit worthy source (Government) which provided the funding, you would see teachers in today's system creating their own schools. Many are innovative and supported by parents, but caught in the bureaucracy of the current system. I know teachers at Cedarbridge that love to give more - but are stuck doing lesson plan after lesson plan for administrators to review. Little benefit from this reaches the children.

The market is not static. It evolves. The educational industry in Bermuda should reward those who produce the best students. I have no problem if schools want to charge above the $15,000 voucher. Let them. Saltus and BHS were set up to educate a certain wealthy segment of the community - so let them. In the same vein, let's set up schools that target mathematics, or economics and let's compete for students or parents really, with what we can give students and how we can best equip them to perform.

I'd wager that I could take 25 students and give them legal, financial and martial training and they would be effective citizens in a number of disciplines post school. College would be an option, but good citizenship would be a must. Why should every parent not have an equal choce in that.

Come on Galt - I thought you would be all over this one with me.

[Tiger Bay on 10.02.05 at 12:24]

http://www.careerpaths.bm/

Kudos to Ace and Butterfield for this initiative to provide subsidized loans for Bermudians to attend further vocational and university training.

[J Galt on 11.02.05 at 07:40]

Jake,

Of course I agree with your idea of privatization, but I cannot agree with a voucher system. The money has to come from some where and if government is providing it, that means we are paying for it.

I suggest that Warwick Academy did well in the 80's because you had to earn your spot there, they took the best and brightest, put them together and that made for a very positive educational enviroment, the same with Saltus and BHS but to a lesser degree because with enough money I'm sure they overlooked some of the less than average students. In the private school cases parents paid for their children and played a bigger part in their childs education, after all almost everyone wants to ensure they get what they pay for.

The voucher system wil not work because you will introduce the less than average into classes and they will hold our brightest and best back, which is unfair to them.

I propose we let the cream rise to the top.

[Intrigued on 11.02.05 at 09:25]

And once teh cream has risen, what do we do with the remainder? Isn't the problem that the average or below average students are failing? Smart kids will always do well because they are smart.

[Guilden M. Gilbert on 11.02.05 at 10:00]

Intrigued,

Obviously you haven't been reading Galt's posts lately. He proposes that the average or below average students be give British Passports so that they can leave Bermuda and be a burden to EEC.

You see, according to Galt whether you are born in Bermuda or not, if there is some minute indication that you could cause him a few tax dollars you are not worthy to remain in Bermuda.

In the "World According to Galt" Bermuda is to be reserved only for the elite of society, there are no average performers allowed.

[jake on 11.02.05 at 10:02]

J Galt,

Here is why my suggested system is more fair. Today, everyone has access to "free" education. You are right. We all pay for it, but as a society we are all supposed to benefit from an educated populace.

Those who opt for private school pay twice. They pay taxes for the public system, and then they pay directly for the private education. They get no direct control over the education dollars they expend, or are expended on their behalf.

Parents supporting public education are also disadvantaged. Why? Because they have no power to vote with their feet if they are unhappy with what is provided. In the private sector, I let the school know I am unhappy by leaving, and if enough people leave, then the school closes. I say that is a good result, because schools that don't produce should close their doors.

Under the voucher system, every tax payer has the same ability to vote with their feet, and everyone gets the same value for their children. The access to value is a benefit to the taxpayer. The access to equal value in voucher is for the benefit of the child. The market is encouraged to provide efficient successful education and competes to do so. Competition increases yield, so standards improve as does diversity as specialist schools are created to respond to different segments of the community.

Now if you feel that we should remove Government schools, and provide no voucher - just return the taxes to the tax payer, so that education is provided only to those in the wealthy category, then no, we cannot agree. That would be worse (albeit marginally) than where we are today.

Economic oppression is no less socially destructive than racial oppression, and in my opinion that is what it would amount to.

Give me your thoughts...

[jake on 11.02.05 at 10:11]

By the way, I am not against competition for spaces, schools charging more than the voucher amount or any other way the market wants to provive segmentation (except segregation - not for that one). I think there are enough schools able to provide for the needs, and the US college system is my inspiration. There are Ivy League schools, there are schools focused on technology, general management, finance, and marketing. People self select, and for those who don't the school selects. Alumni networks are built up and supported, the normally cream rises to the top.

However, it is a proven fact that smart kids do not always rise to the top. Sometimes the mediocre get ahead because they don't have financial burdens to consider. If we remove the financial burdens - for us all - whilst maintaining the choice we simply push the money already being collected back into the hands of parents, who are best placed to decide is something is working for their child or not. That way we can blame ourselves and stop blaming the Government, from whom all mistakes flow.

[Fornicator on 11.02.05 at 10:19]

"I propose we let the cream rise to the top."

That's BS. What you propose is a system where intelligent but poor people get left behind. That's one of the pillars of institutionalized racism.

[J Galt on 11.02.05 at 10:29]

Jake, an excellent post, again I agree totally with your idea of privatization and the benefits we all will reap, and would even go as far to say that your voucher idea is better than the current system, giving "every tax payer the same ability to vote with their feet".

But I cannot morally agree with vouchers, because you are forcing me to pay, for the education of someone else's child.

[Pitts Bay on 11.02.05 at 10:37]

Galt

You already are paying for people to go to school in the public system. That would not change. It is how the schools are managed that would change under Jake's plan - At least that is what I think he is saying.

[Fornicator on 11.02.05 at 10:45]

This has been an interesting thread, but doesn't even paint half the picture. Society's values have tanked over the last 20 years. There is no longer an emphasis on success, progress, discipline, respect, etc.

Over Christmas I was in a store where this "parent" was buying their child a gift and started cussing the sales person out because he had to wait in line. The f's were flying all over the place! I've seen a "parent" call a school principal an idiot [in front of her child] because the child didn't bring their sweater to school (of course the child had a fashionable team jacket instead). And then this "parent" continued to disrespect the principle to other people in the store - and she got agreement!

We now have a society that fully embrances and even promotoes counterproductive, deviant behavior. It's now "in" to be dumb, disruptive, disrespectful and amoral. Everybody wants to be a pimp these days, and pimp values hurt the less wealthy a whole lot more than the wealthy. Conversely, positive values have proven themselves time and time again to be powerful enough to revolutionize a society. Every gain made in the civil rights movement had come about by people who had a solid head on their shoulders. Even those without education past 13 fared far better in a far less tolerant Bermuda as long as they had a progressive value system.

Sorry, but the very best education system can't convert a society with ideals that are in the toilet. Yes, there are teachers who don't give a damn. But if the parents were on the ball, then they'd be demanding higher standards in the teaching profession. The schools will do better when students are better. Students will be better when parents are better. It's time for us to adopt a different value system. It's plain to see that the one we've got produces terrible results.

[J Galt on 11.02.05 at 10:47]

"there was something that happened at the plant where I worked for twenty years The Twentieth Century Motor Company.

It was when the old man died and his heirs took over. ... They let us vote on it too, and everybody -- almost everybody -- voted for it ....
The plan was that everybody in the factory would work according to his ability, but would be paid according to his need. ... they made it sound like that anyone who'd oppose the plan was a child-killer at heart and less than a human being.

... Do you know how it worked, that plan, and what it did to people? Try pouring water into a tank where there is a pipe at the bottom draining it out faster than you pour it in and each bucket you bring breaks the pipe an inch wider, and the harder you work the more is demanded of you, and you stand slinging buckets forty hours a week, then forty-eight, then fifty-six -- for your neighbor's supper -- for his wife's operation -- for his child's measles -- for his mother's wheelchair -- for his uncle's shirt -- for his nephew's schooling -- for the baby next door -- for the baby to be born -- for anyone anywhere around you -- it's theirs to receive, from diapers to dentures -- and yours to work, ... with nothing to show for it but your sweat, with nothing in sight for you but their pleasure, for the whole of your life, without rest, without hope, without end ...

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need ... It took just one meeting to discover that we had become beggars --rotten, whining, sniveling beggars, all of us, because no man could claim his pay as his rightful earning, he had no rights and no earnings, his work didn't belong to him, it belonged to "the family," and they owed him nothing in return, and the only claim he had on them was his "need" -- so he had to beg in public for relief from his needs, like any lousy moocher, listing all his troubles and miseries, down to his patched drawers and his wife's head colds, hoping that "the family" would throw him the alms. He had to claim miseries, because its miseries, not work, that had become the coin of the realm -- so it turned into a contest among six thousand panhandlers, each claiming that his need was worse than his brothers... what sort of men kept quiet, feeling shame, and what sort got away with the jackpot?

... What was it that they'd always told us about the vicious competition of the profit system, where men had to compete for who'd do a better job than his fellows? Vicious wasn't it? Well, they should have seen what it was like when we all had to compete with one another for who'd do the worst job possible. There is no surer way to destroy a man than to force him into a spot where he has to aim at not doing his best, where he has to struggle to do a bad job day after day.

... Amusement was the first thing they dropped. Aren't you always supposed to be ashamed to object when anybody asks you to give up anything, if it's something that gave you pleasure? ... There was a man who'd worked hard, all his life, because he'd always wanted to send his son through college. Well, the boy graduated from high school in the second year of the plan -- but "the family" wouldn't give the father any "allowance" for the college. They said his son couldn't go to college, until we had enough to send everybody's son to college -- and we first had to send everybody's children through high school, and we didn't even have enough for that. The father died the following year, in a knife fight with somebody in a saloon, a fight over nothing in particular -- such fights were beginning to happen among us all the time.

Then there was an old guy, a widower with no family, who had one hobby: phonograph records -- "personal luxury", they called it. But at that same meeting, Millie Bush, somebody's daughter, a mean ugly little eight-year-old, was voted a pair of gold braces for her buck teeth -- this was "medical need," because the staff psychologist had said that the poor girl would get an inferiority complex if her teeth weren't straightened out.
The old guy who loved music, turned to drink instead.

... But the shiftless and the irresponsible had a field day of it. They bred babies, they got girls into trouble, they dragged in every worthless relative they had from all over the country, every unmarried pregnant sister, for an extra disability allowance, they got more sickness than any doctor could disprove, they ruined their clothing, their furniture, their homes -- what the hell, "the family" was paying for it!

They found more ways of getting in "need" than the rest of us could ever imagine -- they developed a special skill for it, which was the only ability they showed.... Yet this was the moral law that the professors and leaders and thinkers had wanted to establish all over the earth.

If this is what it did to a single town, where we all knew on another, do you care to think what it would do on a world scale? ...To work -- with no chance of an extra ration, till the Cambodians have been fed and the Patagonians have been sent to college. To work -- on a blank check held by every creature born, by men whom you'll never see, whose needs you will never know, whose ability or laziness or sloppiness or fraud you have no way to learn and no right to question -- just to work and work and work -- and leave it up to the Ivys and the Geralds of the world to decide whose stomach will consume the effort, the dreams and days of your life.

And this is the moral law to accept? This -- a moral ideal? ... Our agony took four years, from our first meeting to our last, and it ended the only way it could end: in bankruptcy.

"Ayn Rand"

[Fornicator on 11.02.05 at 10:49]

"But I cannot morally agree with vouchers, because you are forcing me to pay, for the education of someone else's child. "

It's as asinine as saying that you are forcing me to pay for policing someone else's street, hospital care, mail delivery, sea rescue, public works, environmental protection, etc.

Sometimes I wonder if Galt is just trying to screw with us...

[jake on 11.02.05 at 10:49]

I think I see where you are coming from Galt. Here is why I disagree.

You believe that a child born to a poor parent should not be supported by the taxes paid by a rich parent. To do so is forcing you to pay for someone elses child, and is against your values.

Let's look at it from the perspective of the children first, however.

Should not every child have the same opportunity, notwithstanding their parents affluence? This way, those who "earn" the right to get ahead because they are smarter are not biased by mommy and daddy. Is it not more fair - on your values - to seperate the child's future from the parents mistakes or successes? Let each child - including your own - prove its entitlement to more by starting them all at the same place.

You might be surprised (happily) by the effect on society as a whole.

[J Galt on 11.02.05 at 11:06]

"Should not every child have the same opportunity, notwithstanding their parents affluence? "

No, people should be made to accept responibilty for thier own actions. If you have a child you should accept responiblity for it, and not come looking to me for a hand out.

"Is it not more fair - on your values - to seperate the child's future from the parents mistakes or successes? "

No my life, my labour, I should decide how I spend it, not be forced to work for someone else's child.

Sorry Jake, I see what your trying to do, but I don't think you can justify it

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 11.02.05 at 11:30]

Galt,

So basically what you are saying is that you owe society nothing for your upbringing, you did everything on your own without any assistance.

Let's take what you are saying and apply it to health insurance. Let's assume you participate in your companies Group Medical programme and you are diagnosed with cancer. How would you feel if the other member in the Group said that they will no longer participate because your illnes is going to drive up the claims experience, which in turn causes a significant increase in premium? If that happened you would not be able to secure coverage and you would them have the choice of dying from your illness or swallowing your pride and admitting that sometimes we all need a helping hand. That is what living in a society is all about. It is not just about you and what you have.

The reality is some people in society need financial assistance and it is up to those of us who are "successful" to play our part in helping our society. We are successful because of our society not in spite of it.

Jake is not saying that anyone is askng for a hand-out what he is saying that from an education perspective everyone, regardless of status in society should have equal access to education.

An uneducated society very quickly becomes a lawless society, therefore, you either pay today to provide a level playing field for education or your pay tomorrow by being a victim of crime or payying for the increase cost of protection from crime.

You need to realise that having money does not make you better than the next person.

[jake on 11.02.05 at 11:51]

Galt,

I would lean toward agreement except that children are not items or things. They are as much people as you or their parents and do not deserve to be destitute because of the choices of the parents that happen to have them. I am for dental care for children - not adults. I am for education for children - not adults. I am for healthcare for children - not adults.

I believe that the children are the responsibility of the society that creates them - not just the parents. Of course there are limits to that theory - Disneyworld for all - no. But basic human decency makes me want the best for children - and I have none of my own.

[J Galt on 11.02.05 at 13:53]

"They are as much people as you or their parents and do not deserve to be destitute because of the choices of the parents that happen to have them"

Lets say I agree that they are people as much as you or I, there for as I would not allow you to take money from me by force, I will not allow them, and I will not allow you to do it, in their name.

Guilden,

apple and oranges, insurance by choice is correct, by force it is not. If I make and agreement to pay for coverage, as long as the terms of the agreements aren't changed then the contract should be respected. If I paid 20 a week with the agreement that I would recieve help if I became stricken, I would expect them to stick to the bargin.

"An uneducated society very quickly becomes a lawless society, therefore, you either pay today to provide a level playing field for education or your pay tomorrow by being a victim of crime "

Guilden this is the way of the criminal, you threaten my future, you try to hold me responsible for the mistakes or failings of others.

You are in fact telling me, not unlike a common thug to pay protection money.

"You need to realise that having money does not make you better than the next person"

No what makes me better than the next man, is not having the money, It is being able to earn the money I have Money. I am better because I don't have to beg or steal for.

If you think I'm wrong Guilden answer me this, you have a choice an island of people willing and able to produce, or an Island of beggers and theives, which would you live on?

I'll give you a clue the beggars won't have anyone to beg from and the thieves won't have anyone to steal from.

[J Galt on 11.02.05 at 14:10]

"Sometimes I wonder if Galt is just trying to screw with us"

No, Forni,

I just don't believe you should force someone to:

pay for your sickness,
pay for your child
or pay for any need you may have just because they are able.

If 1 set of parents has worked hard to provide for themselves and their children, where is the fairness in asking them to pay for somebody elses because they are unable, or as you suggested unwilling to be good parents.

When you have a child you are responible and you should damn well be prepared to raise it make sacrifices for it, and not expect anyone else, to step in and do the job for you.

[Intrigued on 11.02.05 at 14:22]

Galt:

While painful I read through your attempted Ayn Rand analogy. I believe your point was "if we start to share the pie based on need we will go bankrupt". Accordingly no vouchers based on need as it is the slippery slope to bankruptcy. Or stated another way, a tax on us to pay for someone else's children with result in a weaker country, perhaps even a country of beggars and thieves.

Last time I looked at the U.S., they have for some time been taxing their citizens to pay for everyone's education. Still the leading economic power (watch out for China though). Of course, the "leave no child behind" programin the U.S. could prove to be the straw that broke the camels back if you are right in your theories. NOT!