3w ago

Libertarians be like

repost, but it's been a while

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

103 comments

The problem with this is that there ends up being no national education standard. You take a state like Alabama, which ranks dead last in so many education metrics, and remove those federal standards. Now Alabama can just change their state standards, and suddenly they have a 100% graduation rate with all straight A students. Guess what happens when Cletus the Alabama valedictorian tries to get a job in the medical field or the tech sector.
And that's before we ever even talk about funding. States get about 15% of their K-12 funding from the federal government. Where are the states going to make up that difference? Higher state taxes? Higher property taxes? Or are they just going to let already struggling schools go to shit? Guess who that affects the most?
You really haven't put a lot of thought into this beyond "federal gubmint bad".
- "Oh no, what will we ever do if the federal government doesn't set our standards? We are too dumb to set our own standards!"
  I'm pretty sure the states can figure it out on their own. And any school can feel free to set their own standards even higher if they wish.
  
  We are too dumb to set our own standards!
  It's not about being "too dumb". It's about having skills that transfer across state lines. There's a reason we don't let doctors and lawyers from other countries just set up a shop and start practicing in the US without meeting American standards first. Now imagine that happening from one state to the next. In your naive attempt to reduce the size of government, you've actually increased government bureaucracy and red tape by orders of magnitude.
  And again, where are states going to make up that 15% of funding provided by the federal government?
  
  The fed gov could lower their taxes that are used for it, and the states could raise theirs. The fed should not be taking care of states except helping in emergency situations. States should be taking care of themselves financially.
  I get what you're saying, but you're also saying some states are too dumb. If their leaders are too dumb, then they can replace their leaders, same as we do with the fed gov.
  
  I'm not saying some states are "too dumb". I'm saying some states are too poor, and the poor shouldn't be left to suffer compounding negative results because their citizens can't shoulder the burden of higher state taxes. Because I promise you that federal taxes will not go down. Once the government has gotten used to milking you for X amount, they aren't going to give up that cash flow. All that will happen is that poor states will just get worse and worse as education falls and they fail to produce a workforce qualified for anything other than menial labor.
  
  I get what you're saying, but I still think the federal gov has there hands in too many things. The states can be responsible for themselves, if they aren't doing a good job, then it's up to the people to vote in leaders who will do a better job.

103 comments