Siphoning

Have you heard the atrocity of vouchers funneling or siphoning funds from the schools that 90% of students attend? Actually, I've already addressed the ridiculous 90% argument in a previous post. This post is aimed more at another way to look at this argument.

This argument is framed around government-controlled schools. What happens if we frame the exact same argument around children and their educations? The argument takes a very different tone. Simply reframing this argument completely destroys it.

What happens without choice? If a child wants to pursue a better education than an anti-educational government-controlled institution can provide, the funding meant for that child's education is taken from that child for the benefit of the government-controlled institution. Let me put this another way. Without choice, we are siphoning funds from children and their educations for the benefit of government-controlled institutions.

Personally, I care far more about children and their educations than the disastrous schools I was forced to attend. That's who I prefer to frame this issue around. The NEA and AFT don't care about children. They don't care about education. All they care about trapping children in institutions that they control. Why else would they frame this argument around schools?