But your assumption is that it would be better, also without any testing. It's the very definition of a wicked problem.
> And...? Race of citizens doesn't matter. The city schools, since they face the most competition (due to proximity) would improve the most quickly.
And... that's what happens when people are "allowed to choose their schools". People will find ways to segregate. Unless you want a perpetual chase of the students in the poorer schools to the richer schools? Which is weird. And white flights aren't some hypothetical thing that might happen. It happens. It happened. We know why it happens. We've seen it as a response to things. We shouldn't do those things again and expect a new result.
>Exactly. New models would crop up. Overnight, a new multi-billion dollar industry would be created. Startups would spring up everywhere to get certified and capture that new value.
Private schools exist now. And it's not really "new" value. It'll just redirect the tax money to private enterprises. And those disadvantaged will continue to be. It will further entrench the disenfranchisement of millions of children. And it'll enrich some private citizen.
> That's because there is no competition. In a non-competitive marketplace, there is no forcing function for quality.
Has the education system failed you? I said that breaking up the union would be a race to the bottom. You then infer that the union itself is the race to the bottom. I don't see how you can make that inference from what I said. The "forcing function" wouldn't be one for quality, it would be one for cost.
> Education is a service with the greatest material benefit.
First, I said direct material benefit. Tell me. What does education directly produce in the way of material goods? I'll answer that, nothing. Because education, like you said, is foundational. It is indirect, much like infrastructure and dozens of other things no one wants to pay for. Because the reason no one wants to pay for it is that there is no direct benefit. And I don't care how much people say they care about foundational things or indirect sources, where they prioritize their efforts say otherwise.
Education is not "homogenized". Not by a long shot. Having goals is not the same as the process of achieving those goals.
> That is why they want to churn out homogenized thinkers who are only smart enough to vote for their aligned political faction.
That is a weird way to say that you don't know any teachers at all. Or at the very least, don't listen to them.
But your assumption is that it would be better, also without any testing. It's the very definition of a wicked problem.
> And...? Race of citizens doesn't matter. The city schools, since they face the most competition (due to proximity) would improve the most quickly.
And... that's what happens when people are "allowed to choose their schools". People will find ways to segregate. Unless you want a perpetual chase of the students in the poorer schools to the richer schools? Which is weird. And white flights aren't some hypothetical thing that might happen. It happens. It happened. We know why it happens. We've seen it as a response to things. We shouldn't do those things again and expect a new result.
>Exactly. New models would crop up. Overnight, a new multi-billion dollar industry would be created. Startups would spring up everywhere to get certified and capture that new value.
Private schools exist now. And it's not really "new" value. It'll just redirect the tax money to private enterprises. And those disadvantaged will continue to be. It will further entrench the disenfranchisement of millions of children. And it'll enrich some private citizen.
> That's because there is no competition. In a non-competitive marketplace, there is no forcing function for quality.
Has the education system failed you? I said that breaking up the union would be a race to the bottom. You then infer that the union itself is the race to the bottom. I don't see how you can make that inference from what I said. The "forcing function" wouldn't be one for quality, it would be one for cost.
> Education is a service with the greatest material benefit.
First, I said direct material benefit. Tell me. What does education directly produce in the way of material goods? I'll answer that, nothing. Because education, like you said, is foundational. It is indirect, much like infrastructure and dozens of other things no one wants to pay for. Because the reason no one wants to pay for it is that there is no direct benefit. And I don't care how much people say they care about foundational things or indirect sources, where they prioritize their efforts say otherwise.
Education is not "homogenized". Not by a long shot. Having goals is not the same as the process of achieving those goals.
> That is why they want to churn out homogenized thinkers who are only smart enough to vote for their aligned political faction.
That is a weird way to say that you don't know any teachers at all. Or at the very least, don't listen to them.