I’m not sure I follow your logic here. From what I understand, a voucher system does not just take the taxes a family pays and redirect it to the private school. It takes the money that it would require the public school to educate that student, and redirects it to the private school. Please correct me if I’m wrong. Then why couldn’t that money be enough to educate the student at the private school without additional funding?

The reason this struck me is that it strikes at the core of what I’ve been thinking might be a reasonable solution: set up a voucher system that allows x dollars to go to public schools per child, where x is the amount of money it would cost the public school to educate that child. However, the catch is that the private school cannot ask for more money from the parents beyond x. If they want to ask for more money and cater to higher-income families, they don’t qualify for a voucher. So private schools can compete with public schools, but they have to both spend the same amount of money per student. This would prevent the issue from becoming a class war, and I believe would be a more fair system.

However, your argument makes me question this. Why would private schools not receive enough funding from vouchers?

That said, I’m unconvinced that in this day and age, homeschooling could re-gain the popularity it had while we were an agrarian society. Homeschooling accounts for just 1% or so of all schooling in the United States, including private. So the teacher you would find would have to be one who had already been teaching at a public school, if all of them don’t simply try to get into private schools.

Then again, any scenario in which all public schools suddenly close probably means that society has also been disrupted in other ways. So maybe in that case people could come together to form neighborhood schools because there’s little other choice.