tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post2806401052984482600..comments2024-03-27T08:53:29.267-04:00Comments on CURMUDGUCATION: Collective FreedomPeter Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16511193640285760299noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-41263077103928336452017-07-14T16:24:35.544-04:002017-07-14T16:24:35.544-04:00TE, I'm going on the definition that I infer f...TE, I'm going on the definition that I infer from what Peter wrote: that in a democracy, a public good is something the society thinks is necessary for everyone to have for the good of the whole society, and if it's thought that individuals can't all attain it by themselves, the society pools its resources to provide it for everyone. I don't see that it necessarily has to be produced by the government, but in a democracy, if it's done wth taxpayer money, taxpayers need to have a say in how the money is used. <br /><br />I would say that in "primitive" hunter/forager societies, food and perhaps shelter were considered a public good. Healthcare also, as everyone had access to the shaman or healer. In more "advanced" (complex) societies, it's assumed that most individuals working within the economy (if the economy is working right) will be able to acquire food and shelter for themselves, although members who are handicapped in some way may still need help, and using pooled resources via government taxes is the surest way to make sure they are provided for. In a non-democratic society such as feudalism, education was not considered a public good. It's not necessary for serfs to be educated; in fact, it's better for the oligarchs if they're not. If a society were egalitarian but not highly complex, it would be possible for people to become educated without pooled resources; if all people were highly educated and had the time, parents could teach their children and you wouldn't need schools. I don't know that such a society has ever existed. <br /><br />In today's complex, highly specialized society, even if all parents were highly educated, children would be limited to their parents' specialties, and with the type of economy we have, most parents would not have time. But for a democratic society to work, citizens need to be educated and informed, and for the economy to work, people need skills, and most people can't pay a tutor or a private school, so education is considered a public good. If our economy were truly "advanced", then everyone would earn enough for a private tutor or a private school, and education would not have to be considered a public good.<br /><br />I can't give an opinion on whether the countries you mentioned consider education a public good, because I don't know how the private schools are paid for, if it's from pooled resources or not. Rebecca deCocahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13168718846105012814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-6198011830747709722017-07-14T10:46:35.905-04:002017-07-14T10:46:35.905-04:00Rebecca,
Interesting. When economists say that so...Rebecca,<br /><br />Interesting. When economists say that something is a public good, there is the implication that the government ought to produce the good because decentralized markets will do a poor job of producing the good.<br /><br />You are using the term as an observation about what the government is doing at a particular time and place, without any suggestion that the government should or should not produce the good.<br /><br />There are societies where significant number of students attend private schools among OECD countries. In Hong Kong it is over 90%, in the Netherlands and Dubai it is over 60%, and in Ireland and Chile it is over 50% (source: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisainfocus/48482894.pdf). Would you say that these countries do not think that education is a public good?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-52013515225900608322017-07-14T09:13:55.525-04:002017-07-14T09:13:55.525-04:00@ TeachingEconomist - My undergraduate degree was ...@ TeachingEconomist - My undergraduate degree was in Economics - but it's been a very long time. The classic example of a "public good" is fireworks - and I believe this meets your definition. It is rival (in that your enjoyment of the fireworks shooting in the air does not take away from me doing the same) and it is not excludable (in that you cannot deprive someone of enjoying fireworks). The latter is the key rationale for taxation of public goods. I can say that I don't really like fireworks and therefore don't want to pay for them. But I really do like them. However, I realize that because they are non-excludable, I can enjoy them whether I say I like them (and therefore pay for them) or not. <br /><br />By the way, this is the classic "free rider" problem that unions complain about regarding "right to work" - that non-union employees benefit from the negotiation efforts of the union yet do not pay dues. (They forget to mention that this legitimate problem is a consequence of "exclusive representation" state laws that the unions helped enact.)<br /><br />And yes, by that formal definition of a public good, the military meets the definition but education does not. (I'd argue that roads DO meet this definition in some respects. A corollary to non-excludability is complete fixed costs (like fireworks). On the other hand, road costs can be ascribed to users using tolls.)<br /><br />A broader definition of public good, however, are goods are services that as a society, we have decided to provide regardless of someone's ability to pay. Education meets this definition - but a specific provider or school (including government as a provider) does not. <br /><br />To me, the clear (though imperfect) analogy is Pell Grants for colleges. Sure, government is a provider of college education. And some of them do a good job and are highly desired. But they do NOT have a monopoly (regardless of the fixed cost arguments that Greene has made in the past). Rather, they compete with other colleges which are not government sourced (though almost all of them are non-profit). In large part, that's why our college system is the envy of the world.<br /><br />(Again, it's not a perfect analogy as I'm sure critics of reform will point out. For one thing, Pell grants generally can only fund a portion of college expenses. And yes, that's a valid argument against most vouchers. But charters are a different story specifically because the "ticket" with which a family is given enables them to fully pay for any school - charter or district - and therefore meets this broader definition of public good.)alanbackmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16174033131550945945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-4720978078158858772017-07-14T08:02:49.220-04:002017-07-14T08:02:49.220-04:00Yes, in those societies food and shelter are publi...Yes, in those societies food and shelter are public goods. And it used to be that education was not a public good and only the wealthy were educated. A public good is anything that the whole collective decides that it's important for the whole society for everyone to have and they can't all get it by themselves. But I'm not aware of any country that at the present time doesn't think that education is a public good, whether or not they do a good job of providing it. Rebecca deCocahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13168718846105012814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-43290116535938169882017-07-13T22:17:22.490-04:002017-07-13T22:17:22.490-04:00Rebecca,
I know the definition economists use, I ...Rebecca,<br /><br />I know the definition economists use, I am interested in the definition that Alan is using.<br /><br />Clearly a community could pool resources and produce food that the community eats or pool resources and produce buildings to shelter the community. Some communities have done this in the past, some communities continue to do this. Does that make food and shelter public goods as well? Is it possible that education is a public good in some communities, but in other communities, where they do not pool resources to produce education for the whole community, education is not a public good?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-87730405744699107232017-07-13T21:03:55.031-04:002017-07-13T21:03:55.031-04:00TE, who cares what the technical definition of pub...TE, who cares what the technical definition of public good is according to economists? Obviously we're talking about a community pooling resources for something that is good for the whole community.<br /><br />Alan, your music streaming idea would work for education if taxpayers decided it was in the whole community's interest to pay for all individuals' choices without the whole community's input; if there were truly a plethora of choices, as there is with music; and if all the choices cost about the same, so that whatever money went to the individual would cover any choice. I don't see that happening.<br /><br />There's something to be said for discussion, cooperation, and compromise, which is lost when everybody goes off in their own little corner and does their own thing. Not being rich enough to buy each of my three kids everything they wanted was good for them, as they had to learn to share, make do, and get along. Rebecca deCocahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13168718846105012814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-85422016656601231272017-07-13T16:01:54.055-04:002017-07-13T16:01:54.055-04:00Alan,
The definition of "public good" u...Alan,<br /><br />The definition of "public good" used by economists is that the good is not rival (my use or consumption of the good does not impact your use or consumption of the good) and not excludable (I an not be prevented from using or consuming the good once it is produced). On both counts, education is not a public good (nor are roads), though national defense does count as a public good.<br /><br />What definition of public good are you using?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-66150884717904825342017-07-13T11:54:12.906-04:002017-07-13T11:54:12.906-04:00Important article by Greene. But it touches on a ...Important article by Greene. But it touches on a lot of topics in comparing things to education:<br />1. Bill of Rights - Not a great comparison partially because of what Greene acknowledges - "enumerating the rights possessed by every individual". But second, the Constitution mainly consists of negative liberties - what the government cannot do. (Article 1, Sec 8 is different). So giving someone the freedom to practice their religion does not in any way take away or affect my right to do the same.<br />2. Public Goods - As he has done in the past, Greene compares schools to other public goods like the military or roads. And yes, education is a public good. But as Greene explains, the military is not inherently divisible. (Actually, roads can be ascribed to the user which is the basis behind toll roads.) He answers his own question here - "Rather than just let each family locate their own personal tutor, communities decided that they had a stake in making sure that all children were educated." Notice the words "were educated" rather than making sure that everyone had a school. To some, these two ideas are necessarily synonymous. But they aren't as I illustrate below.<br />3.Music - Greene recognizes that we no longer need to aggregate our music choices into relatively few music stations. "When it comes to bus ride music, we have done away with the collective. We don't pool resources or share decisions-- everyone just brings their own resources and makes do with that." But that dismisses the point too readily. We have simply decided that giving everyone music is not an entitlement, though education is. But just for a minute, imagine Greene's retort was met. Everyone was given money for a music streaming membership. Resources would be collected broadly (just as they are for schools). But each student would still be able to express their particular choice. Sound ideal ? That's the education reform's model. <br /><br />I concede that Greene makes fair points about inherent racism expressed through education reform. "Black and brown taxpayers can pay to send white kids to a segregated private school." However, educational freedom does not absolve schools from the other laws which are already in place. Consider the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prevents "public accommodations" (which includes schools) from discriminating on the basis of race, gender, etc. Just like the example of streaming music, aren't we all better off when we can express our own choice - of course, subject to the laws which we have agreed ? alanbackmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16174033131550945945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-74962502530825936822017-07-13T09:53:51.279-04:002017-07-13T09:53:51.279-04:00Ooops. I realized I quoted the wrong parenthetica...Ooops. I realized I quoted the wrong parenthetical, which makes my subsequent comment rather baffling. Sorry about that. I should have quoted: "(and thereby actually increase individual freedom)"Diennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04570040547158789834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-40595001755856141832017-07-12T19:19:09.307-04:002017-07-12T19:19:09.307-04:00"...(that, they claim, wastes a bunch of tax ..."...(that, they claim, wastes a bunch of tax money anyway)."<br /><br />That is so much more than a parenthetical. If we could get people to understand that one concept the whole country could change course. The type of "freedom" that so many right-wingers (including those in the Democrat Party) are championing boils down to the freedom to be exploited by the most powerful players. It is only the combined force of the collective (the democratic state) that can keep the powerful few in check to provide true freedom for the many.Diennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04570040547158789834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-64383692699350414682017-07-12T17:40:28.478-04:002017-07-12T17:40:28.478-04:00If a picture is worth a thousand "Huzzah!&quo...If a picture is worth a thousand "Huzzah!"s, this should sum up my Huzzah! level here: http://wtf.sunfox.org/vendredi/clapping-crowd-applause.gifCrunchyMamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14434606158400653601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-22588698451759267542017-07-12T15:47:47.684-04:002017-07-12T15:47:47.684-04:00Another "spot-on" discussion of taxation...Another "spot-on" discussion of taxation without representation. Thanks for your good and enduring work!!Shirleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11756613176679057344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-32110568636354973682017-07-12T14:06:34.954-04:002017-07-12T14:06:34.954-04:00Well said, sir. Thank you.Well said, sir. Thank you.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01223251137400603071noreply@blogger.com