Homeschooling is an impractical solution in a society built around dual incomes. Until we solve that problem, you can't realistically promote homeschooling to anyone below the middle class area because no one can afford the time (nor go without the free babysitting schools provide).
You can grow in popularity to a point, but until you get the massive underclass on board then you will forever be dwarfed and ineffective. Especially as those underclass just keep breeding more and more, while those who can afford homeschooling are not.
There are communal options that help share the load to make it more viable, but now you require not only more people to make it function you also run the risk of them indoctrinating your kids themselves. We may all hate the public schooling, but this family might think women should have rights while others are full trad kitchen types.
Get rid remove "hostile work environment" as a legitimate tort, end preferences for women in government contracting, stop enforcing the "civil rights" act.
The problem will sort itself out and women will go back to using employment for husband finding and not consider it as a "career".
as the world starts trading for oil in yuan the dollar is going to go into the toilet as nobody will want our debt anymore - so we had better have a supply of crypto or rubles (that are now tied to gold)
All you need is school choice. Whether you do the stupid "voucher" trick to assure people you're not defunding education, or simply reduce taxes by the amount currently put into public schools, people should be able to use their money to send their kids to a school that promotes their values. People will not naturally centralize their schooling at the state or national level. It will be community schooling. Decentralization is anti-Marxism. The way that this happened is the locus of power moved from the schoolhouse to the statehouse to the bastards in Congress.
Before somebody say: you left out poor kids, well, taxes are currently being taken from someone to fund poor kids' education; I don't propose to change the fact that some parents subsidize others. Rather, change who controls the money. Catholic schools, for instance, do quite a good job of providing for poor students as is. Teachers are charitable people. They will provide if given the power.
I agree on that one. Choice, including the choice to not pay into the system you choose to not use, would not only give people enough money to afford these choices but also go leagues into balancing the monopoly problem that creates the cancer of public school.
Heck even a repealing of truancy laws would go miles into it. It still baffles me that the government was able to just pass a law saying "we own your kids for a significant portion of every day and you will face consequences by not letting us take them" and people just let that exist.
People consider it some sort of magnificent achievement that everyone has to go. That's why I'm careful about saying just treat it like any other service, because apparently people think literacy is what makes first world countries. Of course, the fact that a lot of students are functionally illiterate does not support their hypothesis.
I also think that there would be even more kids running wild if they didn't have to go to school. I don't know what you do with them. I guess you can pass a law that they're not allowed out and then arrest their parents. In the COVID era, the kids have been out, so I guess your reaction depends on how bad you think that's been.
Homeschooling is an impractical solution in a society built around dual incomes. Until we solve that problem, you can't realistically promote homeschooling to anyone below the middle class area because no one can afford the time (nor go without the free babysitting schools provide).
You can grow in popularity to a point, but until you get the massive underclass on board then you will forever be dwarfed and ineffective. Especially as those underclass just keep breeding more and more, while those who can afford homeschooling are not.
There are communal options that help share the load to make it more viable, but now you require not only more people to make it function you also run the risk of them indoctrinating your kids themselves. We may all hate the public schooling, but this family might think women should have rights while others are full trad kitchen types.
Ban women from working?
Get rid remove "hostile work environment" as a legitimate tort, end preferences for women in government contracting, stop enforcing the "civil rights" act.
The problem will sort itself out and women will go back to using employment for husband finding and not consider it as a "career".
Gotta end the Fed and have a sound money supply to end the incentivization of dual incomes
russia just might be doing that for us
as the world starts trading for oil in yuan the dollar is going to go into the toilet as nobody will want our debt anymore - so we had better have a supply of crypto or rubles (that are now tied to gold)
God I wish.
All you need is school choice. Whether you do the stupid "voucher" trick to assure people you're not defunding education, or simply reduce taxes by the amount currently put into public schools, people should be able to use their money to send their kids to a school that promotes their values. People will not naturally centralize their schooling at the state or national level. It will be community schooling. Decentralization is anti-Marxism. The way that this happened is the locus of power moved from the schoolhouse to the statehouse to the bastards in Congress.
Before somebody say: you left out poor kids, well, taxes are currently being taken from someone to fund poor kids' education; I don't propose to change the fact that some parents subsidize others. Rather, change who controls the money. Catholic schools, for instance, do quite a good job of providing for poor students as is. Teachers are charitable people. They will provide if given the power.
I agree on that one. Choice, including the choice to not pay into the system you choose to not use, would not only give people enough money to afford these choices but also go leagues into balancing the monopoly problem that creates the cancer of public school.
Heck even a repealing of truancy laws would go miles into it. It still baffles me that the government was able to just pass a law saying "we own your kids for a significant portion of every day and you will face consequences by not letting us take them" and people just let that exist.
People consider it some sort of magnificent achievement that everyone has to go. That's why I'm careful about saying just treat it like any other service, because apparently people think literacy is what makes first world countries. Of course, the fact that a lot of students are functionally illiterate does not support their hypothesis.
I also think that there would be even more kids running wild if they didn't have to go to school. I don't know what you do with them. I guess you can pass a law that they're not allowed out and then arrest their parents. In the COVID era, the kids have been out, so I guess your reaction depends on how bad you think that's been.