My Cato colleague Izzy Santa explains why a free-market approach is the key to better schools.
School Choice Video Shows Why Government Education Monopoly Should Be Disbanded
February 9, 2010 by Dan Mitchell
29 Responses
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Posts
- Responding to Scandals and Corruption, the IRS Rewards Itself with Giant Bonuses
- Europe’s Politicians Learned the Wrong Lesson from Saint Augustine
- What’s the Better Role Model, France or Switzerland?
- Frankenstein’s Revenge
- Siding with the Heritage Foundation in the “Austerity” Fight with Paul Krugman and the Washington Post
Pages
Visitors (beginning December 23, 2010)
Tags
Archives
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
Recent Comments
Categories
- 2nd Amendment
- African-Americans
- Al Gore
- Alarmism
- Argentina
- Atlas Shrugged
- Ausrian Economics
- Australia
- Austrian Economics
- Ayn Rand
- Bailout
- Balanced Budget
- Barney Frank
- Baseball
- Bernanke
- Big business
- Big Government
- Bob Dole Award
- Boondoggle
- Brain drain
- Bulldogs
- Bureaucracy
- Bureaucrats
- Bush
- California
- Canada
- Capital Gains Tax
- cash for clunkers
- Cato Institute
- CBO
- Center for Freedom and Prosperity
- Central planning
- Centralization
- Charity
- Chile
- China
- Chris Christie
- Class warfare
- Climate change
- Clinton
- Cold War
- Collectivism
- Communism
- Competitiveness
- Congress
- Congressional Budget Office
- Constitution
- Corporate income tax
- Corporate tax
- Corruption
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Crime
- Cronyism
- Cuba
- Dan Hannan
- David Cameron
- Dawgs
- Death Tax
- Debt
- Deferral
- Deficit
- Delaware
- Democrats
- Dependency
- Deposit Insurance
- Discrimination
- Double Taxation
- Drug War
- Earmarks
- Easy money
- Economics
- Education
- Election
- Elitism
- Eminent Domain
- England
- Entitlements
- Environmentalism
- Estonia
- Euro
- Europe
- European Commission
- Executive pay
- Fair Tax
- Fannie Mae
- Fascism
- Fatal conceit
- Federal Reserve
- Federalism
- Financial Crisis
- Financial Privacy
- Finland
- Fiscal Crisis
- Fiscal Policy
- Flat Tax
- food nazi
- Food Stamps
- Foreign Aid
- Foreign Policy
- France
- Freddie Mac
- Free Markets
- Free Speech
- Free State Project
- Freedom
- Geithner
- General Motors
- Georgia
- Germany
- Gingrich
- Global Taxation
- Global warming
- Gordon Brown
- Government intervention
- Government Spending
- Government stupidity
- Government Thuggery
- Great Depression
- Greece
- Gross domestic product
- Gun control
- Harmonization
- Hayek
- Health Care
- Health Reform
- Higher Taxes
- Hong Kong
- Hoover
- Housing
- HUD
- Human Rights
- Humor
- Hypocrisy
- Iceland
- Illinois
- Immigration
- Income tax
- Inflation
- International bureaucracy
- International Criminal Court
- International Monetary Fund
- International Taxation
- Ireland
- IRS
- Italy
- Japan
- JCT
- Jobs
- John Stossel
- Joint Committee on Taxation
- Joker
- Jurisdictional Competition
- Kelo
- Keynes
- Keynesian
- KPMG
- Laffer Curve
- Lakers
- Leviathan
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Liechtenstein
- Lobbying
- Local government
- Marginal Tax Rate
- Media Bias
- Medicaid
- Medicare
- Migration
- Minimum Wage
- Mitchell's Golden Rule
- Mitchell's Law
- Mitchell's Theorem
- Monaco
- Monetary Policy
- Money Laundering
- Moral Hazard
- nanny state
- National Education Association
- National Sales Tax
- Netherlands
- New Jersey
- New York
- News Appearance
- North Korea
- Obama
- OECD
- Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
- PATRIOT Act
- Patriotism
- Patriots
- Paul Ryan
- Paulson
- Pelosi
- Pets
- Philippines
- Podcast
- Political Correctness
- Political Humor
- Politicians
- Politics
- Polling Data
- Portugal
- Postal Service
- Poverty
- Price Controls
- Privacy
- Privatization
- Prohibition
- Property Rights
- Property Tax
- Prostitution
- Protectionism
- Public Opinion
- Race
- Rahn Curve
- Rand
- Rankings
- Reagan
- Recession
- Redistribution
- Regulation
- Republicans
- Roman Polanski
- Romney
- Roosevelt
- Russia
- Sales Tax
- Savings
- School Choice
- Singapore
- Sleaze
- Slovakia
- Snow
- Soccer
- Social Security
- Social Security Privatization
- Socialism
- Softball
- South Korea
- Sovereignty
- Spain
- Spending
- States
- Statism
- stimulus
- Subsidies
- Supercommittee
- Supply-side economics
- Supreme Court
- Swedem
- Switzerland
- Tax avoidance
- Tax Competition
- Tax Compliance
- Tax evasion
- Tax Harmonization
- Tax Haven
- Tax Increase
- Tax Reform
- Taxation
- Taxpayer Ripoff
- Tea Party
- Territorial Taxation
- Terrorism
- Texas
- Thanksgiving
- Third party payer
- Tobacco
- Tobin Tax
- Toilet Paper
- Trade
- TSA
- Uncategorized
- Underground Economy
- Unemployment
- Union Bosses
- United Kingdom
- United Nations
- United States
- Value-Added Tax
- VAT
- Video
- Vouchers
- Walter Williams
- Waste
- Weekly Economics Lesson
- Welfare
- Welfare State
- World Bank
- Worldwide Taxation
- Yankees
[...] time they were in power. The created a new entitlement program for prescription drugs. They further centralized education with the no-bureaucrat-left-behind legislation. They undid the positive reforms of the 1990s with central-panning subsidies and controls for [...]
[...] time they were in power. The created a new entitlement program for prescription drugs. They further centralized education with the no-bureaucrat-left-behind legislation. They undid the positive reforms of the 1990s with central-panning subsidies and controls for [...]
[...] time they were in power. The created a new entitlement program for prescription drugs. They further centralized education with the no-bureaucrat-left-behind legislation. They undid the positive reforms of the 1990s with central-panning subsidies and controls for [...]
[...] time they were in power. The created a new entitlement program for prescription drugs. They further centralized education with the no-bureaucrat-left-behind legislation. They undid the positive reforms of the 1990s with central-planning subsidies and controls for [...]
[...] more important, school choice would give poor kids a much better education, thus increasing their ability to achieve the American [...]
[...] more important, school choice would give poor kids a much better education, thus increasing their ability to achieve the American [...]
whooooaaa wait a second. It is a fallacy to say, “the answer is simple,” and then to show one graph and say “see?” The answer is not necessarily complicated, but even a non-economics person from the CATO Institute (or someone speaking on non-economic terms) ought to understand the difference between correlation and causation. Economics, policy, math, and politics majors have heard it a million times (and patiently nod their heads) when a non-statistician tries to tell them that correlation does not equal causality. It gets annoying. And yet someone from an organization that is supposed to be filled with smart people shows a chart of test scores, where private school students perform better than public school students, and surmises that the result is “simple” – private education is better because it allows competition. Any econometrician can point out what’s wrong with that. But so can any informed ordinary citizen. How do we know that there are not exogenous factors? In other words, maybe poor(er) people who can’t afford private school work longer hours and thus cannot be there to help or encourage education in the household. Perhaps they themselves don’t see the value in an education, and thus don’t encourage it. Perhaps they can’t afford private tutors, extra books, and other things that can help a child’s test scores. Maybe the teachers in a private school aren’t state-monitored as tightly and inflate their students’ test scores. Maybe there is a genetic factor involved, and smarter people make more money, allowing their kids to go to a private school – and yet it is the genes and not the schooling that makes their scores “higher.” I really cringe when a think tank, even one with a transparently open agenda or political leaning, puts out overly simplistic or fallacious evidence like this. There are a thousand better ways to give arguments in favor of a free market, or of a voucher system. But please don’t show a chart like you do at the beginning and say that the answer is obvious.
[...] should be substantially cut, including elimination of departments such as HUD, Transportation, Education, Agriculture, etc), but if maintained over a lengthy period will eliminate all red ink. More [...]
[...] should be substantially cut, including elimination of departments such as HUD, Transportation, Education, Agriculture, etc), but if maintained over a lengthy period will eliminate all red ink. More [...]
[...] should be substantially cut, including elimination of departments such as HUD, Transportation, Education, Agriculture, etc), but if maintained over a lengthy period will eliminate all red ink. More [...]
[...] The right approach, of course, is to get the federal government out of the education business completely, and then disband government-imposed school monopolies at the state and local level – as explained in this video. [...]
The presentation doesn’t account for a number of socio economic variables. Nonetheless, anyone who thinks that the government does much of ANYTHING better than the private sector needs to have his head checked.
[...] this video looks at the broader issue of school choice. Rate this: Share this:PrintEmailFacebookTwitterMoredeliciousDiggFarkLinkedInRedditStumbleUponLike [...]
[...] of the status quo used to claim that school choice was a radical idea, but it’s hard to defend that position since nations such as [...]
[...] departments of the federal government, including Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Education, and [...]
[...] if we can just figure out how to expand school choice in America… Rate this:Share [...]
[...] Now, if we can just figure out how to expand school choice in America… [...]
[...] of the status quo used to claim that school choice was a radical idea, but it’s hard to defend that position since nations such as Sweden, Chile, [...]
[...] But after reading this story, I realize that I was being wimpy. These stories show that the time has come to end the government school monopoly. [...]
[...] Here’s a video explaining why school choice is better than a government-run [...]
[...] of the status quo used to claim that school choice was a radical idea, but it’s hard to defend that position since nations such as Sweden, Chile, [...]
[...] Maybe the bigger lesson (especially given the shocking lack of results after record levels of staffing and funding) is that we should break up the government school monopoly and let parents choose better-quality schools? [...]
[...] And the real moral of the story is that we need to break up the government-run education monopoly and allow school choice. [...]
A major difference in education is aspiration of pupil, parent and teacher . Too many teachers in the state education system use poverty as an excuse for low aspiration which tends to produce low results. If one looks at cultures such as India, Sri Lanka and other parts of Asia high standards are produced in despite of poverty and large class sizes because of self -discipline, high levels of concentration and high levels of aspiration from parents, pupils, and teachers.
Subjects such as maths, languages ,history, geography and drawing can be taught in run down buildings with only basic equipment. In applied maths one can teach the mathematical aspects of physics, chemistry, biology and engineering. After all Newton developed many of his theories in a farm house!
After all thge RC Church has history attracting poor children and producing great scholars, especially the Jesuits . A convent education in India is still considered an asset for women.
A major problem is many state schools is that many teachers are not bright enough to teach pupils to high enough levels to enter top universities especially in subjects such as maths,engineering,music, science, languages( European, Classical and Asian) except for such scools as the Brooklyn High.
Able pupils in maths, ballet and music often need high quality teachers from the age of 6. Able maths students at school have often attained university entry standard by the age of 16-17. Shakespeare was taught at Grammar School ( taught Latin and Greek) and left by the age of 16.
I would suggest many pupils in Grammar and Private schools in the UK by the age of 16 were achieving higher scholastic standards by 1600 than many pupils in inner city schools in the USA and UK in 2012 because they received a more rigorous education and expectations were higher. A gentleman knowsLatin and a scholar knows Latin and Greek. If one looks at the a the mid 18 C ,it would be expected than an educated member of the middle classes knew maths, Latin, Greek and French. A major cause of the success of the USA and Industrial revolution was the high standard of education of the Quakers and other Protestant Groups. Look at the education of those who founded the Ivy League Universities and who wrote the Declaration of Indpendence and compare with the average teacher in a state school.
[...] Now, if we can just figure out how to expand school choice in America… [...]
[...] Here’s a video explaining why school choice is better than a government-run [...]
[...] Here’s a video explaining why school choice is better than a government-run [...]
[…] from a policy perspective, we need to bust up the government school monopoly and implement school choice. And not because suburban kids are being victimized by political correctness. That’s a […]
[…] from a policy perspective, we need to bust up the government school monopoly and implement school choice. And not because suburban kids are being victimized by political correctness. That’s a nuisance, […]