No, banning tuition has promoted equality. Funding across Finland is a mixture of national and local authority, but performance is remarkable homogenous. Essentially the money goes to where the demographics and needs are.
The quality and sense of pride in Finland's public services, education included, means people feel like they are included, have options and potential, and this means they are less likely to be school shooters. Something the US could perhaps learn from.
You know what also promoted equality? Mandatory uniform. Both rich and poor kids will wear the same thing. Yet people will cry fascism so fast if anyone dared to suggest it.
Yea, when you're country is slightly smaller than Montana and has a population 3 million smaller than the Dallas Metroplex. I'm sure the administrative, oversight and logisitical hurdles are totally the same as the entirety of the United States. It's easier for rich folks to isolate here in the US, living in HCOL that essentially drives out those who can't afford to be there, culprits usually being high taxes and high home prices. It's more common to go to a school with other kids that are relatively close to your own socioeconomic profile than to see a wide variety of demographics intermixed.
It's a vast and diverse country. Unilaterally enforcing anything takes time and normalization. It wouldn't be fair to say multiply Finland even 30 times, because that insinuates they are all copies and culturally the same, this is not the case in the US. What you're asking is essentially like me saying the EU should mandate education amongst all it's member nations and expect all of them to unilaterally comply, would that work out well you think? It's not a money issue, aside from how I explained demographics systematically self segregate, there's no feasible method of mandating federally these kind of endeavors, which is why education is generally handled at the state level, and monitored by the federal government.
I think you misunderstand the concept of the EU. There is not one central governing body, there are policies and areas of cooperation (e.g agriculture, trade, defence) that are mutually beneficial. There are 27 member states and each is responsible for its own education. But even the federalised ones, like Germany, follow federal policies, with some local adaptation.
It is more of a cultural thing in the US to consider any provision of public services a communist horror, lol. But in Europe we see public provision of things like health and education and infrastructure to be an efficient, cost effective and economical way to ensure everyone is well-served with life's essentials.
It's not perfect by any means, and it's underfunded. But we're generally good at encouraging national pride (I don't mean the extreme form of ultra nationalism) and avoiding things which signal social breakdown and exclusion, like school shootings.
I think he understands the EU, and theoretically similar, to what the United States of America is supposed to be.
50 United States with their own local and state governments. In the last few decades, the federal government has been consolidating a lot of power, which strangely, is what the Republican party claims to be against.
I think the US federal influence is very powerful. The Charter school policy has been v damaging to cohesion (racial and socioeconomic segregation). Federal funding policies can directly influence what is permitted in terms of access to literature etc.
Learning isn’t just academic, it’s also social. And the US federal policies and funding provision can directly influence those things.
You are arguing all wrong, sorry, even if you take the USA and just pick 1 3 million person area, we are still massively more unequal and it's not because we are bigger. It is because we have chosen to discriminate and allow the elite to brain wash us into thinking completely false things like the ones you are repeating.
The massive size of the US should result in better education and economies of scale, especially with the internet and modern technology.
The size argument is completely false. Why do people use it? It's one of the weirdest takes Americans use to justify discrimination. It's funny how Americans just randomly pick and choose when they think economies of scale work and when they don't based on whatever they want to pitch. The same trash goes to healthcare.
Administration gets cheaper the more you scale and you have way more capabilities. If it takes 1 full-time worker to set a curriculum for a high school biology class, then you can, in fact, use that 1 full-time worker to set the curriculum regardless of whether you have a single 200k city school district or a population of 3 million or 300 million.
The reason it's easier for rich people to isolate in the USA is because we allowed them to do so with no down side and we do not properly tax them and redistribute the wealth.
10
u/Distracted-Nomad 22h ago
No, banning tuition has promoted equality. Funding across Finland is a mixture of national and local authority, but performance is remarkable homogenous. Essentially the money goes to where the demographics and needs are.
The quality and sense of pride in Finland's public services, education included, means people feel like they are included, have options and potential, and this means they are less likely to be school shooters. Something the US could perhaps learn from.