Thank you for your many years of support. We want to share the news with you that after much consideration, will cease operations in its present format on October 15th. We appreciate your meaningful contributions over the years.
Back to Home

Active Questions

Should taxpayers without children be forced to subsidize public schooling through property taxes?
Race, Religion & Politics / 3:32 PM - Thursday March 17, 2011

Should taxpayers without children be forced to subsidize public schooling through property taxes?

I don't think it's fair. The people who're squeezing out these babies should be paying for the school system.

And don't give me this "public education provides benefit to all society" mumbo jumbo.. Because quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of 70% of my property taxes going to an education system within which I have no personal investment.

- Asked by drunkmonk, A Couch Potato, Male, 36-45

Read more about the Rating System

I believe that is a good use of tax payer's money paying for education. If you didn't pay then education would only be for the rich. I would rather educate a child then pay for a bum on welfare. Rosey

- Response by roseytalks, A Thinker, Female, Who Cares?, Tampa, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

I would love for the government to get out of the education business all together. If people want children, they should take responsibility for the children - including their education.

Same with everything else, though. If a person smokes, drinks and rides a motorcycle without a helmet, should _I_ have to subsidize his health care? If _I_ buy a house that is too big for me to afford, and it's in foreclosure, should the government (and therefore taxpayers) bail me out? If Wall Street bankers are giving themselves million dollar bonuses while things melt down, and our government bails them out... that's wrong too, isn't it?

I think it's about time that people took responsibility for their own choices. Society would be a better place.

- Response by curvysmartgirl, A Creative, Female, 46-55, Dallas, Artist / Musician / Writer

Rating Received:

Are you saying that your publicly-funded education was utterly wasted on you?

- Response by trawna, A Career Woman, Female, 46-55, Toronto, Consulting

Rating Received:

Just pay for my 4 babies' education and STFU please and thank you! LOL

- Response by momof4, A Creative, Female, 46-55, Administrative

Rating Received:

Well I don't see how the government can claim to be offering a service for "educating" when it has been proven time and time again that private schools not only do a much better job of educating, but also for substantially less. I don't believe tax payers should be forced to sponsor unions under the guise of educating, rather, I believe tax payers should be able to elect if their contributions go towards funding private or public schools, and people with children be able to elect to use the stipen for private schools. After all the government claims this is a service they are providing for the general welfare, if some think the private sector does a better job... they shouldn't be forced to pay for the public as well.

- Response by kalicalendar16, A Hippie Chick, Female, 29-35

Rating Received:

A Scrooge-like part of me agrees with you, while my more altruistic side understands that public education IS an investment in the future.

And to anyone who cares: I don't have kids, and I never attended any public education facility myself - I went to parochial schools my entire life, so my taxes are neither paying for my own kids' schooling OR re-paying for my own education.

- Response by justpassingthru, A Thinker, Female, 56-65, Financial / Banking

Rating Received:

Public "schools" are bad for children. All taxpayers should not have to pay for dumbing down and indoctrinating children.

On the other side, perhaps parents are already paying more than their fair share of providing the next generation and future of the society. Perhaps the future is everyone's responsibility to pay for.

- Response by greenwind, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 56-65, Construction

Rating Received:

How else are we going to perpetuate the Prussian Model education system and forcefeed little children a government-mandated, controlled and propagandized curriculum?

- Response by stillagoodguy1, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 56-65, Political / Government

Rating Received:

Yes, but only if the local community agrees that public education is important enough to be funded. I'd gladly take back the money I send to the public schools so I can send my kids to private ones.

In response to xerxes - money should be spent locally and decisions should be made locally, not in some state or federal capital. If the local people think its important to teach kids how to shoot guns, then let them. If the local people think its important to fund abortions, then let them. If you disagree with how the money is being spent, then perhaps you don't belong in that community or you haven't worked hard enough to make your voice heard.

- Response by inotnuts, A Father Figure, Male, 36-45, Newark, Retired

Rating Received:

it'ss just your turn, monkel. you got where you are now, presumably because your parents paid their school taxes in the town where you grew up, and where you likely went to public school.

if you went to private school, you are still a part of the community at large, and share those costs with your neighbors.

for those who have been, or are still, fortunate enough to have a second (vacation) home, that's just part of the cost of owning a luxury.

- Response by two469, An Alternative Girl, Female, 18-21, Seattle, Science / Engineering

Rating Received:

We were all young once and some others paid our way then.

- Response by frenchkiss49, A Thinker, Female, 66 or older, Tampa, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

Yes, it is in the public interest to have educated citizens. It would be nice if public education did actually educate people, as it did in the past.

- Response by lyon, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 46-55, Boston, Self-Employed

Rating Received:

Well you already subsidize libraries and fire departments. These days you can't have an honest book burning.

- Response by lomizer, A Guy Critical, Male, 46-55, Halifax, Science / Engineering

Rating Received:

I am single, had no kids, did not ever want one. Whats more I went to catholic schools so tax payers contributed not a thing to my education. Do I resent tax money going to schools. Not one little bit-nada. Good schools make good communities. Without good schools all that you get is the riff raff since people that value education go to communities that do have good schools. Now, I am not in favor of exorbitant money going to schools like the benefits that Wisconsin teachers get, Or school buildings that look like the Taj Mahal. But still if you want a vibrant community you have to have good schools.

- Response by gilpill, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 46-55, Chicago, Internet / New Media

Rating Received:

Yes, for the same reason people who have never had their house burn down pay tax to support the Fire Department.

Think of it this way; if childless people did not pay educational taxes, that would mean the tax burded would fall heavily on those who had children. I don't mind my taxes going to education, the problem is the kids are getting a lousy education.

- Response by hearmenow, A Guy Critical, Male, 66 or older, Other Profession

Rating Received:

So...... YOU never went to school ever?

If you ever went to school, then you HAVE benefited from the system.

It does suck to have to pay your dues like a responsible person if you're a selfish POS, but the government is not responsible for you being a selfish POS.

Shut up and think about the country as a WHOLE. We ALL live here, not just YOU.

- Response by A Player, Female, 26-28, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

Yup it should be. Becaus guess what YOU DO benefit from good schools. Deny it all you want but you do. What and how we teach our children has a direct effect on what kind of people they turn into. Which affects the impact they have on the world. When schools are bad the local community is severly affected and creates a poorer area. And of course if you went to a public school then you REALLY REALLY did benefit from the people who lived in the area and paid for YOUR education.

- Response by bellabyrdie, A Thinker, Female, 29-35, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

For those that think private schools are the only way to go, then I say you are full of shit. My 5 went to public schools. They then went on to university's. They ALL have 2 or more degrees and are ALL in high paying jobs. Private or Public, there's good and bad in both. If your children want to learn they will regardless of where they go.

- Response by oldman52, A Mr. Nice Guy, Male, 56-65, Sydney, Retired

Rating Received:

And when those of us who pay the most property (and other kinds of) taxes don't have to pay into the public school because our children are enrolled at elite private institutions, and your snot nosed brat finally is born and goes to the public school there will not be enough funding to run a one room school house and you won't be able to afford to anything about it, so your child with have the education of a third world dog.

Yeah, I see how your master plan works out oh so well.

Trust me, it's not that I like having to pay for a public education my child will never recieve and then paying more then double to send them to private schools to get the education they deserve. But at the end of the day it's bad enough the "educated" at the checkout register don't know how to do simple math and rely on a machine, if we go your way, then they will not even be smart enough to work the damn machine!

- Response by saman, A Life of the Party, Male, 29-35, Who Cares?

Rating Received: