The Rats are circling Mal Rightards where are you?

[J o h n S m i t h]

IF I understand it, there is no Tax Refund for Private School Fees?

no one said there was.

[J o h n S m i t h]

OH, could both of you cease and desist throwing inane insults. IQ is better at it than you JS so either up your game or STFU.

I don't recall asking your opinion on it, nor do I recall entering any competition on it. If you have to keep making stuff up then it's probably time you shut the fuck up instead.

[Neferti]

IF I understand it, there is no Tax Refund for Private School Fees?

no one said there was.

So, what the fuck are you on about ?

If you are happy to come across as a halfwit leftard by all means.

What do you THINK the Government (both do it) SHOULD DO? Stop giving money to the Catholics?

[J o h n S m i t h]

IF I understand it, there is no Tax Refund for Private School Fees?

no one said there was.

So, what the fuck are you on about ?

read this book, then go back through the thread.

[Neferti]

GOTCHA ................

[IQS.RLOW]

sure, just as long as you can tell me how much of your tax bill went specifically to edication,

It's well known what the unit cost per child for "edication"... except by you of course so if youre advocating for families who want to avoid be educated by lazy teachers union unsackables and mixing with lefty devil spawn to finance their choice of private system completely, then they get the cost per child refunded to them that is available and used by the lefty devil spawn.

Or do you think people should be forced to pay 100% cost for their choice of education for their kids and to pay for yours too?

and just as long as I can get back any tax I paid that went to areas I don't use,

as if you pay any tax. You're one of those net tax leeches.

Nor are you are being forced out of a system that allocates a unit cost per child available to everyone and demanding the removal of choice in education, you little fucking Stalinist. Unlike your sperm donor father, you can't have it both ways. It's time you tax leeches understood that the very people you hate so much pay for all the benefits you get but don't deserved and now you think you're fucking entitled access to their wallets

Although with all the money going back to parents so they can spend their money on the education of their choice, you'll have to cough up some more to pay your 'fair share' so your little union marxtwit plot can paper over the holes it will eventually fall into so it doesn't come crashing down within 6 months.

You can breathe a sigh of relief because the extra money you will have forced yourself to pay will be spent to give you additional time to come up with a new bullshit story about why your idiot idea failed and do what all lefty's do...blame everyone else for your own idiocy, fucktard.

[J o h n S m i t h]

It's well known what the unit cost per child for "edication"... except by you of course so if youre advocating for families who want to avoid be educated by lazy teachers union unsackables and mixing with lefty devil spawn to finance their choice of private system completely, then they get the cost per child refunded to them that is available and used by the lefty devil spawn.

Or do you think people should be forced to pay 100% cost for their choice of education for their kids and to pay for yours too?

I'm happy you know what unit cost per child is .... but that's not what I asked.

Or do you think people should be forced to pay 100% cost for their choice of education for their kids and to pay for yours too?

I think govt. should pay for ONE level of education. If you or anyone else wants something else then you should pay for it.

as if you pay any tax. You're one of those net tax leeches.

you keep telling yourself that if it helps you justify your stupidity.

demanding the removal of choice in education,

when did I do that? Reading is certainly not your forte is it?

all the rest of your rant was a substitute for substance with arm waving and wanker

[IQS.RLOW]

It's well known what the unit cost per child for "edication"... except by you of course so if youre advocating for families who want to avoid be educated by lazy teachers union unsackables and mixing with lefty devil spawn to finance their choice of private system completely, then they get the cost per child refunded to them that is available and used by the lefty devil spawn.

Or do you think people should be forced to pay 100% cost for their choice of education for their kids and to pay for yours too?

I'm happy you know what unit cost per child is .... but that's not what I asked.

It's exactly what you asked, measured down to the fucking cent

Australian governments on average, fund state schools at $12,639 per student.
Non-government school students only receive $6,607.
Once again and not surprisingly lefty's can't do maths (must be that public school system eh? Surely throwing more money into a system design for lefty greasers should improve it? )
Non-marxist schools already pay 43% of the education cost, saving the country billions.
Do you wanna take a stab at where the majority of the $12639 (that you lefty's already piss 43% up against the wall) comes from?
Would it be from you bottom 25% of wage earners you don't pay 'your fair share' as it is.
Could it be coming from those that are already paying 43% more towards their costs than you because they're more likely to use the private system?

Not only do you marxist shitbags want to punish the more efficient, better outcome producing non-government entity you want to punish those that contribute 43% 'more than their fair' share towards the costs than you do.

Or do you think people should be forced to pay 100% cost for their choice of education for their kids and to pay for yours too?

I think govt. should pay for ONE level of education. If you or anyone else wants something else then you should pay for it.

As I have demonstrated above, the govt does pay for one level of education.
That level is $12639. Those that want something else pay 43% more than you.
Without the non-government sector paying 43% of their share, that $12639 figure would be much much lower.
Arent you a lucky boy to receive yet another subsidy because others pay 43% more than you.

as if you pay any tax. You're one of those net tax leeches.

you keep telling yourself that if it helps you justify your stupidity.

I can't help that you demonstrate every day your position on the lowest rungs of the ladder.

demanding the removal of choice in education,

when did I do that? Reading is certainly not your forte is it?

Your whole argument is based on it because you have no idea on how education is funded nor do you understand what the contribution of others is actually worth to you.

You sociocommunarxists are always hacking off your nose to spite your face because you are blinded by your jealousy and envy.
Withdrawing your vote should be done as a priority to protect you from yourself.

[J o h n S m i t h]

It's exactly what you asked, measured down to the fucking cent

not it's not ... it's not even close. this is what I asked for

just as long as you can tell me how much of your tax bill went specifically to education

not how much is spent per child.

so how about it numbnuts, how much of the taxes you paid went specifically to public schools?

As I have demonstrated above, the govt does pay for one level of education.

you've in fact demonstrated the exact opposite.

Your whole argument is based on it because you have no idea on how education is funded nor do you understand what the contribution of others is actually worth to you.

off on another tangent now because once again you've been proven to be a lying turdball. Lets go back to the original question that tripe was supposed to answer, where did I demand the removal of choice in education?


you're whole argument is almost verbatim the exact same argument the private school industry has put forward for eyars. It's not like their biased now is it?

The figures don't stack up. Scrap subsidies and people will still send their kids to private schools, scrap subsidies and most kids will end up in already pre-existing infrastructure. They won't suddenly have to build a new school for each of the private ones that close down. Private schools thrive in the USA and receive no govt. funding. Private schools thrive in Sweden, and again, no govt. funding. The whole private school funding argument is a fallacy based on fear. They try and scare people into believing cost will skyrocket if private schools close down. It's all bullsh1t.

[IQS.RLOW]

It's exactly what you asked, measured down to the fucking cent

not it's not ... it's not even close. this is what I asked for

just as long as you can tell me how much of your tax bill went specifically to education

not how much is spent per child.

so how about it numbnuts, how much of the taxes you paid went specifically to public schools?

What I posted is the cost to educate a child and is applicable to the premise I raised which is if you want to force a taxpayer to fund 100% of education of their choice outside the public system, then the funding that would have been used for that public education should be returned to be used as it was intended.
For education.

Just because the only thing you raised was a strawman, doesn't mean it is relevant or deserves an answer.

As I have demonstrated above, the govt does pay for one level of education.

you've in fact demonstrated the exact opposite.

" Nuh uh" does not a rebuttal make.

Your whole argument is based on it because you have no idea on how education is funded nor do you understand what the contribution of others is actually worth to you.

off on another tangent now because once again you've been proven to be a lying turdball.

I accept your surrender on the point of you have no idea of how education funding works.

Lets go back to the original question that tripe was supposed to answer,

I don't blame you. I'd run away too and try to deflect to something else if I was trying to argue a subject I knew fuck all about and getting caned on it.

where did I demand the removal of choice in education?

When you demand diverting of allocated funds for education via private facilities that currently save taxpayers 43% into the public system.

you're whole argument is almost verbatim the exact same argument the private school industry has put forward

You seem to be unaware of what happens when the same data has many different people apply logic and analysis to it, so I'll try to explain it to you in a way you might understand...

for eyars.

...then again, maybe not....
1. When many people reach the same economic conclusion from a data set, the data will show a clear picture or trend of what is actually occuring.
2. The data is known as a fact or facts.
3. When this happens, the conclusion can be debated but not the data unless you introduce a new data set.
4. If someone wants to argue against the conclusion, they have to use the same data to prove the conclusion is wrong.
5. If they're unable to prove the conclusion is wrong and there is no new data, the conclusion is elevated to a fact with equal weighting to the data as a fact.
6. They remain facts until someone goes through 4 again with different data/result.

The figures don't stack up.

" Nuh uh" never made the cut for the list above nor any other list... .
Let's get your counting blocks out and you let me know when you can count up to number 4.

Scrap subsidies and people will still send their kids to private schools, scrap subsidies and most kids will end up in already pre-existing infrastructure.

Amazingly you have got this one sentence correct! Sadly for you it's only correct in your wording, not in your intent
I'm going to frame this as a reminder of the only time you managed to get something right and I even then you were wrong.
Thel only entity being subsidized is the public system by the private system, so if they are scrapped, the public system will deteriorate.
Not only will people still send their kids to private, many many more will do so as your tribute to glorious "Founding Union of Communotard Kapital Encroachment by Demokratik Union Principles" approved learning system deteriorates further and faster than it already is because the the funding is no longer enough without the subsidies and majority know that union controlled public entities will not provide the best outcome.

They won't suddenly have to build a new school for each of the private ones that close down.

Once the public system absorbs the outflow from the destruction of the smaller private entities, it will soon become apparent that for every new student received that was displaced under the glorious "FUCKEDUP" program, they only get 57% of what it costs to educate them.
For example, before it became the new glorious tribute to union "FUCKEDUP" completely, it previously had 10000 students and received $10000 a year to cover all costs to educate them. Now under the union FUCKEDUP program, 5 surrounding private schools averaging 3000 students at each are affected with 4 closing and 1 growing to 5000 from absorbing the kids from those who can afford it or those smart enough to see what comes next.

New glorious FUCKEDUP re-education camp receives the extras and now they have 23000 students and cram them into the unused Julia Gillard School Hall and await for glorious leader Smith to arrive with his buckets of cash which must have risen to at least $23000 to cover the minimum standards of $1/student.

Glorious leader Smith proudly hands over $17410 to his perplexed comrades who tell him,
Comrade FUCKEDUP: "but comrade, this is not enough, it costs $1/student to put the new students through our school. You have only given us $0.57ea"
Glorious leader Smith: " Nuh uh"
Comrade FUCKEDUP: "But comrade, don't you know what this means? It means that all 23000 will experience a 25% reduction in the standards required as stipulated in the glorious union of teachers handbook of how to get FUCKEDUP completely"
Glorious leader Smith: " Nuh uh"

The outflow will reverse and be unstoppable as parents remove their kids from the deteriorating and now underfunded public system and have no confidence in them. Even I know that a public education system is essential, just as I know private systems attract a better quality of teacher.
I also know how education is funded and I also know when a stupid lefty idea will not only fail, it will destroy the existing system completely and the generations that will be subjected to that idiocy.

Private schools thrive in the USA and receive no govt. funding. Private schools thrive in Sweden, and again, no govt. funding.

You've already proven you know fuck all about how education is funded here.
How do you think you'll go using another country you know even less about with different populations, tax rates, wage laws etc...

The whole private school funding argument is a fallacy based on fear. They try and scare people into believing cost will skyrocket if private schools close down. It's all bullsh1t.

Is that seriously the only argument you can put forward?
Really?