education
A place to hash out all opinions on education policy, charter schools, statewide testing, and what the political world is and isn't doing about it.
The Missing Argument in the Stay-at-Home Parent Subsidy Debate
Preface: Video Context: Video Credit: Timcast / Tim Pool This article is a response to a recent Timcast segment discussing the proposed policy that would allow qualifying married couples with a stay-at-home parent to receive childcare subsidies of roughly $9,000 per child per year. The video frames the central debate around whether this amounts to additional welfare or whether it simply redirects money government is already spending on childcare toward parents who choose to provide that care themselves. Around 9:32–10:20 , Tim argues that the welfare expenditure already exists and that the important change is where the incentive points: instead of subsidizing families specifically when parents work and children are cared for elsewhere, the same funding could begin supporting married parents who raise their children at home.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcast8 days ago in The Swamp
A Better Buyout: Paying Married Parents to Buy Back Their Time
A Different Kind of Buyout I previously proposed what I called a Family Support Buyout: give families the option to voluntarily exchange a large portion of the government benefits and services already being spent on their behalf for one predictable, untaxed monthly payment they control themselves. Instead of administering SNAP, childcare subsidies, housing assistance, refundable credits, cash assistance, and other ordinary supports through separate bureaucracies, government could calculate the avoidable cost of those programs and offer families perhaps 65, 70, or 75 percent of that value directly. The family would relinquish the benefits being replaced, taxpayers would retain the remaining savings, and the household would gain dramatically greater control over how its resources are allocated. Medical coverage, disability services, catastrophic healthcare, and other specialized needs could remain separate because those costs are less suitable for a simple cash conversion. The central idea was straightforward: if government is already spending $100 supporting a family, perhaps both taxpayers and the family can benefit if the family receives $70 directly instead.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcast8 days ago in The Swamp
THE GREAT AMERICAN FUNHOUSE: How We Traded the New Deal for a Corporate Lease and Called It Freedom
Gather ’round, citizens, grab your participation trophies, and strap yourselves tightly into the Tilt-A-Whirl because the ride is completely unbolted from the concrete.
By Meko James 10 days ago in The Swamp
LAUSD Allowed an Unapproved Charter Program. Families Could Pay the Price
“Breaking the law, breaking the law” When José Cole-Gutierrez was caught lying to his bosses on the LAUSD School Board in 2023, many assumed it would mean the end of his LAUSD career. This was especially true since, as a result of his reassigning special‑education classrooms to charter operators under false pretenses, children with special‑education needs were forced to receive services in stairwells and storage closets.
By Carl J. Petersen17 days ago in The Swamp
Fear: The Quiet Architect of Closed Minds
I use AI the same way any creator uses a tool to support my imagination, not replace it. My stories, my voice, my face, my lived experience are mine. If you choose to judge or ostracize people for using modern tools, that’s your bias, not my truth. I’m not hiding. I’m not cheating. I’m creating. And I’ll keep doing that with whatever tools help me express my work.
By Vicki Lawana Trusselli 17 days ago in The Swamp
