3 ms·

In how many ways do Krugman's arguments fail? First of all, he's preaching to the choir by ignoring any need to even suggest a casual relationship between Amer

In how many ways do Krugman's arguments fail? First of all, he's preaching to the choir by ignoring any need to even suggest a casual relationship between American economic prosperity and the availability of formal education. Then, he ignores the difference between public spending on higher education and the availability of education overall. >Education made America great; I'd argue that individual freedom led to American prosperity, and individuals' choice to partake in education was merely a consequence of a free society. How can someone look at OpenCourseware, free textbooks, and the self-organizing study groups surrounding the former two and not conclude that education is more available than ever before? Up until WW2, going to college was an unlikely occurrence for the child of parents who had not themselves gone. Was the "American Century" really the result of upper middle class education alone? It was not until the GI bill that college became an odd expectation. The underlying logical fallacy in Krugman's piece is that attending college is the only form of "higher" education available or even desirable. Shouldn't we instead be asking why lower socio-economic status Americans seem to have adopted an anti-learning cultural bias? Why, as Dean Kamen asks, do we not celebrate society's engineering achievements? It's thinkers? Government subsidy of education is one convenient target of many for those who think more government is the answer to all of society's ills. Never before in America has so much knowledge been available for free from the comfort of one's home (star), and yet he argues that we have some sort of education crisis. (star) Even at minimum wage, an internet connection only costs at most a few hours labor per month. And, the computer sufficient to partake in this knowledge can probably be found at some upper-middle class curb on garbage day.

mdakin 17y ago
I'd argue that individual freedom led to American prosperity, and individuals' choice to partake in education was merely a consequence of a free society. You could argue that but it is wrong (well, at least the education-specific bit). Mandatory education in America traces back to the culture (in general) and the enacted legislation (in particular) of the Puritan settlers of New England. The Puritans believed in universal literacy so that everyone could read scripture. They passed laws mandating child literacy and required towns to hire teachers to teach the children. This was all mandated and required by the government and in some sense that can be construed taking choice AWAY from individuals rather than giving choice to them. At the time this system and these requirements were unique in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan#Education http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan#Education
- tokenadult 17y ago
  Compulsory school attendance (as contrasted with tax-supported provision of schools) came later in American history. And the history of the colonies where Puritans were not the majority was also different. But Americans in general cherished literacy, and got that without much school attendance. When Horace Mann finally made school attendance compulsory in the modern sense in the 1850s in Massachusetts, he reported in his Common School Journal that more than 90 percent of the inhabitants of Massachusetts were literate. Earlier, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Is it a right or a duty in society to take care of their infant members in opposition to the will of the parent? . . . It is better to tolerate the rare instance of a parent refusing to let his child be educated, than to shock the common feelings and ideas by the forcible asportation and education of the infant against the will of the father. What is proposed here is to remove the objection of expense, by offering education gratis . . ." Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Cabell, September 9, 1817, reprinted in Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Memorial Edition 1904) volume 17, page 423. http://learninfreedom.org/Founders_free.html http://learninfreedom.org/Founders_free.html
  - mdakin 17y ago
    My point is that education/literacy in America is not something that magically emerged on its own but is something that was mandated by the earliest settlers. These particular settlers, regardless of number/geographic footprint, exert great cultural influence up until this very day. As time went on their meme spread out and mutated, and we have what we have now which is universal public education. Compulsory school attendance seems like a different question, and more like an implementation detail to me. At least today school attendance is not compulsory if the parents arrange for the child to be educated up to the currently mandated educational standards. (i.e. Homeschooling is legal.)
    - kingkongrevenge 17y ago
      There was high literacy because Americans were more affluent. Slaves and indentured servants aside, there simply weren't the masses of deeply impoverished folks toiling long hours to survive as were common in Europe. People had the leisure to read. The public schooling movement had nothing to do with literacy or a culture that valued education. It was about nationalism and cultural uniformity. Elite WASPs wanted to hammer all those urban Catholics and ethnically disparate (German, French speaking, etc) rural kids into Americans in their own image. There was armed resistance to public schooling. It was something imposed on communities that did not want or need it.
timwiseman 17y ago
Beautiful points. To add to them, I highly doubt that people who truly want failing to go to college due to the cost of college is common occurrence. Student loans are relatively easy to get, much financial aid is need based, and if all else fails the military will pay 100% tuition in most cases. I do know of people that had to leave college in order to financially provide for family members, for instance an unexpected pregnancy, but that is different than the cost of college itself being a problem.
linhir 17y ago
As Sandel points out, there are three classic ways to categorize justice: welfare, freedom and virtue. Although I doubt that we need to have a long conversation here, I think that what is great in America has not been that it maximizes freedom over all else, but rather that it has continued to find an appropriate balance between these conceptions of just government action. To dismiss the idea that promoting welfare--through education--is a worthy ideal of our government, and rather to say that freedom is the paramount ideal is short-sided, and naive. Krugman's point may not be convincing, but neither is yours that unfettered liberty is the reason that America has prospered. Krugman's inaccuracy, in my opinion, is not that America's education was a driving force in economic growth, particularly in post-war America, but rather that the federal government was a driving force in the growth of education. The sad thing is that the arguments we have today are not all that dissimilar from the ones that were had on the local levels during the common school movement in the 19th century. Some felt that certain segments of the population were not worth being educated, which is essentially what a lot of people today are supporting with a radically inequitable system, especially for those from poorer (both monetarily and 'culturally'). OCW is a laudable example of open education, but that does little to address one of the key points that Krugman is making. Namely, that on indicators of educational success far lower than college education, we are failing so many of our students. The fact that I can read graduate level micro notes from MIT doesn't help someone who can't properly add because they were provided with poor primary education in the Bronx. I'm a firm believer in the idea that we rise and fall by our citizens, and it is sad that so many of our citizens are provided with substandard education. To that end, whether you think that federal government does or does not have a role in the educational system, I think we can all agree that something needs to be done, or we will continue to fall behind the rest of the industrial world.

mdakin 17y ago

I'd argue that individual freedom led to American prosperity, and individuals' choice to partake in education was merely a consequence of a free society. You could argue that but it is wrong (well, at least the education-specific bit). Mandatory education in America traces back to the culture (in general) and the enacted legislation (in particular) of the Puritan settlers of New England. The Puritans believed in universal literacy so that everyone could read scripture. They passed laws mandating child literacy and required towns to hire teachers to teach the children. This was all mandated and required by the government and in some sense that can be construed taking choice AWAY from individuals rather than giving choice to them. At the time this system and these requirements were unique in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan#Education http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan#Education

tokenadult 17y ago
Compulsory school attendance (as contrasted with tax-supported provision of schools) came later in American history. And the history of the colonies where Puritans were not the majority was also different. But Americans in general cherished literacy, and got that without much school attendance. When Horace Mann finally made school attendance compulsory in the modern sense in the 1850s in Massachusetts, he reported in his Common School Journal that more than 90 percent of the inhabitants of Massachusetts were literate. Earlier, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Is it a right or a duty in society to take care of their infant members in opposition to the will of the parent? . . . It is better to tolerate the rare instance of a parent refusing to let his child be educated, than to shock the common feelings and ideas by the forcible asportation and education of the infant against the will of the father. What is proposed here is to remove the objection of expense, by offering education gratis . . ." Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Cabell, September 9, 1817, reprinted in Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Memorial Edition 1904) volume 17, page 423. http://learninfreedom.org/Founders_free.html http://learninfreedom.org/Founders_free.html
- mdakin 17y ago
  My point is that education/literacy in America is not something that magically emerged on its own but is something that was mandated by the earliest settlers. These particular settlers, regardless of number/geographic footprint, exert great cultural influence up until this very day. As time went on their meme spread out and mutated, and we have what we have now which is universal public education. Compulsory school attendance seems like a different question, and more like an implementation detail to me. At least today school attendance is not compulsory if the parents arrange for the child to be educated up to the currently mandated educational standards. (i.e. Homeschooling is legal.)
  - kingkongrevenge 17y ago
    There was high literacy because Americans were more affluent. Slaves and indentured servants aside, there simply weren't the masses of deeply impoverished folks toiling long hours to survive as were common in Europe. People had the leisure to read. The public schooling movement had nothing to do with literacy or a culture that valued education. It was about nationalism and cultural uniformity. Elite WASPs wanted to hammer all those urban Catholics and ethnically disparate (German, French speaking, etc) rural kids into Americans in their own image. There was armed resistance to public schooling. It was something imposed on communities that did not want or need it.

timwiseman 17y ago

Beautiful points. To add to them, I highly doubt that people who truly want failing to go to college due to the cost of college is common occurrence. Student loans are relatively easy to get, much financial aid is need based, and if all else fails the military will pay 100% tuition in most cases. I do know of people that had to leave college in order to financially provide for family members, for instance an unexpected pregnancy, but that is different than the cost of college itself being a problem.

linhir 17y ago

As Sandel points out, there are three classic ways to categorize justice: welfare, freedom and virtue. Although I doubt that we need to have a long conversation here, I think that what is great in America has not been that it maximizes freedom over all else, but rather that it has continued to find an appropriate balance between these conceptions of just government action. To dismiss the idea that promoting welfare--through education--is a worthy ideal of our government, and rather to say that freedom is the paramount ideal is short-sided, and naive. Krugman's point may not be convincing, but neither is yours that unfettered liberty is the reason that America has prospered. Krugman's inaccuracy, in my opinion, is not that America's education was a driving force in economic growth, particularly in post-war America, but rather that the federal government was a driving force in the growth of education. The sad thing is that the arguments we have today are not all that dissimilar from the ones that were had on the local levels during the common school movement in the 19th century. Some felt that certain segments of the population were not worth being educated, which is essentially what a lot of people today are supporting with a radically inequitable system, especially for those from poorer (both monetarily and 'culturally'). OCW is a laudable example of open education, but that does little to address one of the key points that Krugman is making. Namely, that on indicators of educational success far lower than college education, we are failing so many of our students. The fact that I can read graduate level micro notes from MIT doesn't help someone who can't properly add because they were provided with poor primary education in the Bronx. I'm a firm believer in the idea that we rise and fall by our citizens, and it is sad that so many of our citizens are provided with substandard education. To that end, whether you think that federal government does or does not have a role in the educational system, I think we can all agree that something needs to be done, or we will continue to fall behind the rest of the industrial world.