I wasn’t holding my breath. ;)

Can’t… resist… the temptation…

Are you out of your bloomin’ mind? The idea of the people rather than their elected representatives deciding how they should spend their money. You’re starting to sound like Thomas Jefferson or worse yet . . . Ron Paul.

I’m speechless . . .

Jay

You are a beautiful person. Well argued. Also, since most of the private schools are along the wasatch front, and none are really hurting enrollment-wise, there is a fairly inelastic demand…which would be manifested by the cost of tuition in private schools increasing by nearly as much as the vouchers…

Instead of vouchers, just blow the whole thing up and give everyone their money instead. That makes more economic/libertarian sense. Return the money and let me spend it on dietCoke, cookies, or whatever brings me the most marginal good.

But…I don’t think that will pass.

- Rob

Now, with the voucher system it is coming from the general fund and is not tied to regions. So, take a wealthy person or business in 50% of the counties without private schools. Since they are now also paying taxes for vouchers that can be used anywhere in the state and at any school, the actual payer of these taxes has even less choice and freedom where his money goes than the public system. Now, the money isn’t even in the region he lives, and he has no say in who runs, teaches, and what curriculum is taught in the schools he is paying for. And even those in regions with private schools have no idea what proportion of their money is in what regions and in what schools. With this, a loaded Catholic in Logan could now be paying the vouchers for a kid to attend an all LDS private school in St. George.

You have said it yourself that the vouchers give more choice for parents of school children, but it takes away choice from the people actually paying for these children. In the end it is probably just even and I don’t think this can be an argument for the pro-voucher side. I just read so often in here that we shouldn’t take choice and freedom from one person so we can give it to another, but this is exactly what it does. In this regard it isn’t any better than public schools and is in my opinion worse.

Also Russell, my comments weren’t necessarily targeted at you. I have just seen ads and comments on blogs stating that this is about freedom to use THEIR tax dollars as they wish. However, the majority of people will be using OTHER businesses and wealthy peoples tax dollars. Many of these people are libertarian/constitutionalists who disagree with redistributing income. This voucher program redistributes income the same way other programs do. I mean it is tied to the free lunch scale! Didn’t I just see someone on here post TANSTAFL?

For this reason I wonder why this group of people are supporting this voucher bill. It would make more sense that they would support a system that only gives you back what you paid in. Is this an extreme change? Of course, but passing this voucher bill would not be a change in that direction at all. In fact, it would just give more fuel to the fire of giving more voucher money in the future if the budget allowed. Connor and others on here have said they are supporting Ron Paul even though his ideas are pretty radical from what is going on in Washington right now. They also say they don’t care if he has a shot at winning, they vote for someone who holds their ideals in legislation whether or not they are a long shot for being passed or not. Make a revolution right here then, and get someone to offer a bill where people only get back what they pay in. It is their ideals, no free lunch.

I don’t believe income tax has anything to do with the education budget. Education funding is tied to property tax, which means it doesn’t matter how much you make, it matters what you own. Families with 12 children use more in terms of relative taxes, and folks like may pay but don’t use it at all because I don’t have kids in studio.

With vouchers, the parents receiving the money get freedom on where to send the children. However, if a large number are using other people’s money then the people actually paying get even less choice in where their tax money goes

This “using other people’s money” happens now with public schools, so you’re statement about less choice in use of tax dollars for education is interesting.

Note: Someone who makes $43k a year (or less) qualifies for the full $3k voucher under the referendum. But if you’re using it as an example of what people would get back, remember that the major portion of what you pay for education isn’t tied to your income. It’s tied to your property tax. But, what you qualify for under a voucher is tied to your income and is based on federal “free lunch” guidelines.

I don’t list my clients online right now, but I do list some of their accomplishments. I do not currently work “pro-bono” for vouchers other than I believe in them, so I promote them on my blog. The site you are referring to is not my company website.

As for bias, like I said, in the realm of where my opinions stand, I stand for vouchers. If you still don’t feel like I’m answering your question about bias, you may have to expand a little more on what you’re looking for.

I’m just asking, when you say this for you is ONLY about a principle, if you are indeed being straight with me. All I want to know if you are an owner in a PR firm involved in campaigning for #1? Pretty simple. You ack. on your page that there are clients not listed. I think it is a fair question if there are any other motives. Is there any form of compensation, result or otherwise you receive? Or is this a doctors without borders kind of a thing. You are using your PR skills pro bono for something you believe in. Are you “pro-bono”ing?

IT isn’t a slight on your industry, per se, or an ad hominum attack on you. I’m just asking to see your cards before I debate you. You say that it doesn’t matter if the vouchers get used, however, I believe it is from an economic, governmental, and pragmatic approach.

If your views on this issue are purely motivated based on ONE principle, then I would like to know if you actually have any OTHER motives. That’s it. You still, however, haven’t answered my direct question about bias. I’m sorry if it sounds negative. It is however a fairly regular social scientific term…

As far as me. I have absolutely no dog in this show. Oh, I am interested in Vouchers from an intellectual standpoint and I’ve got an old paper I dusted off that I think contributes, somewhat, to th debate…but, I don’t even live in Utah anymore. Myself, I’ve gone to private and public schools in Utah and I send my kids to a charter school in Arizona.

I sure wish someone would pay me to be a blow hard.

First, if you felt I attacked you personally, I apologize. That was not my intent.

Do you agree “If the voters demand it, they will vote for it?” Well fine. But what I’m asking is a slightly different question. “Will the users of vouchers use it? And at what rate?”

The second part of the question was what I was getting at before. Whether or not people use it doesn’t matter. What matters is that they can.

You pretend money doesn’t matter nut to your narrow self-interest ideology numbers DO INDEED matter, because they represent personal liberty?

Money and liberty are not related at all. This is a lie. You do not need money to have liberty. LIberty is a right. Money is not.

How about even simpler questions since you refuse to answer mine directly.

I’m not refusing to answer your questions, but I promise you I will skip loaded questions every time. I work in PR remember? I’m trained to recognize loaded questions to help people when the media comes along asking them.

1. What is your direct interest in the outcome?

Freedom to choose how my tax dollars are used.

2. What is your bias?

This question is loaded as it is because bias has a negative connotation, but if you are asking where my opinions lean, I lean in favor of vouchers because they allow people to choose how their tax dollars are used in education.

3. Are you paid for an outcome?

No. Are you?

4. Do you have a vested interest in the outcome?

Absolutely I do. I paid nearly $3000 in property taxes this year, much of which went to to fund public schools, and I don’t have a child of school age. But if I wanted to send my child to a different school and I had a child in school I still have to pay for the public school even if I never use it. I’ve paid for years as a property owner. You bet I have an interest in the outcome.

5. Are you paid to participate in the debate or is it strictly ann idealistic vision to you?

This doesn’t matter despite your connotation that it would, but I am not “paid” to participate in this debate. It’s also very sad and troubling to me to hear people talk about the ideal as though it isn’t what we should constantly seek for.

Again, bias is important here in this debate. What is your bias? You speak as if the only outcome of voters decisions is personal liberty. You push hard that money doesn’t matter?

Bias doesn’t matter to me. I could ask you all these same questions, but they don’t matter. You could be getting paid lots of money to write what you are writing, and it doesn’t matter to me. When you don’t really believe what you say, your arguments will surely fall. If you are choosing to express your opinions on the matter, and if for some reason you are being paid to do it and don’t agree with it… well… that’s your decision to go against what you believe. I won’t do that, and political groups don’t hire people like that either. Republican strategists are always republican and so on.

I’m here because this is what I believe. And I stand by my stance that money doesn’t matter. I’ve made this point in previous Connor posts that if the public school system didn’t exist that I still would have had an eduation. If I would have been a child with bad parents and no education at all, I still would have been able to get an education. We praise people left and right when they come from circumstances like this and then exercise their LIBERTY, their choice, their agency to become something more than what they were given, yet we run at the chance to not allow people this chance by spoon feeding them when they are in need. Liberty yes. This debate is about the erosion of personal liberty and absolutely NOT about money despite the fact that it’s what most people talk about. Money is just what makes the news and the news becomes the center of the debate.

Are you getting paid to say what you say, or are you typing for free? Sorry if I’m skeptical, you work for a PR firm…

I own a PR firm. I push this because it’s what I believe is truth. You’re not skeptical of me, you just don’t agree, and you’re trying to make excuses by making horribly inaccurate assumptions about the integrity of my profession and my motives. None of it has to do with what we are discussing.

People peddle the ideas that you are promoting all the time, but they do not truly believe them. When put to the wall, when placed in the positions of what we are talking about, they cave. Every time. They love to go to the movies and see Will Smith play the role of Chris Gardner in the Pursit of Happyness where a man loses everything but becomes wealthy. And they they do not believe they can do the same. The same goes for education. Other people can invent, inspire, become Bill Gates or Oprah Winfrey, but they do not believe it themselves. All of these people, every one of them, knew something that that this whole “opposition debate” negates. Their education, their smarts, their job, career, character, future was all in their own hands and not in the hands of someone else (PUBLIC SCHOOLS and the PUBLIC INCLUDED!). Yet, here he go again fighting against a referendum because it seeks to change a system focused on making sure we take care of others but never teach them to take care of themselves.

This is not a debate about being selfish, it’s about teaching people to be accountable, to choose, to recognize that liberty is choice, freedom, and most importantly personal accountability. It is not accountability for others. And what happens? The Bill Gates and Oprah Winfrey’s of the world help anyway. They feel fortunate (even though they worked their butts off for what they have) and they recognize that above all the things that they have are not theirs. They recognize that they are stewards who have somehow acquired the ability and responsibility to care for a lot of stuff that belongs to God, stuff that will be gone someday. And what do they do? They use God’s stuff to help other people. But it would have never happened if someone would have removed those experiences from them by undermining their personal liberty.

Your check is in the mail. :-P

It has been over a year ago that I happened upon the LDSelect web site and discovered Connor Boyack. I recall a time in the beginning when I looked forward each new day to reading the new commentary, and seeing what new insight I might glean from a 20 something RM. I do not recall ever being disappointed with his devoted efforts to “warn his neighbor.” Of course there were times when I was not so interested in the subject at hand, but I generally read anyway just to add substance to my opinionated view of things.

I really do not recall the first time I made the reluctant decision to participate by adding my two cents to the conversation, but I do know that I felt a sense of gratitude when I clicked on “submit.” I was finally involved in something I felt was generally very important, and I was thankful to Connor for giving me the opportunity to add what I hoped would be useful information from the perspective of someone who had seen way too much of the world before returning to full activity in the church. I was 20 something when I was baptized, but became inactive after only 6 months. I returned to activity in December of 2001 after 30 years of making really bad choices. Thankfully the Lord had enough faith in me to give me another chance at seeking after the truth. I will be eternally grateful to Him for the forgiving nature of the Atonement.

There is much to be learned from the brain of Connor Boyack because I believe he learned well from the Lord about what it really means to serve. I have often been amazed at his abilities to do what he does even though I really do not understand what he does. I am not comfortable much of the time using this monstrosity, but I do know that I have learned a great deal from being involved. In fact, I am probably too involved, but I love my freedom very much and I cannot bear the thought of losing it due to my complacency. I refuse to stand by and let this land which I love be destroyed by those who do not fully understand what they possess.

I know that Connor is also a devoted servant, and true patriot, and I am grateful to him for the many hours I have spent reading what he has offered up for consideration in spite of the efforts of some to demean and disparage his work.

Thank you Connor for your service to the Lord and your fellow men. Thank you for sharing your wisdom and knowledge with an old man who needed to get involved. I know that our Constitution will not be lost because you are on the side of the Lord.

Public education [is] the unique moral authority on how to educate.

, but I certainly DO reject your narrow framing of the debate to personal liberty. Believe me Russ baby, I love liberty, but even Kant recognized there are limits when we are not living alone. – Rob

No, you’ve got demand backwards. Or you simply misinterpret what I was asking. Do you agree “If the voters demand it, they will vote for it?” Well fine. But what I’m asking is a slightly different question. “Will the users of vouchers use it? And at what rate?”

My “do I build an McDonalds question” is only saying I need to know how many consumers want a hamburger, not how many consumers want the freedom to eat.

You pretend money doesn’t matter nut to your narrow self-interest ideology numbers DO INDEED matter, because they represent personal liberty?

How about even simpler questions since you refuse to answer mine directly.

1. What is your direct interest in the outcome?
2. What is your bias?
3. Are you paid for an outcome?
4. Do you have a vested interest in the outcome?
5. Are you paid to participate in the debate or is it strictly ann idealistic vision to you?

Again, bias is important here in this debate. What is your bias? You speak as if the only outcome of voters decisions is personal liberty. You push hard that money doesn’t matter?

Are you getting paid to say what you say, or are you typing for free? Sorry if I’m skeptical, you work for a PR firm…

Dare I say in response to your criticism of Connor’s ideals that truth is extremely narrow and very idealistic.

I do dare because one thing you will notice is there is a theme to what Conner writes, and that theme is based on specific beliefs and ideals. He can near always tie his statements back to a principle of belief. And what good is truth if it does not paint a picture of the ultimate ideal for us?

OK Russell, You can’t disagree more. That is a big statement. So show me the individual benefit. Real dollars, realistic expectations of use. When I ran the numbers, it came out to about $16 per kid in Utah. Obviously, I ran it for $1000 voucher back in 1998. What I’m saying is once you run the numbers you’ve got to use the assumption that not everyone will use it.

I don’t build a McDonalds because of market liberty…I build a McDonalds because the market demands it. I don’t see the market demand. Show me the money. Again, I’m just being pragmatic here. But thanks for reading my stuff. IT was just gathering dust on my hard-drive.

With what I’m saying, numbers and use do not matter in this situation. My mom pulled this one on me. “Not everyone will use it. People still won’t be able to go to private school.” This does not matter. Let the people decide whether they will use it. Let them decide if they will pass up a new house or a new car or a family vacation each year to go to send their kid to private school. Can we not give them some of the money they would send to public schools to help them pay for their child to go to school somewhere else? They are paying the money out of their own pocket. Is it feasible that the parent could wish so deeply for their child to go to school somewhere else that the parent extends his or her own education to get a better job to help pay for that education? Use does not matter. Choice does.

You’ve also got market demand backwards. You may not build a McDonald’s unless the market demands it, but you’re also not going to build a McDonald’s with public money. What the pro voucher folks are saying is they don’t want a McDonald’s. They want a KFC, and they don’t understand why they should have to pay to build your McDonald’s but can’t have any of that money (money they contributed) to build their KFC. Why… Opponents say “Because it will take money away from building and improving our McDonald’s.” Well, I don’t like McDonald’s. I (along with a whole group of other people) prefer KFC proponents say… Too bad. We’re using YOUR money to build OUR McDonald’s. If you want a KFC use your own money. Shouldn’t the McDonald’s builders do the same? Use their own money?

Moral of the story is, they don’t need to prove to opponents that their is a demand at all. Public education is not the unique moral authority on how to educate. Personal liberty is the only thing that matters. Does referendum 1 support individual liberty?