[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]

"Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net> writes:

> Matthias Julius wrote:
>> Curt Howland <Howland@priss.com> writes:
>>>For $200, you can get the Robinson Curriculum, a complete K-12 home 
>>>study kit, except math books. Math books are $50 each, new, approx 
>>>one per year depending on student speed and aptitude of course.
>>>So even at the slowest, full 13 years worth of math books and the rest 
>>>of it, is $850. Total. And you get to resell or reuse the math books.
>> How do you do that when you have to go to work?
> How do you do it *now* when you have to go to work?

I send them to school?

>>>The public schools in the United States spend MORE THAN $10,000 (TEN 
>>>THOUSAND DOLLARS) per student EACH YEAR, EVERY YEAR, and it's only 
>>>going up.
>> Why is that so?  Just because it is a public school?  Why is a public
>> school by definition so different from a private school?  Is there no
>> way of making a public school more (cost-)efficient?
> No.  That is the point.  By definition, government has no incentive to
> be efficient.  If it did, half the problems (number pulled from my hat)
> that exist in American government would likely cease to exist.  If
> schools were run more like the Postal Service, that would be a step in
> the right direction.  But wait, we actually have to *pay* postage.  So
> if people want to continue to be able to send their kids to school for
> "free," there is no way to make it efficient.

I don't think any government likes to be beaten for increasing debt or
raising taxes.  And improving the public school system could be a very
good reason for reelection.

What the public school system lacks is an equivalent of revenue, some
benchmark other than the grades of its graduates.  Those are cheap.


Reply to: