To the editor:
I read with interest Rich Minder's letter to the editor concerning the frustrating and time-consuming process of buying school supplies.
How different it was growing up in northern Minnesota. Every six weeks, each student was given a new pencil and all paper and notebooks needed. In Lawrence, 5,000 parents drive all over town, searching shelves in Wal-Mart and Target, often vainly, for the correct supplies.
What would be the cost of ordering uniform (not designer) supplies from the manufacturers (perhaps equal to the cost of a series of hearings on intelligent design vs. evolution) and storing them in a central warehouse (maybe a closed neighborhood school)? What would be the cost of hiring a local company to distribute them (perhaps equal to the cost of sending a school board representative to a national meeting or two)? What is the cost for thousands of people in time, traffic congestion, pollution and profits diverted to international vendors?
It is not necessarily the fear of higher taxes that prevents the free distribution of school supplies to our students. But even if extra tax dollars were needed, we must face up to those who complain that they are subsidizing other people's children. Everyone benefits from a free, quality education. Who among us has not attended some school supported by taxpayers? Why can't states access some of the windfall tax breaks given to our wealthiest corporations and individuals to where they would be more beneficial?
As a bumper sticker points out, "If you think education is expensive, consider the cost of ignorance."
Jim Juola,
Lawrence
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
lawrencechick (anonymous) says…
We're subsidizing other people's children right now ! My kid won't use half the stuff on that list. But we must have more freebies in lawrence. So the people with flip top cell phones, free day care, and cigarettes in their pocket won't need to spend a precious dime.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Actually this could be covered if they city/county would add a 5 cent education fee on each soda pop. This way the schools provide only what is necessary. Add $25 to every moving violation/$100 DUI/$250 DUI involving accident.
Pool the two together which would pay fees and supplies.
moderationman (anonymous) says…
Thank you lawrencechick for pointing out the cost of ignorance. You are a fine example.
lawrencechick (anonymous) says…
Sorry moderation man, I know too many of them personally. The ignorance is all yours.
bisky1 (anonymous) says…
you guys are absolutely correct, it is unbelievable (sp) how inefficient it is having people take care of thier own lives is.
i propose that going forward we contract with some of the people running feedlots in western kansas to feed us. we would no longer have to waste precious energy
going to the grocery store we could just walk to the local feed trough, where a wagon would roll by and dispense our dinners onto a flat table. meals would be programmed depending on our desires- vegan vegatarian, or like me a lowly meatatarian, no utensils will be allowed, too much energy would be required to manufacture and wash knives and forks, therefore just lap it up off the trough.
mermily (anonymous) says…
good grief- you thought that editorial was about disliking going to the store for supplies or about not wanting to be inconvenienced by the purchasing of children's school needs? let me explain; it was about equalizing things by allowing all children to have expensive supplies. in order to have truly public education, school supplies should be provided. the article was a statement asking why education is not made functionally available to all children, par none, as it is the most important governmental function.
i imagine in the edit and cropping of the editorial, that clear point became less obvious to those only lightly reading the editorial. however, may i recommend that before you jump to the conclusion an author must naturally be addressing their dislike of doing things for their children, re-read the piece. the logical conclusion for those of us not plagued with such pessimism isn't that someone must feel disdain for their children, but rather they are concerned about something- for this author is was obviously concern for education. their child's and yours.
bisky1 (anonymous) says…
didn't miss a thing, if you are not able or willing to make the sacrifices to raise children properly- providing for all of their needs, do not have them.
if you cannot afford smokes or beer or you have to work two jobs then that is what you do. our parents and grandparents did this and it is what we should do also.
but, of course this is not what we are talking about, the people writing these letters have the means to take care of their kids but want the rest of us to take care of them.
mermily (anonymous) says…
i see my advice that we not jump to illogical conclusion (e.g. people want other's to take care of their children), feel on deaf ears. i'll try once more to shed some reason here.
a little reseach on the author finds he has three children. the youngest almost 21 years old. clearly he no longer has children in the public school system and is consequently no longer engaging in the school supply hunt and gathering exercise. therefore, the article isn't motivated by his dislike of getting supplies for kids nor hopes that others will raise his already raised children.
instead, with good education and research skills, one might find out that jim juola is a teacher. seems that maybe, just maybe, he is motivated by having seen one too many poor kids come to school unarmed with supplies and is, as the article indicates, willing to be taxed more to see this lack of truly free public education cured.
please let this point resonate loudly; it is never the fault of children when their parents, for good or bad reasons, aren't able to fund their school supplies property. what it always is though, is a problem for society. period. the sooner we stomach this truth and stop punishing kids, the sooner we can join the ranks of civilized people.
i'll reiterate- even if the case here was that those writing were just too lazy to get their kids supplies and instead wanted others to pick up the tab, i am still willing to do. i am willing to pay for education, evening "unfairly", for a number of reasons. the first being that i am bright enough to realize it hurts ME (even as a young adult with no children) and all of society when young people aren't properly educated. lack of quality education leads to higher needs for welfare, higher instances of drug abuse and addiction, higher teen pregnancy rates, more crime, and increased incarceration; none of which are cheap. the second reason is that i very simply don't take out the sins of parents on children. and finally, i realize that "showing those lazy parents" by not helping educate their children isn't the solution to anything.
you may not like what i've written or the tone in which i've written it. you may not like my username, nor that i don't have children. you may not like that i'm willing to pay higher taxes. however, none of that doesn't changes the ABCs of my main message which is, when children aren't given all the advantages of a complete education, no one wins.
mermily (anonymous) says…
ah yes, juola- an obviously native american name.....or traditionally scandinavian! guess that wasn't taught in the 3 Rs, eh? rather than chalking the idea up to "them dang injuns gettin ur monie once agun", minnesota has always done well in prioritizing funding for education- that's why they score among the top schools in american.
1. the reason you should pay for notebooks is b/c paying for prisons is more expensive. clearly an over-simplification, but the idea is to not be penny wise, and dollar foolish. education is a solution for many other social problems i'd wager you also moan about. i for one, don't enjoy pissing up a rope and so i like to pay for schools before i have to pick up the tab on less worthy causes. does that expression resonate better with you? i can only assume if talk if truly free education leads you to call "communist!", you must be more comfortable with such illustrations.
2. poverty and under-education begot poverty and under-education. people being able to access social services ironically requires knowledge of them; the phone to make the appointment; the car with which to drive there; the luxury to take time out of your minimum wage job to get there, and so forth. no one was suggesting Gap for all. just basics for everyone. bulk notepads not displaying disney characters, movie stars, or the latest fad makes what is in the notebook more important than what is on the outside of it.
mermily (anonymous) says…
cont.
3. not sure where you're going with this one. it's quite tangential. i'm a fan of A's for A work and F's for F work too. it's an uniquely american phenomenon to give everyone A's and have happy endings in all movies. travel and you'll in most other school systems, C's are (gasp) the average grade as intended. but again, this is another topic altogether. get your editorial published and we'll all wax and wan on that subject matter, but for now, let's try to contain ourselves.
military as a substitute for education....nice work on that one. i'll leave that topic for another day when i've decided to so egregiously waste my time like i have this evening.
and as for getting "off the hook"- you know, not just the children of those that would like to be "off the hook" end up with trouble makers and the "relief" this provides. you may have accidentally linked problem children with poor children. or black children. or children of single parents. tsk, tsk. what happens if you're poor and your kid doesn't become a trouble maker. oh no, what then? better push them towards trouble so you don't have to buy what you can't afford. brilliant idea. thought of running for office lately?
4. and now the famous pull yourself up by the boot straps argument. yes, very original and has proven to be so terribly successful thus far. i mean, that is why more money is spent on building prisons than education, right? because people are pulling themselves up so well. hmmm, i like where this is going; rather than everyone paying a small amount more for a worthy cause, let's put that pressure on a young person and hope, knowing they likely won't, that they succeed. if they don't, well we'll have to pay then. managed a company recently? run a company into the ground lately? i simply have to know!
finally, maybe we should pay kids to go to school. in my opinion it is their job. a very serious job. and the best thing they can do to promote our future is to educate themselves. i wasn't thinking of going that far, but now that you've suggested it, i'm on board.
kcwarpony (anonymous) says…
conservativeman, the BIA does not do a good job with schools on the reservations! In an article from Indianz.com
http://www.indianz.com/News/2004/0008...
Cuts run deep for tribal programs at bia
tuesday, march 9, 2004
The largest cut, though, comes to the construction account. In 2005, replacement of BIA schools, which are the worst in the nation, will be reduced by $61.0 million. Repair and improvement of other facilities will be cut by nearly $9 million.
The BIA does not pay for all school supplies. I am co-founder of a nonprofit org that is for the benefit of indigenous children and we are forever scrambling to find school supplies, i.e. paper, pencils, even textbooks, for the children. I am afraid you are sadly misinformed.