5 ms·

The pattern with the government is the same from situation to situation. 1) Government makes something free 2) The market for private delivery of the same thi

The pattern with the government is the same from situation to situation. 1) Government makes something free 2) The market for private delivery of the same thing dries up. Those few that still want to pay must pay much more than they would have before the government started giving it away for free because the market has shrunk so much 3) The same thing happens to alternatives to the thing they made free 4) Decisions are now made by those delivering the process instead of the person choosing between the alternatives. Costs and benefits are no longer weighed together or by the person that cares about the outcome the most. Considerations easily described in resumes and sound bites become uber important 5) The corporations and unions move in and start influencing the decision makers, carving out expensive niches for themselves 6) Things that truly matter but aren't profitable for the politically connected fall by the wayside 7) People getting something free put up with it because ditching the free thing for same thing done right is now a super expensive alternative 8) Delivering the free thing grows more expensive, much faster than the rate of inflation 9) Eventually the tax payers fight back and the costs of delivering the thing are slashed, along with quality. The corporations and unions have to spend and/or threaten more to hang on to their protected positions. 10) Those getting the service for free now have to spend all their time at rallies and fine tuning the stories about how badly they're being treated.

crayz 16y ago
Why is this seemingly not true in other western countries where they have cheaper, better-functioning public institutions? I think there's truth in what you're saying, but the idea that government itself is the sole problem is far too simple an answer
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- karzeem 16y ago
  On education in particular, school choice is common in much of western Europe, and that seems to go some way towards mitigating the effects of government involvement.
  - eftpotrm 16y ago
    School choice is far from an unmitigated blessing - it has a very strong tendency to produce 'sink schools' with very poor outcomes, simply because the parents who care congregate around the schools they think are best. Note think - we know how much the statistics are manipulated, classes are taught to the test to significantly undermine league tables - so you end up with state sponsored failure, waste and the dooming of those children who got stuck in the sink schools because there weren't places elsewhere. If you introduce favouring of more local pupils then property prices rise around the more favoured schools, if you introduce selection by ballot people complain it's 'unfair'. Honestly, I don't think there is a 'perfect system'. But school choice is somewhat illusory when there are limited and largely fixed numbers of places and it honestly has real, significant problems. (As an outsider looking in, the thing that really shocks me about American schools is the consistent, persistent denigration of teachers and implication that so many are only there because their greedy, too-strong unions are protecting them in spite of incompetence and laziness while demanding outrageous salaries and pensions. I forget which country but there was an interesting example given during our election campaign last year of a country with very high outcomes and yet relatively modest teaching salaries, which was alleged to be significantly due to teaching being accorded very high status and very difficult admission criteria. The upshot of this was competent, respected teachers with pride in their jobs and better outcomes all round.)
    - anamax 16y ago
      > As an outsider looking in, the thing that really shocks me about American schools is the consistent, persistent denigration of teachers and implication that so many are only there because their greedy, too-strong unions are protecting them in spite of incompetence and laziness while demanding outrageous salaries and pensions. As an "insider", the thing that really shocks me about outsiders' comments is their assumption that they know enough to comment intelligently about what's going on in the US. Actually, it doesn't shock me at all because it's SOP. We get that you watch US media, but don't confuse that with information. Helpful tip - don't expect warm water at LA's beaches, let alone SF's. Yes, we know that bay watch suggests otherwise, but ....
- stretchwithme 16y ago
  I guess you'd have to cite some examples of what you're talking about. Europe seems to be quite a mess right now, heading in to the austerity phase where quality gets gutted. I do think winner-take-all elections magnify the ability of corporations in the US. Unions are more powerful in Europe and strike paralyze France routinely, which doesn't happen in the US very often. The problem is the government giveaway itself. I don't see proof that most of the same dynamics aren't happening elsewhere; they're just manifesting differently. Human nature and the desire to get something for nothing are the same everywhere you go, as is getting fed up with all the distortions created.
- angus77 16y ago
  Exactly. Canada spends, on average, over $3000 less per student and yet consistently scores significantly higher on the UN's Education Index than the US. No need to look to Europe or the East to find out what can be done better.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    The gap becomes insignificant (524 vs 530 on PISA) once you correct for demographics. http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-about-pisa-scores-usa.html http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-abou... http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-average-american.html http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-...
    - angus77 16y ago
      The "insignificant" gap gets more significant when you remember that the US spends on average more than $3000 more per student per year. It says that the US could cut costs by a third without hurting education in the least. Just where is that $3000+ going?
  - tsotha 16y ago
    Because Canada doesn't share a border with Mexico. The southern US border states absorb almost a million Central and South American peasants every year - people who don't speak English and may not have more than a few years of elementary school.
    - angus77 16y ago
      Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world. Ever been to Toronto? Almost half of the population there is foreign born. Look up Demographics of Toronto on Wikipedia for some stats.
      - tsotha 16y ago
        How many of them are there illegally, with a sixth-grade education, no skills, and no ability to speak English (or French)? It's not immigration, per se, that's the problem. The problem is the type of people we're getting.
- stretchwithme 16y ago
  I think "seemingly" is the key word here.

crayz 16y ago

Why is this seemingly not true in other western countries where they have cheaper, better-functioning public institutions? I think there's truth in what you're saying, but the idea that government itself is the sole problem is far too simple an answer

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
karzeem 16y ago
On education in particular, school choice is common in much of western Europe, and that seems to go some way towards mitigating the effects of government involvement.
- eftpotrm 16y ago
  School choice is far from an unmitigated blessing - it has a very strong tendency to produce 'sink schools' with very poor outcomes, simply because the parents who care congregate around the schools they think are best. Note think - we know how much the statistics are manipulated, classes are taught to the test to significantly undermine league tables - so you end up with state sponsored failure, waste and the dooming of those children who got stuck in the sink schools because there weren't places elsewhere. If you introduce favouring of more local pupils then property prices rise around the more favoured schools, if you introduce selection by ballot people complain it's 'unfair'. Honestly, I don't think there is a 'perfect system'. But school choice is somewhat illusory when there are limited and largely fixed numbers of places and it honestly has real, significant problems. (As an outsider looking in, the thing that really shocks me about American schools is the consistent, persistent denigration of teachers and implication that so many are only there because their greedy, too-strong unions are protecting them in spite of incompetence and laziness while demanding outrageous salaries and pensions. I forget which country but there was an interesting example given during our election campaign last year of a country with very high outcomes and yet relatively modest teaching salaries, which was alleged to be significantly due to teaching being accorded very high status and very difficult admission criteria. The upshot of this was competent, respected teachers with pride in their jobs and better outcomes all round.)
  - anamax 16y ago
    > As an outsider looking in, the thing that really shocks me about American schools is the consistent, persistent denigration of teachers and implication that so many are only there because their greedy, too-strong unions are protecting them in spite of incompetence and laziness while demanding outrageous salaries and pensions. As an "insider", the thing that really shocks me about outsiders' comments is their assumption that they know enough to comment intelligently about what's going on in the US. Actually, it doesn't shock me at all because it's SOP. We get that you watch US media, but don't confuse that with information. Helpful tip - don't expect warm water at LA's beaches, let alone SF's. Yes, we know that bay watch suggests otherwise, but ....
stretchwithme 16y ago
I guess you'd have to cite some examples of what you're talking about. Europe seems to be quite a mess right now, heading in to the austerity phase where quality gets gutted. I do think winner-take-all elections magnify the ability of corporations in the US. Unions are more powerful in Europe and strike paralyze France routinely, which doesn't happen in the US very often. The problem is the government giveaway itself. I don't see proof that most of the same dynamics aren't happening elsewhere; they're just manifesting differently. Human nature and the desire to get something for nothing are the same everywhere you go, as is getting fed up with all the distortions created.
angus77 16y ago
Exactly. Canada spends, on average, over $3000 less per student and yet consistently scores significantly higher on the UN's Education Index than the US. No need to look to Europe or the East to find out what can be done better.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  The gap becomes insignificant (524 vs 530 on PISA) once you correct for demographics. http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-about-pisa-scores-usa.html http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-abou... http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-average-american.html http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-...
  - angus77 16y ago
    The "insignificant" gap gets more significant when you remember that the US spends on average more than $3000 more per student per year. It says that the US could cut costs by a third without hurting education in the least. Just where is that $3000+ going?
- tsotha 16y ago
  Because Canada doesn't share a border with Mexico. The southern US border states absorb almost a million Central and South American peasants every year - people who don't speak English and may not have more than a few years of elementary school.
  - angus77 16y ago
    Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world. Ever been to Toronto? Almost half of the population there is foreign born. Look up Demographics of Toronto on Wikipedia for some stats.
    - tsotha 16y ago
      How many of them are there illegally, with a sixth-grade education, no skills, and no ability to speak English (or French)? It's not immigration, per se, that's the problem. The problem is the type of people we're getting.
stretchwithme 16y ago
I think "seemingly" is the key word here.