> If the argument is that teacher pop growth outpaced student pop growth, therefore there’s an oversupply of teachers, that includes an implicit assumption that

> If the argument is that teacher pop growth outpaced student pop growth, therefore there’s an oversupply of teachers, that includes an implicit assumption that the 1987 ratio was correct. There’s no reason to assume that’s the case. Yes there is. Total cost in K-12 is up 180% since 1970 and results in Math, Science and Reading are basically flat. Employees are up almost 100%. If you almost triple inputs while outputs stay the same you’re probably just wasting money. https://fee.org/thinkecon/articles/the-problem-with-education-isn-t-spending/ https://fee.org/thinkecon/articles/the-problem-with-educatio... https://www.cato.org/blog/public-school-spending-achievement-media-coverage https://www.cato.org/blog/public-school-spending-achievement...