ALP Education Policy [regarding funding to independant and non-independant schools] (1 Viewer)

[thorrnydevil]

http://www.abbotsleigh.nsw.edu.au/

totally struggling

'The Abbotsleigh Aquatic Centre'

Shit, my school doesn't even have a web page.

Look at the buildings there huge, and not shitty like ours. Fuck more funding for them.

 

[Generator]

I don't believe i ever referred to my school or situation.

It seemed as though you did. Oh well, my mistake.

 

[iambored]

paying 14 000 you would expect to have a school like that though, what else could you get for shit-loads amount of money, nothing else could justify it. if parents want their children to go to schools like that and they are prepared to pay for it good for them.

 

[ellymelly]

http://www.abbotsleigh.nsw.edu.au/

totally struggling

'The Abbotsleigh Aquatic Centre'

might i add that the Aquatic Centre was paid for by parents.

 

[thorrnydevil]

eeeeeeeeee what?

i thought u were a liberal? you see this is what we call an 'elite' school...interestingly there are even more elite schools than abbotsleigh

my school is 10 mins for this school...our computers are from last century...but we do have a an oval! and a quad with trees! :uhhuh:

our school is also painted...we also have hall and a flag pole

if we need a pool however we go to hornsby pool...

Yeah, but after seeing that site, shit, $14,000 a year...I'd just prefer for that money to go away so I could save it. I dont think there funding should be decreased, but it should just get locked at what it is while ours goes up.

Our computers in the Library are crap and some don't even have the net or printing facilities...its total crap. We do have a flag pole, but I think its broken or something, so it doesn't get used which is total crap. And these schools have pools, huge halls, geez...i want something cool like that.

 

[ellymelly]

I'm not going to pretend that i attend a private school, nor should i have to. To suggest that it doesn't deserve its already small amount of funding is, however, unfair on both the parents and students that attend the school. What is it that most of you seem to have against 'elite' schools?

btw, i seem to recall Generator saying that public schools offered the same standard of education as private schools.

 

[Ziff]

might i add that the Aquatic Centre was paid for by parents.

Implying what? That the State should pay for the Aquatic Centre?

 

[ellymelly]

Implying what? That the State should pay for the Aquatic Centre?

implying that by in-large, a school such as Abbotsleigh pays for itself, is not a burden on the community and deserves the little funding it gets.

 

[iambored]

might i add that the Aquatic Centre was paid for by parents.

what my post was getting at

she is not implying the government should pay for it, she is simply saying the government should not cut the funding for the schooling based on the fact they have an aquatic centre when it was the parents that paid for it.

which is also saying everyone else shouldn't say they should lower the funding for the school. it was the parent's choice and their paid for it.

 

[ellymelly]

what my post was getting at

she is not implying the government should pay for it, she is simply saying the government should not cut the funding for the schooling based on the fact they have an aquatic centre when it was the parents that paid for it.

which is also saying everyone else shouldn't say they should lower the funding for the school. it was the parent's choice and their paid for it.

thank you, thank you, thank you

 

[Generator]

If the parents can afford a pool then why can't they afford to have the school's funding cut (or capped, but I would prefer cut) so that the system is fairer for all?

 

[ellymelly]

If the parents can afford a pool then why can't they afford to have their funding cut so that the system is fairer for all?

because only a small amount of the parents could afford the pool. the money for it was saved over a long period of time and a large percentage was taken from canteen profits. There are so many parents struggling financially to keep their children at the school who can't afford the cut. ( i won't repeat the reasons why it is unethical anyway as well pointless)

 

[iambored]

If the parents can afford a pool then why can't they afford to have the school's funding cut (or capped, but I would prefer cut) so that the system is fairer for all?

that i do not know, maybe that's the max the parents can afford?

i know for some of the cheaper private schools it will make a huge difference to the students if funding is cut because a lot of the students won't be able to afford to go there anymore. by cheaper i mean schools that pay either 3000, 6000, 9000 per year. 14 000 is a lot of money, but maybe there are income brackets who can only afford that much and no more?


edit: reading the above post i think that could be right. some parents struggle financially to keep their kids in a public school, some in a $3000 school, some in a $9000, some in $14 000 and some in even more expensive schools

when you're used to something cheaper you can't understand why people at more expensive schools don't just go to cheaper schools but maybe some of the opportunities at the expensive schools are important for some parents.

 

[Generator]

I don't see it as being unethical, as we established yesterday.

Edit:

i know for some of the cheaper private schools it will make a huge difference to the students if funding is cut because a lot of the students won't be able to afford to go there anymore. by cheaper i mean schools that pay either 3000, 6000, 9000 per year. 14 000 is a lot of money, but maybe there are income brackets who can only afford that much and no more?


edit: reading the above post i think that could be right. some parents struggle financially to keep their kids in a public school, some in a $3000 school, some in a $9000, some in $14 000 and some in even more expensive schools

But, why must they afford it? It's a non issue for those with the financial capacity to pay, yet for those who 'struggle'... Why seek a non-public education beyond their reach?

 

[ellymelly]

that i do not know, maybe that's the max the parents can afford?

i know for some of the cheaper private schools it will make a huge difference to the students if funding is cut because a lot of the students won't be able to afford to go there anymore. by cheaper i mean schools that pay either 3000, 6000, 9000 per year. 14 000 is a lot of money, but maybe there are income brackets who can only afford that much and no more?

as i say, there are, in truth, a handful of students with parents who can afford to spend much more money on their children's education. that's just the nature of the school, but the greater majority of the parents can only just afford the fees.

there is a great mis-representation and generalisation that parents who send their children to schools such as Abbotsleigh have an endelss stream of income. it's just not true, many of them make less money then the majority of people who send their children to public schools the only difference is that these parents devote most of their money to their children's private school education. a personal descision that should not be punished.

 

[ellymelly]

I don't see it as being unethical, as we established yesterday.

Edit:


But, why must they afford it? It's a non issue for those with the financial capacity to pay, yet for those who 'struggle'...

No, but as we have already estabilished, your ethics are questionable.

society as a whole sees it as an unethical move.

 

[Generator]

No, but as we have already estabilished, your ethics are questionable.

society as a whole sees it as an unethical move.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/24/1095961858288.html (It's only a poll, yet we all use and abuse such figures when required).

It seems as though we will never agree (and we both have a different view as to what 'society' expects).

 

[ellymelly]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/24/1095961858288.html (It's only a poll, yet we all use and abuse such figures when required).

It seems as though we will never agree (and we both have a different view as to what 'society' expects).

I think i will reserve my judgment on the smh and simply say that about 2 thirds of population send their children to public schools and don't seem to give a shit what happens to the independent schools because they don't go there. and before you say it, i do care what happens to public schools never once did i say that they should receive less funding or support, all i said was that private schools should keep their funding.

 

[ellymelly]

If the parents can afford a pool then why can't they afford to have the school's funding cut (or capped, but I would prefer cut) so that the system is fairer for all?

btw, i'd love to hear how you explain, "fairer for all" when you take all funding from a group of people.

no, seriously, i dare you.

 

[ellymelly]

or were you referring to 'all' as public schools and pretending that independent schools don't count as members of society?