NationStates Jolt Archive

I thought Free education needs to be revised, so help me repeal it.

RECOGNISING that private schools/colleges/universities arent always free.

RECOGNISING that the proposal must elaborate on who qualifies/doesnt qualify for free education

NOTING that a nations governments will take a beating if it must pay private school's/universities/colleges instructors using taxpayer money

i will only propose this if at least 10 people agree.
then i plan to submit this:

WHEREAS resolution #28 "Free Education" will be refined as follows:

1. Students under the age of 18 who attend a private shcool must pay tuition fees

2. College/University students must pay for tuition and/or educational resources

3. Students who attend homeschools must pay for educational recources

4. Students attending public schooling have the right to a free education IF they reside in the public school's district

5. If students do not reside in the appropriate district they must pay tuition fees

6. State and/or county governments have the right to set tuition fees and/or educational recource prices according to the governments decision

WHEREAS #5 does not apply if the student moves to another district during the school year. Student must pay tuition only AFTER that school year unless the student decides to attend another school

WHEREAS #1 and #2 does not apply if the student qualifies for Financial Aide

Amendments are illegal. You have to repeal Free Education, then propose this.

which is what im doing. go to the bottom of page 5 in un proposals

Your point?

While you scrabble around for one, I'll make mine: a repeal cannot introduce new legislation.

It's illegal.

well if you'd look at the topic, which ive revised, you understand that wouldnt you

Even if this was to be submitted as a replacement (in the correct format) for resolution #28, I wouldn't back it.

I thought Free education needs to be revised, so help me repeal it.
then i plan to submit this:

WHEREAS resolution #28 "Free Education" will be refined as follows:

1. Students under the age of 18 who attend a private shcool must pay tuition fees.

Don't most people, by virtue of going to a private educational establishment, pay fees? That is a fairly fundamental, or so I thought, principle of private education. And if you make exceptions to scholarships, why do you need to include this clause?

2. College/University students must pay for tuition and/or educational resources

Why? If the state finances everything (like in Compadria) with no clear detriment to the state of education facilities, teaching standards and graduate quality, then why force it?

3. Students who attend homeschools must pay for educational recources

So they should be entitled to no support from a local education authority? And what if it's only temporary homeschooling due to illness or incapacity?

4. Students attending public schooling have the right to a free education IF they reside in the public school's district

That's fairly fundamental, I don't object.

5. If students do not reside in the appropriate district they must pay tuition fees

Yet that violates the whole ethos of a public/state school surely?

6. State and/or county governments have the right to set tuition fees and/or educational recource prices according to the governments decision

For what?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

[my post] Today 8:25 PM
[your edit] Today at 8:26 PM

Yep you sure showed me!

Now, onto this topic. I think Resolution #28 needs to be repealed. But I don't agree with your replacement either - much of it strikes me as superfluous. So I'd support the repeal, but not the replacement.

sorry guys but im clumsy, i admit. this is actually to REPEAL, not revise (yet)

Right, ok. Well if it's to repeal, you should concentrate more on why you think Resolution #28 is bad, than what you think should replace it.

Even if this was to be submitted as a replacement (in the correct format) for resolution #28, I wouldn't back it.



Don't most people, by virtue of going to a private educational establishment, pay fees? That is a fairly fundamental, or so I thought, principle of private education. And if you make exceptions to scholarships, why do you need to include this clause?



Why? If the state finances everything (like in Compadria) with no clear detriment to the state of education facilities, teaching standards and graduate quality, then why force it?



So they should be entitled to no support from a local education authority? And what if it's only temporary homeschooling due to illness or incapacity?



That's fairly fundamental, I don't object.



Yet that violates the whole ethos of a public/state school surely?



For what?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.
1. yes, but im trying to keep this fundamental as possible. in real life if you do not reside in proper public districts, you have to pay 500$ semester. and yes, i agree with your injury/disability point. i will revise that asap

Even if this was to be submitted as a replacement (in the correct format) for resolution #28, I wouldn't back it.



Don't most people, by virtue of going to a private educational establishment, pay fees? That is a fairly fundamental, or so I thought, principle of private education. And if you make exceptions to scholarships, why do you need to include this clause?



Why? If the state finances everything (like in Compadria) with no clear detriment to the state of education facilities, teaching standards and graduate quality, then why force it?



So they should be entitled to no support from a local education authority? And what if it's only temporary homeschooling due to illness or incapacity?



That's fairly fundamental, I don't object.



Yet that violates the whole ethos of a public/state school surely?



For what?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.
1. yes, but im trying to keep this fundamental as possible. in real life if you do not reside in proper public districts, you have to pay 500$ semester. and yes, i agree with your injury/disability point. i will revise that asap

1. yes, but im trying to keep this fundamental as possible. in real life if you do not reside in proper public districts, you have to pay 500$ semester. and yes, i agree with your injury/disability point. i will revise that asapWhy is this any of your damned buisness? This is a national issue.

Why is this any of your damned buisness? This is a national issue.
what's your problem?
and what are you talking about?

what's your problem?
and what are you talking about?
Ugh. If you're going to post your proposal on the forum, then expect for people to not like it and grow some nerve. This resolution is stupid. You want to control the "school district"? Quaon has no such thing. If you wish to go to a public school, you must go to one within the city, territory, or 100 mile radius of where you live. You cannot go to a public school out of that area unless you move, in which it will be free. And what if a nation has free college? Why should students be taxed for it?

And use some proper grammar, for God's sake. This is not some AIM chat, this is a place where world leaders gather. At least use a spell checker programme before you write a resolution!

Quaon:

What you are saying has merit. But please, don't be so aggressive, the guy's new here, he doesn't know all the conventions yet and he's trying to listen to us and take note of what we say.

1. yes, but im trying to keep this fundamental as possible. in real life if you do not reside in proper public districts, you have to pay 500$ semester. and yes, i agree with your injury/disability point. i will revise that asap

I see what you mean about public/state school districts, but I'm not entirely convinced yet. Still, keep up the work, although I'm not particularly supportive of a repeal, so I won't be festooning your proposal with plaundits yet.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I belive that the education resolution should be repealed IF a better one is put in place that puts some standard on it. But as I have seen on working on it this is very impracticle from what I have seen because you have so many different areas to judge on.

This is just terrible though. From what I see it seems to just make people pay money for schools at certain times. This only attempt to loosen up the resolution which only need to be tightend because it has so many loop-holes(more like big huge gaps :) ).

1. yes, but im trying to keep this fundamental as possible. in real life if you do not reside in proper public districts, you have to pay 500$ semester
Not where I live. To my knowledge, it's free in my area to attend an out-of-district public school. Besides, what if a nation doesn't have school districts? Or wants to have free schooling for everyone, and people can go wherever they want? It's a national issue.

And what if a private school wants to be free? Maybe like donation-only or something. Or maybe a co-op of parents. Or maybe a grant from the government.