32
Minister eyes deal to fully fund public schools across country after landmark WA agreement (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/australia@aussie.zone
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

we need a lot more schools

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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    I’m not suggesting they be banned

    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).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 12 points 2 years ago

    They couldn’t possibly stay open

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent