Yale Daily News

The problem was that privatization was not fully embraced.

It's not enough to just bring in Aramark as a cost cutting measure.

The public school system is inherently broken.

Government has no business being in the education sector.

Private schools, Charter Schools, Independent schools routinely out perform public schools.

Vote in School Vouchers and you will see the free market forces at work to save education in CT.

"Private schools, Charter schools, Independent schools routinely out perform public schools" — because they attract the best students, and the most involved parents. The simple act of moving your kid to a non-public school implies a concern with their education that not all parents necessarily see as important. Before you say you want private schools, remember that with any private good and market forces, someone always has none. Someone is homeless, someone goes for want of a meal — just because you hate YSFP you're willing to decide that some young kid doesn't need or deserve an education?

Instead of complaining, get involved for G-d's sake. Yes, the education system is broken, but there is nothing inherent about it. But complicated? Yes. For example, is it really any surprise that families with a single parent working two minimum wage job to make ends meet might not have as much time to read to their kids and get them going early as a stay-at-home mom or dad who drives their kids to pre-school and then has time to go work out at the gym for two hours?

Get real. Libertarianism is a coherent intellectual exercise — and an excuse for not doing anything in the real world.

Wow, how la-de-dah can you be? Well, YSFP would cost extra, but of course it's worth it. How do you know that? Where's your research? I thought not.

Also, on the issue of charter schools, you're essentially saying to a parent with motivation "I don't care about your kid, I'm going to trap him in a terrible school where he's doomed to fail because to give him the option to escape would be unfair to kids whose parents don't care, and your primary obligation is to those kids."

Approve school vouchers and let the free market work.

Then there is no issue with income or geographic disparity.

The bad schools will fall and die on their own, while the good schools will flourish and others will copy them.

I am humble enough to realize that I don't have all the answers to fix education. I don't know enough to tell teachers how to teach.

But there are great teachers, principals, administrators out there.

The government can't efficiently find them.

Only a competitive free market can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw

Stupid in America

Again, I'm actually curious to have you answer the question instead of avoiding it:

In any market economy, some people will have nothing.

In a market education system, some children will not be able to afford education.

Sure, you could subsidize them, set price ceilings, and give vouchers — but since when do libertarians think price controls work? (... which you would have to have because otherwise schools would have every incentive to change an outrageous sum if the government would pay it all.)

Secondly, while there are great teachers, there are also good teachers, and okay teachers, and great students, and good students, and okay students. And poor students and teachers as well. All of those students, no matter which teacher they have, deserve an education.

You say they will "copy them." Sorry, try again. It's not so easy.

What's next: good lawyers should "copy" great lawyers? Mediocre politicians should "copy" great politicians? Programs work for a multitude of very complicated reasons, not easily emulated. That's why the governments funds them: because in some places, education is NOT going to be cost effective in the short term, profit-driven sense.

You also pretend income and geography don't matter, but provide no evidence, just your word. There are cultural differences that affect how different students approach education. There are differences in nutrition, based on socio-economics, that determine how ready a student is to learn when he or she arrives at school at 8 a.m.

Please — I'd love to hear your answer, detailed, and well-supported. No need to provide lengthy responses; I'd go for a few interesting links because I'm interested to read them.

Because right now, the holier-than-thou attitude espoused by libertarians is beyond grating. Don't think you have a monopoly of understanding on how a market economy works.

Truisms like "Only a competitive free market can." don't say anything at all.

I support government involvement — but that is because I understand and appreciate market economies — not because I am ignorant of them.

Here's an answer: stop dragging down those who want to learn and have dedicated parents by letting the less able/less prepared/less interested kids and their parents set the norm. You may be perfectly comfortable telling a kid and his parents "sorry, we're not going to let you escape to a better school where you can learn with similarly-minded kids, backed by supportive parents" - I'm not willing to say that.

two things:

1. We can never have real equality of opportunity without egregious restrictions of freedom. Kids whose parents talk about politics around the dinner table will have an advantage over kids whose parents talk about LOST. It's something you just can't account for.

2. Why should Yalies volunteer for New Haven? Let the city stop making stupid decisions (ie: hire a different food contractor instead of trying to get the goverment into yet another business where it will do poorly and inefficiently). No one, not even Yalies(!) wants to see their work go down the drain due to gross incompetence.