Last Friday John Stossel's ABC special dealt with how the over-funded government school monopoly squanders money. Can you say hate mail? I knew that you could. :)

Support your Local Schools, but keep your money.

The call of "Money for schools!" is common in politics at all levels.  It's a perfect issue, grabbing more taxes under the cover of caring for children.   Of course the NEA teacher's union wants more money for schools. Stossel reports "At a union demonstration, teachers carried signs that said schools will only improve 'when the schools have all the money they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.'"  

Okay, lets look at the money.  The U.S. Department of Education spends about $10,000 per student.  Suppose for a class of 25 you had that $250,000 to spend.  Combine that quarter million with the economy of scale from the shared resources of the other classes, and you have to wonder what the point of more money would be? 

Stossel also shows the evidence of no real correlation between high spending on schools and performance.  Increased spending is rarely spent on better books, more or better teachers; but on fancier buildings, gyms, swimming pools, and elaborate labs.  What's more is the schools just get worse!  Parochial schools focused on fundamental content and study consistently outperform the big government bloated counterparts.

Ben Chavis, a former public school principal says "Everyone has been conned -- you can give public schools all the money in America, and it will not be enough." Chavis now runs the American Indian Charter School in Oakland where spending is thousands less per student than local government schools.

The hate mail response to Stossels reasoning calls him an an idiot, or right wing extremist.