Is this true? If so, why?

[Wry Catcher]

"The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance" Sandra Day O'Connor

Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com

 

[eflatminor]

...our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance...

Yet ANOTHER consequence of the increasingly monopolistic control of affordable education by government.

Get the government out of running the schools and allow competition in the education market. That is the only way to realize improved results and lower prices. The 'top-down' status quo only serves to produce profoundly ignorant students (as O'Connor describes), ridiculous drop out and illiteracy rates, and skyrocketing costs that far outpace the overall rate of inflation.

You want to redistribute money to poor families so that they can purchase an education for their children? Fine, but the idea that government RUNS the schools, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots get served at lunch is the problem. We need COMPETITION in education, not more central planning.

End the government monopoly on affordable education now!

 

[DGS49]

Yet ANOTHER illustration of the folly of "get out the vote" campaigns. Given that most people are woefully uninformed and mis-informed, herding thousands of marginally-engaged citizens to the polls is a recipe for irrational election outcomes in which those candidates who have been able to compose the most compelling sound bites will win out, regardless of the candidate's real positions, competence, or even the desires and needs of the individual voters.

Kudos to organizations like the League of Women voters, who at least in principle wish to educate the public, but in a society where most young adults (who even give a shit) get their information from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, the solution to voter ignorance is elusive.

 

[Moonglow]

govt. education does not stop you from learning.

 

[Wry Catcher]

...our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance...

Yet ANOTHER consequence of the increasingly monopolistic control of affordable education by government.

Get the government out of running the schools and allow competition in the education market. That is the only way to realize improved results and lower prices. The 'top-down' status quo only serves to produce profoundly ignorant students (as O'Connor describes), ridiculous drop out and illiteracy rates, and skyrocketing costs that far outpace the overall rate of inflation.

You want to redistribute money to poor families so that they can purchase an education for their children? Fine, but the idea that government RUNS the schools, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots get served at lunch is the problem. We need COMPETITION in education, not more central planning.

End the government monopoly on affordable education now!

Your use of the word government is unclear. School Boards are democratically elected as is the Supt. of each District in California as is the State Supt. of Education. All of whom can be replaced by recall or rejection by the people.

Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why. I don't want a corporation to teach our kids, why do you?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yet ANOTHER illustration of the folly of "get out the vote" campaigns. Given that most people are woefully uninformed and mis-informed, herding thousands of marginally-engaged citizens to the polls is a recipe for irrational election outcomes in which those candidates who have been able to compose the most compelling sound bites will win out, regardless of the candidate's real positions, competence, or even the desires and needs of the individual voters.

Kudos to organizations like the League of Women voters, who at least in principle wish to educate the public, but in a society where most young adults (who even give a shit) get their information from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, the solution to voter ignorance is elusive.

Wow! Both the Daily Show and the Colbert Report offer more than "take our country back" rhetoric (i.e. nonsensical) and mean spirited character assassination; they expose contemporary issues and the pols who support or decry them to satire.

 

[eflatminor]

Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.

Damn right. Why? Choice...choice in your education dollar that only competition can produce. With centrally planned education (local, state and feds working together to screw things up), you get NO choice. The outcome, as always, is crappy results and skyrocketing costs.

I don't want a corporation to teach our kids, why do you?

Corporations, partnerships, LLCs, or just one guy that owns the operation...I don't care. The point is with a free market in education, you get choice. With choice comes the NECESSITY to produce superior results and to keep costs in check....or you send your kid to another school.

I don't want government bureaucrats to "teach" our kids, why do you?

 

[Moonglow]

not all public schools are unionized and the much of the planning is done by local committees.

 

[eflatminor]

much of the planning is done by local committees.

Even if that local planning didn't involve state and federal mandates/funding, which all do, that's no reason for government to run the schools. Should local committees run all markets? Clearly not.

The results speak for themselves. Our kids fail/dropout at an alarming rate. They graduate with 'skills' that wouldn't get them out of the 8th grade a century ago. The costs far outpace the overall rate of inflation. All because THERE IS NO CHOICE in the market for affordable education.

Rome managed to build it's empire without public education of any kind. When they did implement government control of the education market, its timing matched their decline. Not the only reason for their eventual failure, but a correlation and arguable causation in history we should not duplicate.

At the very least, get the damn Feds out from meddling in education!

 

[jasonnfree]

Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.

Damn right. Why? Choice...choice in your education dollar that only competition can produce. With centrally planned education (local, state and feds working together to screw things up), you get NO choice. The outcome, as always, is crappy results and skyrocketing costs.

I don't want a corporation to teach our kids, why do you?

Corporations, partnerships, LLCs, or just one guy that owns the operation...I don't care. The point is with a free market in education, you get choice. With choice comes the NECESSITY to produce superior results and to keep costs in check....or you send your kid to another school.

I don't want government bureaucrats to "teach" our kids, why do you?

Finland produces top students with government schools and they have teachers unions as do other countries with top performing students.

 

[Unkotare]

Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't [sic] explain how or why.

It don't?


The system fails another one...

 

[Moonglow]

much of the planning is done by local committees.

Even if that local planning didn't involve state and federal mandates/funding, which all do, that's no reason for government to run the schools. Should local committees run all markets? Clearly not.

The results speak for themselves. Our kids fail/dropout at an alarming rate. They graduate with 'skills' that wouldn't get them out of the 8th grade a century ago. The costs far outpace the overall rate of inflation. All because THERE IS NO CHOICE in the market for affordable education.

Rome managed to build it's empire without public education of any kind. When they did implement government control of the education market, its timing matched their decline. Not the only reason for their eventual failure, but a correlation and arguable causation in history we should not duplicate.

At the very least, get the damn Feds out from meddling in education!

Louisiana has.
Rome was pre-industrial and the education that was manged during the decline involved the clergy for the new Christian religion.

The Founding Fathers advocated public education as well as libraries.

 

[Unkotare]

Findland produces top students with government schools and they have teachers unions as do other countries with top performing students.

And they have a much smaller population, and that population is much more homogeneous, and they have much less immigration, and they have much less linguistic, economic, and cultural diversity, and a different history, and different standards of measure, and, and, and....

 

[Unkotare]

Our public secondary schools are mandatory, public, and non-competitive. They are not exactly the best in the world.


Our universities - even the public ones - are ultimately based on a competitive model. They are by far the best in the world.


So..............

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance" Sandra Day O'Connor

Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com

I certainly think the same thing every time I read one of your posts. Doesn't make it true, nor does it mean I can explain the cause.

 

[boedicca]

"The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance" Sandra Day O'Connor

Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com

You can thank the federalization of public education combined with self-serving Teachers' Unions. They've transformed schools from institutions of learning into centers of indoctrination and sources of pensions.

 

[asterism]

"The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance" Sandra Day O'Connor

Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com

It's true because the current trend in public schools is against rigorous testing. If kids don't need to know it to graduate and that's all they want to do, they won't know it.

 

[eflatminor]

much of the planning is done by local committees.

Even if that local planning didn't involve state and federal mandates/funding, which all do, that's no reason for government to run the schools. Should local committees run all markets? Clearly not.

The results speak for themselves. Our kids fail/dropout at an alarming rate. They graduate with 'skills' that wouldn't get them out of the 8th grade a century ago. The costs far outpace the overall rate of inflation. All because THERE IS NO CHOICE in the market for affordable education.

Rome managed to build it's empire without public education of any kind. When they did implement government control of the education market, its timing matched their decline. Not the only reason for their eventual failure, but a correlation and arguable causation in history we should not duplicate.

At the very least, get the damn Feds out from meddling in education!

Louisiana has.
Rome was pre-industrial and the education that was manged during the decline involved the clergy for the new Christian religion.

The Founding Fathers advocated public education as well as libraries.

Louisiana still controls education from the state down...and they're not immune to the fed meddling. Again, NO choice in affordable education. If that's your retort, you're missing the point entirely.

That Rome was pre-industrial is completely beside the point. They thrived like no society before them and their decline coincided with government education. It matters not the form of government that controlled the education market. What matters is the lack of choice and competition.

The founding fathers ensured that the Federal government would have NO place in education by specifically enumerating powers, among which you'll not find education.

Fail.

Further, you fail to address the dismal failure that is public education despite the phenomenal amount we spend per student.

Fail again.

Choice, competition...THAT'S what's needed.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I have two major arguments against privatizing education. First and foremost, I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies. Secondly, "choice" exists in the public school system. Most major public education system in the country has merit-based magnet schools and competition - I went to "magnet" schools from 6th grade on, and got a better education in high school than most people get in college.

 

[eflatminor]

Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.

Damn right. Why? Choice...choice in your education dollar that only competition can produce. With centrally planned education (local, state and feds working together to screw things up), you get NO choice. The outcome, as always, is crappy results and skyrocketing costs.

I don't want a corporation to teach our kids, why do you?

Corporations, partnerships, LLCs, or just one guy that owns the operation...I don't care. The point is with a free market in education, you get choice. With choice comes the NECESSITY to produce superior results and to keep costs in check....or you send your kid to another school.

I don't want government bureaucrats to "teach" our kids, why do you?

Finland produces top students with government schools and they have teachers unions as do other countries with top performing students.

Yes, and we could identify a small student population of homogenized, wealthy students of Scandinavian decent here in America that get a reasonable education. America is not a small nation where everyone is exactly alike, practically related.

The status quo HERE is failing. More of the same isn't the answer.