> You're not completely wrong, but, you're suggesting an unconstitutional system to deal with education.
<br>
<br>It's arguably a stronger position to say the current system of federal funding is unconstitutional.
<br>
<br>> Problem with your plan: People can't feed their kids, or people can't feed their kids right.
<br>> Result of your plan: Millions of malnourished, obese and sick kids.
<br>
<br>Somehow people managed before we had school lunches. If parents neglect their children to the point that they become malnourished, there is a system in place to remove those children from their parents.
<br>
<br>> Your plan: expulsion used regularily
<br>> Result of your plan: Millions of kids getting expelled, leading to a large population of uneducated violant kids who grow up to be violant criminals.
<br>
<br>Many of whom may become violent criminals <b>even if they stay in school</b>. You're also completely ignoring the possibility that such a policy might motivate some students to "shape up" in order to stay in school, thus <b>decreasing</b> the likelihood that they end up leading a life of crime. There could also be huge benefits for "the rest" of the students, who would benefit from an improved learning environment.
<br>
<br>> Your plan: Do away with gym equipment.
<br>> Result of your plan: Unhealthy and obese population which will drain our health care system.
<br>
<br>If a kid is motivated enough to work out regularly at a school gym, or do what it takes to be on a competitive sports team, then he'll find other avenues to do that outside of school, if school suddenly stopped providing these services.
<br>
<br>> Your plan: Do away with books and use computers
<br>> Result of your plan: You need a computer for every child. This makes sense economically, and I fully support it.
<br>
<br>I disagree with DeathClaw on this one. Computers are, for the most part, completely unnecessary to educate children (with the exception of courses specifically related to computing). Not only are they unnecessary, I'm seriously doubt whether they're cost-effective compared to, say, taking that money and giving it directly to teachers in the form of salary increases.
<br>
<br>Various people have written articles in the press lamenting this over-reliance on computers in the education system. I think Paul Allen may have written one. I'll see if I can dig it up.
<br>
