[MD] Value and the Individual

[craigerb at comcast.net]

[Arlo]
> People without kids "should" pay for education, but they shouldn't "be forced 
> to". Is that right?

No & Yes.  People without kids "should" support education (public or private)
to the extent they value it.
I find dubious your theory that people should be forced to do what others think
is in their interest.  I guess you'll be voting for the Prohibiition Party in 
the PA election.

[Arlo]
> Same with people without cars [regarding roads]?

Ideally  roads could be financed by user fees:  vehicle registration, commercial
vehicle tariffs, fuel taxes, etc.  If you never travelled by road or never 
purchased anything that travelled by road, you could avoid most of these.
(You would still have to support roads to the extent they are used by police/
military/fire departments, etc.)
 
[Arlo]
> Do we care about the poor school districts, those in low socio-economic areas?

Some people do, some don't.
 
[Arlo]
> Do we rely on charitable donations from other areas to fund those schools?

This would be (& is currently) one of many factors. 

[Arlo]
> You aren't being forced. You can run for office or vote for a candidate...

I shouldn't have to do this to protect my rights.  That's what governments
are for--not the opposite.

[Arlo]
> Should we make support of the military voluntary?

Another bad analogy, since the alternative to a national military would be
competing private armies.  One the other hand, competing private schools
sounds good.

[Arlo]
> I don't work in the public school system.

Sorry, I was misled by the "psu.edu" 

[Arlo]
> I have not seen a [voucher] plan yet that does not set up a system of privilege. 

I guess the system of privilege consists of better schools.  Why not let the voucher
system bring the public schools up to the level of private ones, rather a system that
tries to bring the private school system down to the level of public schools.  

[Arlo]
>  your first payment is to support the general education of the populace.
> It has NOTHING to do with what you do with your kid. NOTHING. Except that as
> a result of that support, your child can get their education for no additional cost. 

This is probably the worst theory of education I've ever heard.  Your first
obligation as a parent should be to your own kid. 

[Craig, previously]
> [Parents] can be compelled to send [their children] to school or home school,
> because that is an obligation of parenthood.

[Arlo]
> Who determines if that obligation is met?...
> Who is the government to tell me what's best for my kid? 

This is a legitimate function of all governments.  You are not required to
provide "the best", but to at least meet standards.
Craig