3 ms·
Childless taxpayers subsidize the public school system. I get the impression this is a substantial cost already. A better starting point is to take down artifi
by abecedarius 3y ago
Childless taxpayers subsidize the public school system. I get the impression this is a substantial cost already.
A better starting point is to take down artificial costs imposed on childrearing, like https://thezvi.substack.com/p/on-car-seats-as-contraception https://thezvi.substack.com/p/on-car-seats-as-contraception
- nfriedly 3y agoMost people go through the public school system - so childless or not, you could think of that tax as paying back for the education they already received.
- abecedarius 3y ago1. Their parents paid. 2. From my experience of public school it's more of a cost than a benefit. Many thousands of hours wasted, bullying incurred, etc. (That its value was negative does not reduce the other point about cost in taxes.)
- abenga 3y agoTheir parents also received public education. How far back do we go?
- abecedarius 3y agoIf you want to think of it that way, the recursion does have a base case, and it goes how I said. But it's simpler to follow the money in the now.
- analog31 3y agoEverybody subsidizes the school system. And the productivity of educated workers subsidizes everybody. It's the bargain of the millennium.
- abecedarius 3y agoThis is a common belief with terrible support and a good case against it. https://www.econlib.org/caplan-callard-the-case-against-education-at-u-chicago/ https://www.econlib.org/caplan-callard-the-case-against-educ... (I can recommend the book.)
- antisthenes 3y agoCaplan is a well known hack of an economist. Seriously recommending his work betrays a serious lack of knowledge of the field.
- abecedarius 3y agoNamecalling.