Jackson50 said:
1. Education is an inherently private good. There really is no way to disagree with that. It is both rivalrous and excludable. I would say public funding of education is one of the greatest developments in human history. Subsidizing the producer is never the optimal choice. Subsidizing the consumer, however, allows for choice in schooling and will efficiently allocate educational resources. There are other areas where the government chooses to subsidize the consumer as opposed to the producer. One such instance is food stamps. Instead of creating government owned grocery stores, we subsidize the consumer through food stamps. 2. I diversify my investments. Whether it is bonds, a Roth IRA, a 401K and so on. To suggest, however, that someone should invest in social security because the market may fail-haha-is surprising. The (potential) wealth created by other investments should be more than enough to offset the costs of the low rate of returns on social security.
|
I think education is a basic human right, and I think your education should be safer than the shopping skills of your parents and how much money they have. Not every parent can afford to pay more for a better education for their kids. That means poor families put their kids in poor schools. That would be very bad.
Or am I missing something here? What if a parent doesn't want to buy an education for their stupid expensive baby? Is the magical Libertarian government going to invade my privacy and tell me how to raise my kid or force me to put them in school? I'll shoot the sons of bitches. They can't tell me how to spend my money.












