America Needs More Competition in Schooling
The nomination of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education during the Trump administration has opened up the school choice conversation like never before.
Although there hasn’t been much reform made at the federal level, state and local level governments are still on the move. John Stossel highlighted this in the case of Philadelphia. He is correct that with most goods and services “you get to shop around, but rarely can you do that with government-run schools.”
The case he covered dealt with Elaine Wells, a Philadelphia mom who was concerned about her son’s safety at the public school he was currently attending. To improve her son’s education experience, Wells tried to enroll him at a charter school through a school lottery. According to her, the city of Philadelphia “rejected 75% of the applicants.” Thankfully for Wells, she was able to get her son into a charter school.
However, for many inner-city parents, these kinds of choices are not available. Public schools in inner cities often present very dangerous scenarios for young students. From gang violence to the illicit drug trade, these environments can put otherwise promising students on the wrong path.
Much to the dismay of students, education bureaucrats don’t realize this. Instead, they believe in throwing more money at the problem in order to fix it. For example, Stossel notes that “Philadelphia schools already spend $18,400 per child” which totals out to approximately a half a million dollars being spent in the average classroom. Despite such spending, not much of it goes towards teachers.
Instead, it winds up in the bureaucracies’ pockets. Similar dynamics are witnessed in the Baltimore City Public Schools, which spends about $16,187 per pupil, yet only 15 percent of students were able to pass the state’s English test.
Even with these facts considered, public schools around the nation will continue to receive boatloads of money irrespective of their lackluster performance. In 2017 alone, all states and the District of Columbia spent $12,201 per student, representing a 3.7 percent increase from 2016 when spending per pupil was $11,763. What we’re witnessing here is the product of our society treating education like a human right, thereby making the state the principal organization that provides this service.
By using a flawed understanding of what rights actually are, the government has appropriated a function that best belongs in the market. It should be the market and its profit and loss system that determines how a service like education is provided. By distorting this system through state control, consumers are denied quality services and producers have no real incentive to provide a service that is in line with consumer demands.
This is a lose-lose for all parties involved…well, unless you’re part of a teachers union or a bureaucrat — someone who still gets paid big bucks regardless of performance. Charter schools and other school choice policy variants are solid first steps in introducing some form of competition into the education sector. Ideally, the entire education system would be privatized and subject to market forces — just like every other good and service in the economy.
When people’s mindsets on education policy change, we can then move towards a market-based system that harmonizes teacher and student interests.
Although there hasn’t been much reform made at the federal level, state and local level governments are still on the move. John Stossel highlighted this in the case of Philadelphia. He is correct that with most goods and services “you get to shop around, but rarely can you do that with government-run schools.”
The case he covered dealt with Elaine Wells, a Philadelphia mom who was concerned about her son’s safety at the public school he was currently attending. To improve her son’s education experience, Wells tried to enroll him at a charter school through a school lottery. According to her, the city of Philadelphia “rejected 75% of the applicants.” Thankfully for Wells, she was able to get her son into a charter school.
However, for many inner-city parents, these kinds of choices are not available. Public schools in inner cities often present very dangerous scenarios for young students. From gang violence to the illicit drug trade, these environments can put otherwise promising students on the wrong path.
Much to the dismay of students, education bureaucrats don’t realize this. Instead, they believe in throwing more money at the problem in order to fix it. For example, Stossel notes that “Philadelphia schools already spend $18,400 per child” which totals out to approximately a half a million dollars being spent in the average classroom. Despite such spending, not much of it goes towards teachers.
Instead, it winds up in the bureaucracies’ pockets. Similar dynamics are witnessed in the Baltimore City Public Schools, which spends about $16,187 per pupil, yet only 15 percent of students were able to pass the state’s English test.
Even with these facts considered, public schools around the nation will continue to receive boatloads of money irrespective of their lackluster performance. In 2017 alone, all states and the District of Columbia spent $12,201 per student, representing a 3.7 percent increase from 2016 when spending per pupil was $11,763. What we’re witnessing here is the product of our society treating education like a human right, thereby making the state the principal organization that provides this service.
By using a flawed understanding of what rights actually are, the government has appropriated a function that best belongs in the market. It should be the market and its profit and loss system that determines how a service like education is provided. By distorting this system through state control, consumers are denied quality services and producers have no real incentive to provide a service that is in line with consumer demands.
This is a lose-lose for all parties involved…well, unless you’re part of a teachers union or a bureaucrat — someone who still gets paid big bucks regardless of performance. Charter schools and other school choice policy variants are solid first steps in introducing some form of competition into the education sector. Ideally, the entire education system would be privatized and subject to market forces — just like every other good and service in the economy.
When people’s mindsets on education policy change, we can then move towards a market-based system that harmonizes teacher and student interests.
Common arguments for Africa’s poverty include climate, colonialism, and racism. While these factors may contribute to Africa’s underdevelopment, they don’t touch on the elephant in the living room — government intrusion in the economic activities of individuals — a factor present throughout Africa that persists even into the present.
Magatte Wade, a Senegalese businesswoman, understands this. Wade believes that there is too much regulation in African countries such as Senegal. “Once you hire someone, good luck getting rid of them for any reason,” Wade stated. The Senegalese government must approve every firing.
Wade adds that “the tax code is so complicated … worth at least two or three truckloads of paper.” The African entrepreneur set up a lip balm company that uses certain ingredients that are not made in Senegal. In turn, they must be imported. However, the Senegalese government imposes tariffs to supposedly “protect” these industries. What actually happens is that these products become more expensive for consumers. “Some have a 70 percent import tariff on them!” she exclaimed.
To escape such taxes and regulations, people end up bribing public officials, which is commonplace in many developing countries. Corruption should be condemned, but it’s not the root cause of the problems in Africa. Wade correctly asserts that “corruption is a natural consequence of stupid, senseless, idiot laws.”
She even argued that there would be as much corruption in America if taxes and regulations were similar to those of Senegal. Thankfully, America still has a simple 
His efforts to scale back the administrative state have even earned him praise from
Now 
Well, at least that’s what his new labor plan intends to do. Labor Day is past us, but 2020 presidential candidates used the lead-up to this holiday to put forward their demagogic labor plans. Like his presidential campaign in 2016, Bernie Sanders is using his current presidential run to advance his ideas of activist government.
After 
Initially, Mugabe took his time establishing himself as an economic demagogue, making political consolidation of Zimbabwe his top priority during his early years in power. He started his radical redistributionist campaign in 2000 by seizing 
What seemed like a distant threat confined to an authoritarian country like China may now be washing up on our shores.
The Daily Caller 
Naturally, interests groups connected to the state complained about how these reforms would hurt labor rights and environmental protections. After all, many pro-intervention groups cannot fathom the idea of a society that is able to organize itself voluntarily.
Nonetheless, Brazil desperately needs such reforms. The World Bank’s 
Trump’s bombastic criticism of the labor leader came after Trumka slammed Trump’s trade deal with Mexico and Canada in a previous interview on Fox News. Although this attack may have seemed petty, Trump did raise a valid point about the political nature of unions in one of his tweets.
Trump specifically said, “No 
The former El Paso congressman believes that no one in America should be living below the poverty line, hence his support for a $15 minimum wage. Similarly, O’Rourke contends that such a wage increase would boost worker productivity. The $15 minimum wage is in vogue among leftist elites, with states like 
After a series of mass shootings during the last month, Kroger