Arguments in favor often center on improved educational outcomes. Increased funding could lead to smaller class sizes, more resources for students (like technology and extracurricular activities), and higher teacher salaries, potentially attracting and retaining more qualified educators. This could result in better student performance, higher graduation rates, and increased opportunities for students from all socioeconomic backgrounds. Furthermore, a well-educated populace is often linked to a stronger economy and a more engaged citizenry.
However, there are also counterarguments. Simply increasing funding doesn't guarantee better results; effective allocation of resources and accountability are crucial. Concerns about potential mismanagement of funds, inefficient spending, and a lack of measurable improvements in student outcomes are often raised. There are also questions about the definition of "fully funded" – what level of funding constitutes "full" and how would that be determined? Finally, fully funding public education would likely require significant tax increases or cuts in other areas of government spending, leading to potential political and economic challenges.
Therefore, whether fully funding public education is a "good idea" depends heavily on various factors, including how the funds are allocated, the specific needs of the community, and the overall economic climate. It's not a simple yes or no answer.