The following is the response of one commenter to an Article in American Thinker on line magazine by an author who carefully deconstructed the public school education system. There were many more comments along the same lines as this one. It is clear that there are many Americans who still think for themselves and who are fed up with the "education" now being offered by the government by unionized teachers and administrators. One senses a groundswell of discontent that augers for long overdue change. The key point made by this commenter, and many others, is the absence of competition for the product now offered by the government. It is always so. One of the basic tenets of capitalism is the role of competition which keeps producers on their toes by offering choice. The only way one can find choice in the public school system is to opt out and go the very expensive private school route.
show more show lessIn most transactions involving goods and services we are free to spend our money elsewhere if the products and services are inferior. Except government, of course.
Your comment gnawed at me, Schmutzli, for which I thank you. I've wondered a time or two or three why government is always monopolistic, yet hadn't paused to ask myself aloud, "What if it weren't monopolistic?
With the exceptions of criminals on parole and professional politicians tied to public feeding troughs, anyone can move to another state. Within a state, anyone can move to another county, and within many counties, anyone can move to another school district.
Wait a minute. Why do we citizens have to do all the work of moving? Isn't government supposed to be our public servant? That's what it said in my high school civics text, anyway.
If I get tired of waiting in the all but static lines at Grocery A, do I have to drive to another county to try Grocery B? If Grocery B's meats are mediocre and high-priced, do I need to drive to yet another county to try Grocery C?
Once upon a time, people could sign up—and pay—for medical insurance plans as they saw fit: some policies more comprehensive and expensive than others, some less. I'm required by state law to carry minimum insurance on my car, and have the option to carry additional insurance at greater cost, as well as increase or decrease my deductible payment.
At the very least, why shouldn't we be able to sign up for varying levels of government service? Why shouldn't several brands of government compete with one another within a single geographic area?
Before you dismiss that idea out of hand, friends, let me mention trash collection, please. I live in El Paso County near, but not within the city of Colorado Springs.
Most utilities in the county are monopolies, but garbage collection isn't one of them. When I moved here, I signed on the dotted line with Waste Management, which soon proved both unreliable and more expensive than others. I switched to a local company. I'm sure if the county made itself the exclusive provider of trash removal service, I'd pay twice as much, and the reliability would make Waste Management's look positively good.
Maybe it wouldn't be efficient for geographic areas to offer competing law enforcement and fire fighting services, but why shouldn't we, the people be free to sign up for competing school plans, competing trash removal plans, other utility services that compete with one another?
At the very least, it seems to me, we ought to be able to remove some portion of the raw power of monopolism from local government and force markets open to competition, which normally results in improved quality and reduced prices. This old guy who's never had children, for example, would opt out of education altogether. I'd keep my local sheriff's and fire department protection, (both far superior to anything I had to pay for and hoped I'd never need to rely on during my years in California,) but wouldn't sign up for education, street sweeping, (strictly an annual event, anyway,) street lighting, (all but non-existent,) or monopolistic water, (excruciatingly expensive and micro-managed down to the last drop.)
"Aw, now, wait a minute, Standing Wolf!" someone's bound to object. "Educating children is a shared responsibility, and besides, if you opted out, people with kids would have to pay more to send them to school."
If children's education is a "shared responsibility," why do I have to accept sole responsibility for my yard work and house maintenance? Why should we call education a "shared responsibility" when highway maintenance is primarily paid for by taxes on gasoline? The more or fewer miles I drive, the more or fewer dollars I contribute to highway maintenance, which is to say: I pay for what I use rather than everyone but me uses.
If my parents and tax payers in Michigan paid for my elementary and high school education lo, those many years ago in Michigan, are we sure it somehow "averages out" for me to be required to pay for other people's kids' education in Colorado?
Ultimately, if people had to pay for their own children's education instead of sending them to "free" government schools, might they not take more interest in the entire affair? Might they not be more inclined to wonder how much they're paying and how much their kids are getting for it?
Oh, by the way, why should this individual who's never had children be required to pay state taxes in support of blatantly "progressive" state institutions of supposedly "higher" learning? Given Colorado has both public and private colleges, why should the former enjoy the advantage of funding by mandatory tax collection? Who pays? Who benefits? Who—other than boundlessly self-serving government itself—makes these decisions? I believe we're both suffering from and required to pick up the tab for altogether too much government monopolism.
It seems to me both the kind and degree of monopolism authorized at every level of government ought to be a topic for serious civic consideration and debate when the time arrives to restore our constitutional republic.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/ending_progressive_public_education_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz2F31ZqVu8
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.