What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rumours and Stuff

emjaycee

Coach
Messages
13,837
It costs less to hand out $8M per year to a private school (99% are primary + secondary), than maintain school grounds, upgrade facilities and pay wages for 50 - 100 staff. Do the math and then tell me its abhorrent.

It's the conservative way of thinking and you are part of their cheer squad - yet you object ?

Cut subsidies and make parents pay $65k a year (up from $35-45k) and they all flock back to the public system. The whole private health debate / private schools have interchangeable arguments.

Not sure about any State Govt subsidisation, however the Federal Govt subsidy in 2014 was a base per student of:
Primary
$9,271.00
Secondary
$12,193.00
Primary (distance education student)
$3,244.85
Secondary (distance education student)
$4,267.55
These amounts are indexed each year by 3.6%.

St Margaret Mary's Primary at Merrylands gets 89.71% of this per student.
St Michaels Primary at Baulkham Hills gets 60% of this per student.
SCEGGS at Darlinghurst gets 20% of this per student.

Public schools get 100% of it.

Government schools receive the majority of their public funding from their state or territory government, with the Australian Government providing supplementary funding. Non-government schools receive the majority of their public funding from the Australian Government with state and territory governments providing supplementary funding.

2017 RAM implementation
2017 represents the fourth year of additional Gonski/NERA funding to NSW public schools through the RAM methodology.

In 2017, the base component will be a streamlined package of operational funding, with multiple line items rolled into a single allocation. This will give schools increased operational flexibility and allow them to focus on the priority of teaching and learning by reducing red tape.

ram_triangle_645.jpg


So demountables and aircon issues aren't really replaceable by removal of the Federal Govt. subsidy when it is the responsibility of the State Govt. to fund these things.
 

phantom eel

First Grade
Messages
6,327
Isn't the key difference that those that are shared or celebrated in a communal manner are 'organised religions' and the others are not?
Yep sure, if you're talkjng about whether following football or going clubbing can be religious.

I was responding to the points that having a personal belief to not follow a religion is also somehow a religion. Which it's not.
 
Last edited:

phantom eel

First Grade
Messages
6,327
And yet the subsidisation by the federal government is reduced by the ability of the individual private school community to contribute.
in theory...
By the way, demountables in public schools are not necessarily a funding related issue IMHO.
Sure, it can be a population/planning issue, hamstrung imo by lack of available funding directed elsewhere to support (school) communities who could otherwise get by without such high subsidies.
 

phantom eel

First Grade
Messages
6,327
Percentage figures aside, my philosophical view is that parents who choose to send their kids toa non-government/religious school should fund that choice (more), and/or it should be funded (more) by the filthy rich church bodies that run these schools. Some people will disagree. And some will make their own personal choices given their circumstance, and that's ok too.

Yes, charge parents more and they'll see that "private" education isn't really worth the extra expense, and flick back the the government system. But there'll be more subsidy money available to help with that - and nothing precludes wealthy parents from making similar investments in their commumity government schools (to the tune of up to $20K per year that some are happy to hand over to certain private/religious schools without question)?

Does the (government) system need more money? Yes. Is it a philosophical question akin to the publuc/private healthcare balance? Yes. But if governments of any stripe or either level were brave enough to collect a decent amount of tax from high end corporations and profit-making industries, the public purse would stretch a lot further imo (And people wouldn't be as easily swayed by the private education industry.)
 

emjaycee

Coach
Messages
13,837
Yep sure, if you're talkjng about whether following football or going clubbing can be religious.

I was responding to the points that having a personal belief to not follow a religion is also somehow a religion. Which it's not.
If more than one person has the same personal belief regardless of that belief, isn't that by definition, a religion in itself?
 

emjaycee

Coach
Messages
13,837
Percentage figures aside, my philosophical view is that parents who choose to send their kids toa non-government/religious school should fund that choice (more), and/or it should be funded (more) by the filthy rich church bodies that run these schools. Some people will disagree. And some will make their own personal choices given their circumstance, and that's ok too.

Yes, charge parents more and they'll see that "private" education isn't really worth the extra expense, and flick back the the government system. But there'll be more subsidy money available to help with that - and nothing precludes wealthy parents from making similar investments in their commumity government schools (to the tune of up to $20K per year that some are happy to hand over to certain private/religious schools without question)?

Does the (government) system need more money? Yes. Is it a philosophical question akin to the publuc/private healthcare balance? Yes. But if governments of any stripe or either level were brave enough to collect a decent amount of tax from high end corporations and profit-making industries, the public purse would stretch a lot further imo (And people wouldn't be as easily swayed by the private education industry.)

So, if a family has the means to support the education of their child in a non-government school, whether partially or wholly, are you suggesting that this abdicates the government from it's responsibility to provide an education to all of its citizens?
 

84 Baby

Referee
Messages
29,809
Every religion has faith. Whether that is faith in human nature to build the best society or faith in science to fully understand the human experience.

Every religion has changeable beliefs - look at the many branches of Christianity. Even Islam of today (any of the various forms) bears little resemblance to Islam of a thousand or even a hundred years ago.


I am talking about shared values with their foundations in faith - that is anything that is unproven. Fanaticism is just the ugly side of this, and doesn't require belief in the supernatural.

Yes every RELIGION has faith, but you are confusing a system of "beliefs" with religion. I can believe something without knowing the basis of it's truth and not just assume it's because god did it. If I could be bothered and had the ability to do so, I could create a test to prove the cause. I don't necessarily care if I know the cause or even if it can be proved, it's just there and I accept it. A religious person doesn't need to prove anything, they have faith in the underlying cause of everything. Sure in theory their belief is also testable but faith overrides any outcome of that testing, when their faith fails to outweigh contrary beliefs then they are no longer religious.

When religions "change" their beliefs, the underlying fundamental faith remains the same to the individual. You can suggest perhaps religious leaders are doctoring the religion for their own benefit or whatever the reason for the branching of the religion, at the end of the day the sum of the religion's parts still has complete faith that there's a higher power leading the way.
 

84 Baby

Referee
Messages
29,809
Most people who have been arguing with Pou have a very narrow view of what religion is. It doesn't align with the actual definition and application of the word which is much broader reaching.
The most basic definition is essentially a set of beliefs that are important to a group of people.

Atheism is definitely becoming a religion to some. We all know the type...the ones who constantly go out of their way to mention their non belief and spend all day sharing Ricky Gervais quotes about the non existence of deities on Facebook
Agreed that largely it's just semantics over peoples definitions of the words religion & faith and the knobs that want to ram their atheism down people's eyeholes are f**king stupid, but true non-religious beliefs getting lumped with devotion to a blind ideal is just plain wrong
 

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,959
Percentage figures aside, my philosophical view is that parents who choose to send their kids toa non-government/religious school should fund that choice (more), and/or it should be funded (more) by the filthy rich church bodies that run these schools. Some people will disagree. And some will make their own personal choices given their circumstance, and that's ok too.

Yes, charge parents more and they'll see that "private" education isn't really worth the extra expense, and flick back the the government system. But there'll be more subsidy money available to help with that - and nothing precludes wealthy parents from making similar investments in their commumity government schools (to the tune of up to $20K per year that some are happy to hand over to certain private/religious schools without question)?

Does the (government) system need more money? Yes. Is it a philosophical question akin to the publuc/private healthcare balance? Yes. But if governments of any stripe or either level were brave enough to collect a decent amount of tax from high end corporations and profit-making industries, the public purse would stretch a lot further imo (And people wouldn't be as easily swayed by the private education industry.)

Bart, are you aware that they DO fund that choice??
Name me a fee-free private school? These schools all cost (big bucks in the main) to attend.

It is a simpletons argument that 'the government shouldn't fund those schools'. And even more simplistic because it has been played out in practical terms in Australian history already.

Funding has been pulled from private schools in the past. In 1962 a Catholic lady pulled all her kids out of the Catholic schooling system (I think she had 6? But it was the 60s and she was Catholic, so may have been 26??) and sent them to the state schools in protest that the government refused to fund equally the education of all children. Others followed suit, the Catholics closed their schools, the state schools in Goulburn collapsed under the pressure, and the folly of the decision to remove funding from some kids was seen.
[edit: worth noting Parra Pete may or may not have been one of her kids]

I don't understand why this debate keeps surfacing?

Fund all kids to go to school.

I understand the frustration when a private school receives MORE funding per student than a public school in the exact same circumstances (ie same suburb). I'm not across the numbers well enough to understand how that could possibly occur? IMHO it ought to be an equal $ per student - and if they want to base that on the theory of economic banding, then that sounds good to me (ie, more affluent areas receive slightly less funding per student).
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
77,719
Cant wait for the footy to start Sunday.... then we can get back to finding scapegoats, bagging refs, the Board, previous Boards, Boards before that and each other !

I'm keen to know who will get the honour of the first scapegoat for 2017.

I'm fearing it will be Gutho.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,987
My god ... who would have thought the forum would decend into shit this close to the season starting ..... bring on the 21 man squad
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,987
I'm keen to know who will get the honour of the first scapegoat for 2017.

I'm fearing it will be Gutho.
Candidates:
- Gunco
- Bevan
- whatever dummy half
- Bernie
- new board ... hey its never to early to be a parra scapegoat
 
Top