[MaggieL]

Again, the quoting mechanism sucks here.

But again I'll say: the kids were not sold. The conession to teach them was let. The city is not making any money here---*they're* paying for a service; nobody paid the city anything.

The analogy to private trash hauling *is* germane. If Edison said: "Let us have the kids for eight hours a day to do with as we please and we'll pay you X dollars a head" you might be on-target. But the deal is "Pay *us* to meet on your behalf your responsibility to give the kids a free education". If you can still call that "selling our kids", then there's nothing further we can discuss on that score...and I can also see why TUG is "too convoluted" for you. Mitchell's writing does require more thought than a Pepsi commercial.

And I'm not sure I buy your assesment of the plight of "the people most affected" either, even if we ignore the people who have been *paying* for all this; surely they are affected too. The parents *had* a voice in this: they had their say when they elected the city and state governments.

I don't think kids are any smarter these days than they ever were. It's quite possible--likely, in fact-- that the average parent is dumber, though. That's partly the fault of the educational system...one of whose jobs is to teach critical thinking. Of course, folks like [Mayor] John Street will find their life's work of accumulating power and dispensing patronage easier if the voting populace *isn't* all tuned up with the skills of critical thinking, and able to be manipulated by empty slogans like "They're sellling our kids".

And I better not catch anybody trying to "exude control over" me...it sounds messy.