|
|
Delving a little deeper...
   
Keep
in mind the libertarian assumption that government messes up anything
it touches by one or more of the following: inefficiency, incompetence,
or corruption. Yes there are some very good public school districts in
terms of the product they produce. But even they could do what they
could do much more efficiently if they were subject to market
conditions. Market conditions, competition, free enterprise are what
keep prices down and quality up.
Also keep in mind that
libertarians oppose force. Yet in this democracy, all property owners
are forced to fund the public schools where they own property, whether
or not they have children or they choose to send their children to the
local public school. Should they choose to decline paying the big tax
bill, eventually people with guns would come and take their property
from them. If this were done by a private company, we would call it
stealing, or even organized crime. Because it is done by the
government, we accept it as lawful and just.
The root of the
problem is the force issue. Because children are forced by the
government to attend school, and because property owners are forced to
fund public schools, the problem of under-performing schools becomes a
political problem. Much time is spent in elections from the Presidency
on down, debating what has caused our current "education problem" and
what would fix it. Though some candidates discuss vouchers or charter
schools, no one dares say the government should get out of the
education business all together, but that is the simple solution, if
you allow yourself to think outside of the box.
If we are no
longer compelled to pay for schools that don't perform well, or send
our children to these schools, it is a non-issue. In that situation,
parents would look for the best schools for their children. Schools
that do not perform well would either improve or be out of business.
The cost of quality of any particular school would not be a matter of
national policy, but a matter of interest only to the students,
parents, faculty and administration of a given school.
If
there were no school tax or no sales tax, parents would have additional
money in their pockets to pay for their children's education. Obviously
financial aid and scholarships would also be more plentiful because
many private citizens who have already educated their children, who
have no children, or who are wealthy and concerned about their
neighbors' children, would give generously to fund education for the
less fortunate. Churches, which already provide affordable education to
their parishioners families, would be able to do even more because,
again, their members would not be subsidizing public education while
also subsidizing parochial education.
With government
regulation and mandates out of the way, each school would be free to be
creataive with programming, format, and approach, in order to serve a
particular population as a speciality school, or to serve their own
unique student body as best defined by the school community. Parents
who wished to home school their children could do so, again, without
having to subsidize public education while also paying for private
testing and accreditation.
|
|