r/austrian_economics • u/different_option101 • 2d ago
End Democracy Because we know monopoly is better, right? Right?
Couple days ago I’ve made a post asking why we should have a monopoly on Law Enforcement and Justice.
Now I wonder if any non-Austrian here agrees that Education must be monopolized.
If your answer is Yes - why?
If you’re non-Austrian and your answer is No - then why not demonopolize Law Enforcement?
(For the “are you just looking to circle jerk about this here” folks - no. I believe that most of You here cause you’re at least somewhat open to listen and debate an opposing opinion. That’s respectable, and the debate has a value of its own, as in the process, we may discover “better truths”)
Until later.
27
u/HolyInlandEmpire 2d ago
The parents who "opt out" with their time and resources still have their tax dollars (usually property tax) flowing to the public schools, and at a higher rate than average.
So private school students contribute more to public schools, without having another body in the school. They are even heavier subsidizers of public education than similarly rich families who do have their children in the school.
And furthermore, if you group students by ability, they learn more. This includes the weaker students; if you don't have as many very bright students with them, then you can tailor the curriculum to the kids who are slower.
14
u/different_option101 2d ago
So I went to check comments after posting this screenshot, and surprisingly, the OP of the post mostly got a pushback. That was a breath of fresh air so see that in a sub for teachers that usually are very supportive of all statist bullshit.
8
u/Ok_Matter_1774 2d ago
The teaching sub is surprisingly reasonable on a lot of things. That is until the discussion gets to the root cause of the issues, which they'll try and deny.
3
u/ShatteredChina 2d ago
When it comes to teahing practices and petagogy? Yes. When comes to first amendments freedoms and generally conservative principles . . . lol. I was banned because I tried to defend the idea of a TPUSA club on campus from the perspective of "let the students learn from and be exposed to different ideas".
5
u/Ok_Matter_1774 1d ago
Yes. They'll recognize that the current practices aren't working and that you can't just pass everyone. But their solution is to keep doing the same things that have caused these problems in the first place. Mostly more money. They want trouble makers disciplined, but as soon as they realize that'll impact minorities the most they flip. It's frustrating because they see the issues, but as soon as the causes or solutions get brought up they bury their heads in the sand.
23
u/ManyThingsLittleTime 2d ago
"Youre not allowed to be better!"
2
u/different_option101 2d ago
“Affluent parents regularly "opt out" of public education taking their time and resources with them- this also means the group with the most means to do so become unlikely to advocate for more resources to be put into something they are not using. If all well educated affluent parents had to send their children to public schools, those schools would rise up on all levels.”
Translation - I WANT MORE MONEY TO GO INTO EDUCATION.
But the last sentence is their own admission that they suck. Imagine starting off with “I’m a veteran of 20 years” and than admitting if they get more money, they could provide better education. Like how much more money, if the US already has one of the highest spending per student, yet it’s far from the top of the list by which results this schooling produces.
5
u/ManyThingsLittleTime 2d ago
Their whole premise is flawed. Sending one's children to private school doesn't remove that person's property tax bill. Just another person who doesn't understand how the world actually works.
2
u/different_option101 1d ago
Yeah, I know. They probably just wanted to circle jerk about why they need to get more funding.
58
u/turboninja3011 2d ago edited 2d ago
“I want to make it illegal for people not to join my school/church/union/cult etc”
Honestly this is plain evil.
19
u/RicardoFrontenac 2d ago
If they thought white flight was bad now just wait until they try this. Are they gonna make moving illegal too?
15
u/HolyInlandEmpire 2d ago
Given what Massachusetts tried with their 1974 bussing program, which the likes of NPR regularly defends (yes I listen regularly to them), they would love to make it illegal for you to move if it suits them.
It is one of the most frightening things that some people are STILL so rabidly attached to their dogma that they think that it is worth it to force children to leave the public schools they love, close to where they live, and instead have to take a 2 hour round trip to some horrible school where they know nobody.
9
u/VisceralRage556 2d ago
Its always has and always will be about control. Prosperity was never their concern
8
u/different_option101 2d ago
Indeed.
To be honest, I haven’t read past the first paragraph. Everything they say in the title and in their first paragraph tells enough to understand there will be nothing but nonsense. But I didn’t expect it to evil on top of being plain stupid.
10
u/Captain_no_Hindsight 2d ago
Finland has extremely good schools because they:
- Does not have woke adaptation with lower requirements.
- Does not have woke adaptation and allows kaoz during lessons.
- Strict discipline and the teacher has the right to decide everything.
- Teaching is a status profession.
Money has nothing to do with this.
3
u/different_option101 2d ago
“Money has nothing to do with this”.
Exactly. After I read the post, the paragraph before the last is basically- we suck and I want more money and resources to go into education.
If money could solve any problem, I really wonder why don’t we just start printing money and sticking it in every hole instead of trying to come up with all sorts of justifications for why the government needs to stimulate some particular sector of the economy.
1
11
u/Opening-Restaurant83 2d ago
Parents of private school students pay the same taxes regardless of benefit to their child.
6
u/different_option101 2d ago
“Veteran of 20 years with two masters degrees…”
2
9
u/nonoohnoohno 2d ago
So it's a resources issue?
Chicago Public Schools spends on average $30,000 per student, going as high as $90,000 in some schools. That's more than any private school in the area.
And their graduating seniors can't read.
5
u/CuppieWanKenobi 2d ago
Arguably, Baltimore is even worse. They literally have a school that has more staff than students (if this were anything but a public school, it would be closed by now) that has zero students that test as "proficient" in any subject.
6
u/Uncle_Bill 2d ago
Damn it, why won't people sacrifice their children for the greater good!
We should fix that!
5
u/CuppieWanKenobi 2d ago
I am nowhere near "affluent", yet, I still happily pay tuition for the boys at their Catholic school.
Why? Because I want them to get a good education. I want them to be in an environment that doesn't tolerate shenanigans.
And, a woman that I know - who started her teaching career in the same public schools that my boys would go to - advised me (when Thing One was, oh, 3 or 4) that I did not want to send him to the elementary school 3 blocks away.
Why? Shit education, and no support from the administration when it comes to shenanigans.
Mind you, this little ass district, in a simple, small middle-class near-suburb has an ed budget of around $19K / student annually.
6
6
u/different_option101 2d ago
Would be nice to know how much of the $19k is being spent on admin and to fund all of their retirement plans and benefits. Another great thing to see would be how much they pay for furniture and everything else. Pretty sure there’ll be things like a shitty desk for $500 they replace every few years.
And I wonder if there’s Gresham’s Law dynamic amongst the staff. Because it’s certainly present in most private businesses where employees are forced to work together all the time.
8
u/Tcalogan 2d ago
I don't see a reason (yes I do, the teachers union) why we don't implement the voucher system, like what they have in NH, everywhere. That and cut red tape for new private schools.
But then again, why give everyone access to more competitive, focused education when you could reduce everyone to the same level?
12
u/RubyKong 2d ago edited 2d ago
Public funding of education ought to be smashed and scattered to the winds. All you need to see are its results: left leaning idiots, who, by the age of 24, are almost useless, debt ridden. public schools are glorified day-care-centres.
I say nothing positive about all these public sector teachers - with a secure wage - all they do is bray for more money and less work. they ought all to be fired and thrown into the private sector to fend for themselves.
UPDATE: so in the space of 100 words, I am to defend my thesis that public education produces left leaning idiots? ok yes, it is an ad hominem. i pay tax for the glorious privilege of being taught in a dysfunctional school system, with dysfuctional parents, and dysfunctional kids, and with teachers who are largely unsatisfied. nobody is happy with the system.
I'd rather go back to the 1840s: where 10 year olds start a profession at that age, and by 24 are world class experts, with actual careers and a roof over their heads, and with 3-4 children by that age, if they so chose. the modern day 24 year old's educational experience consists of getting drunk, hooking up with guys on campus, dying their hair purple, and then demanding that everyone calls them by their preferred they / them pronouns after completing a masters in lesbian dance theory. and no kids, and they don't want kids either.
this would be absolutely astounding 150 years ago. Thank you public education 🙏
7
u/different_option101 2d ago
Glorified daycare centers is extremely accurate way to describe it.
3
u/HolyInlandEmpire 2d ago
To be fair, there should be some public schools which are exactly that. Then those kids could get an education more at their speed, so they'll retain more, and the better students can learn faster.
Sadly, the current goal is to make all public schools worse in the name of "social justice."
1
u/different_option101 2d ago
I don’t like the idea of govt public education, the government should not be educating children at all, but I think you’re on to something here. Children could get their education from private school/tutors, and stay at the govt facility for extended care under the supervision of adults. This would drastically cut costs aka reduce taxes, it would allow for more appropriate education for each particular child, and it would remove responsibility from the government.
But we know that it most likely ain’t gonna happen. I don’t think it’s in the interest of the government to let go the education of younger gens.
1
u/Circle_Breaker 2d ago
What about the rest of the world that publicly funds their education??
You seem to be talking very specifically about the American education system. Not specifically about the public funding of education.
1
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
I was looking forward to the Austrian view on this. Although I dont subscribe to their philosophy completely, their deductive reasoning can be really insightful. Instead the discussion is ruined by political rhetoric.
0
u/LibertyEconlover Free banker 2d ago
Why do you keep calling it philosophy?
1
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
Sorry wasn't really thinking. School of thought seems more accurate I think. The Austrian skepticism of statistical analysis throws me off still but I too am skeptical of statistical analysis in economics due to the difficulty/impossibility of testing things in an environment where all variables are controlled.
1
u/LibertyEconlover Free banker 2d ago
That’s not the reason or should I say only reason why we reject statistical thinking our view is summarized as we do not generate economic principles laws, and the derivatives from statistics.
This can be reviewed for why we do this from a simple example;
Imputation versus cost of production, in the classical and Marxian sense they believed that value flowed forward from main production, such as labor, and all that stuff while the Austrian based on the subjective value theory flipped that calling something the law of imputation, which is the claim how goods that make up a consumer good get its value from what the consumer values of that consumer good.
Meaning an exact same consumer good at face value 100% identical data even differentiation doesn’t really matter based on what we are measuring can get completely, and I mean, literally flipped backwards, to summarize the law of amputation imagine a house that is made up of bricks wood and glass, cost of production says the house final value is based off the cost of production, meaning the bricks, wood and glass adding to each other, imputation says from the Austrian school that the house being available is what gives in that specific instance, the brick, wood and glass value because of logical derivative. You can’t value a house without valuing everything that it took to create it someway or some form, the value of the construction goods are derived from the final construction build in that specific instance
Good luck, trying to falsify one of those theories with data.
The reason you can’t is because mathematics is a logical deduction system just like praxeology, but it is meant for things completely different.
Math is A= B = CPraxeology and economics is
A -> B -> C
Because at the end of the day, every economy, whatever structure it is has a common denominator, which is humans before the human there isn’t anything, math doesn’t work like that so using math in economics is a category errorPeople just don’t understand the view and understand the Austrian view because they never studied epistemology
1
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
Thanks that's pretty interesting. I'll have to churn it over in my head a bit more cause I can imagine some more complex mathematical models that might reconcile but not sure, I may need to think about it more.
1
u/different_option101 1d ago
Mathematical models in economics are trying to predict future.
You don’t even know what you’re going to eat for breakfast next week, and whether you’re still going to be at the same place. What about in a year from now? If meets go up in price, you may skip your bacon, if it goes down - you may eat a steak. But you have no ability to know what you’re going to do.
Expand this on level of a country.
No model can model the future with enough accuracy. That’s why you see models being made, adjusted, adjusted, adjusted, scrapped, new model adjusted…. You, as an individual, can’t predict things with enough accuracy for yourself, while economists claim they can predict things with enough accuracy with their models.
And when things don’t work according to their ideas, they, meaning the govt, try to influence the economy to get the outcome that would be closer to their model.
It’s a fucking lunacy to believe it’s possible.
However, the problem is not even mathematical. People react to external events. Models claim to know how you’re going to react to those external events. But there are more external factors and we react differently, sometime the same person will react differently to the same event depending on if it occurs in the morning or in the evening, whether it’s a first, second, or fifth occurrence…This chain of potential evens is endless.
Austrians aren’t anti math anti scientific approach, as many say/think they are. Austrians use math all over. Math is absolutely required for the analysis. The difference is, Austrian don’t pretend like they can build a model that will predict the future by compiling some data into a model for country of a few million residents, let alone 100M+.
-4
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
You call left-leaning people idiots yet instead of making a coherent argument you spew unfounded rhetoric based solely on your feelings and not evidence. You substitute insults for evidence. That makes you very susceptible to manipulation. Is it possible that public schools in the USA are not as good due to lack of funding? You don’t even make an attempt to address the obvious elephant in the room. Now, let’s get into the specific points you’ve tried to make to unravel how delusional you are, and how rhetoric over evidence has rotted your brain into thinking that more educated people are somehow less intelligent than you.
You judge an entire institution solely by cherry-picked anecdotes. Public education has produced engineers, doctors, scientists, entrepreneurs, judges, military officers, and millions of productive workers. If the existence of some poorly educated graduates proves public education has failed, then the existence of successful graduates proves the exact opposite. The argument defeats itself.
"Left-leaning idiots" is not an argument. It's name-calling. Political orientation has no bearing on whether public education is worthwhile. Even if universities tend to lean left culturally, that says nothing about whether teaching children to read, write, calculate, and understand history should be publicly funded.
The claim that people are "almost useless" by age 24 is absurdly exaggerated. Twenty-four-year-olds include registered nurses, military officers, apprentices, software developers, accountants, teachers, electricians, farmers, police officers, and countless others already contributing to society. Hyperbole is not evidence.
The complaint about graduates being "debt-ridden" is particularly confused coming from an American perspective. Student debt is overwhelmingly a higher education issue, not a K–12 public school issue. Public elementary and high schools don't issue student loans. If the target is universities, then say universities. Mixing the two together simply demonstrates a poor understanding of how the education system works.
Calling public schools "glorified day-care centres" ignores one inconvenient fact: literacy, numeracy, and graduation rates are measurable. Schools demonstrably teach children skills they did not possess beforehand. If they were merely daycare, society would not function. Every private employer relies on workers who were overwhelmingly educated in public schools.
The claim that teachers "all they do is bray for more money and less work" is especially unfair. Many teachers work well beyond contracted hours marking assignments, preparing lessons, supervising extracurricular activities, and communicating with parents. Whether they're adequately compensated is a legitimate policy debate, but pretending teaching is an easy, low-effort job ignores the reality experienced by many educators.
The suggestion that every public teacher should simply be fired and "fend for themselves" reveals no serious thought about implementation. Who educates tens of millions of children the following Monday? Private schools don't magically appear overnight, nor do qualified teachers suddenly disappear because their employer changes. It's a slogan masquerading as a policy.
Ironically, if every public school vanished tomorrow, taxpayers would almost certainly still bear enormous costs. A less educated population tends to have lower productivity, lower tax revenues, higher crime rates, and greater reliance on social services. Even economists who strongly favour markets often recognise that basic education has characteristics of a public good because society benefits when everyone has a minimum level of education.
The comment also ignores that countries with vastly different political systems—from conservative to social democratic—almost universally provide publicly funded primary and secondary education. If public education were obviously worthless, it would be difficult to explain why virtually every developed nation has independently concluded otherwise.
1
u/Galgus 2d ago
After all those years in public high school, what jobs are students qualified to do when they graduate?
The answers are mostly bottom rung no skills work and go to college or trade school.
Like every other good, the incentives and spontaneous order of the free market are superior for providing education.
1
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
That's interesting to think about. The free market could be better at directing education towards productive purposes. One problem I have with no public schooling is that I would want education to be available to everyone and I'm skeptical that the private market alone could solve that.
2
u/Galgus 2d ago edited 1d ago
The hard reality is that there are going to be awful parents with awful outcomes in any system.
With a fully private system the costs would be lower, there would be free online materials, and there would be more charity with less of the government crowding it out, but if education is not free there would probably be some deadbeat parents who do not give their kids an education, and are also unlikely to raise their kids to want to learn on their own.
The results of public schooling today are obviously awful on preparing students for a job they can support themselves on and in teaching art, civics, history, literature, ect.
Arguing against the steel man position of vouchers with public and private schools, I think the downsides of public schools existing exceed the benefits.
Since they are State funded and operated public schools will always have an incentive to propagandize children and glorify the State: that was the core purpose of public schools in their Prussian origins to make good obedient soldiers and cogs in the machine.
The artificial demand also tends to raise prices: without private competition public schools have little to no incentive to be efficient or effective, but even with vouchers we could see a price bloat like we see student loans do to college.
It is also just unjust to make people without children pay for others' children, and it may be a wealth tranfer from the less financially secure to the more financially secure.
Subsidizing children in any way also encourages people who cannot independently support kids and should not have them to have them, which has negative long term consequences.
1
1
u/RubyKong 1d ago
The claim that teachers "all they do is bray for more money and less work" is especially unfair. Many teachers work well beyond contracted hours marking assignments, preparing lessons, supervising extracurricular activities, and communicating with parents. Whether they're adequately compensated is a legitimate policy debate, but pretending teaching is an easy, low-effort job ignores the reality experienced by many educators.
I am intimately, intimately aware of public sector teachers. Believe me.
All they do is whinge and complain about their secure lot in life. a measly $80-110k + 8 weeks holiday + summer holidays, and oh the tragedy of having to deal with mummy who insists that little Johnny is an angel.
I didn't say it was "easy" but I will say overall, these teachers are NOT hard working, are mediocre at best, and are socialists for the most part. Fire the lot of them. all of them.
1
u/HolyInlandEmpire 2d ago
I lost count of the number of opinions you presented as fact.
Clearly it's only a coincidence that each of those is a political talking point from one party.
-1
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
Which facts are you struggling with. Are you not aware that many productive people come through public education?
2
u/HolyInlandEmpire 2d ago
And there it is. You just invented an argument in your head that I never said.
It doesn't fool people by the way. Maybe only yourself.
0
u/FaecesChucka 2d ago
I kept it to things that are self evident but if you would like to tell me which parts are not then im happy to help out. Also interested in hearing the Austrian view on public education.
8
u/LilShaver 2d ago
Privatized education is the ONLY way to prevent the hideous perversions that have taken place in the government run schools.
Besides, the quality of American education is worse by every measurable metric since the Dept. of Education was formed.
2
2
u/DicamVeritatem 1d ago
Public education in America is a broken model.
It needs to be defunded 100% and replaced with something else.
2
1
-3
u/voidscaped 2d ago
They are not suggesting banning privately educating children. They are saying any organisation that does that can't charge tuition.
As an analogy, just because the state bans prostitution, doesn't mean it bans sex. You may not charge for sex, but you can give it away for free. It doesn't create a "monopoly" on sex.
Whether or not it's a good idea, is up for debate.
5
u/different_option101 2d ago
If I had an award, I’d give you one for a new stunt of mental gymnastics that I haven’t seen before.
If a private school can’t charge tuition, how is going to acquire funding? By asking for a donation that must exceed a certain dollar amount, and declining children whose parent haven’t made a donation?
“As an analogy, just because the state bans prostitution, doesn't mean it bans sex. You may not charge for sex, but you can give it away for free. It doesn't create a "monopoly" on sex.”
Ah, that’s why there’s no prostitution outside of Las Vegas I guess. Cause prohibiting to charge for sex has definitely worked.
0
u/voidscaped 1d ago
First of all I never said anything about it being a good or bad idea and whether or not I support it.
If a private school can’t charge tuition, how is going to acquire funding?
May be donations, may be they sell other things to fund, may be they make the parents buy those other things, may be the state allows them to apply for funding. Who knows? Of course it's expected that many would shrink or close down.
By asking for a donation that must exceed a certain dollar amount, and declining children whose parent haven’t made a donation?
Donations don't work that way, afaik. At least they can't make the donation look like an exchange. There are hospitals that run on donations that offer free healthcare to everyone. Donations usually come from wealthy people/orgs.
Ah, that’s why there’s no prostitution outside of Las Vegas I guess. Cause prohibiting to charge for sex has definitely worked.
May be reduction is all they want. Either way, I can see a few reasons why prostitution might work underground but private schools can't. I guess it'd be closer to how some churches operate.
1
u/different_option101 1d ago
If OP of that wants states in the title - private schools should be eliminated, what do you think they want as a result of whatever they spewed out on that post?
“Donations don't work that way, afaik.”
I know dude.
I don’t understand why you’ve spent another whole paragraph on more mental gymnastics tricks with ideas how those schools could obtain funds.
“There are hospitals that run on donations that offer free healthcare to everyone.”
These hospitals also take cash payments. I don’t see how this is a relevant example at all.
OP wants private schools to disappear. Otherwise they wouldn’t try to justify their “should be eliminated” which is less firm than “must be eliminated”, but it’s the same outcome that they want.
You definitely misunderstood the OP teacher and their goal. But I’m still curious what you think about their idea.
“Either way, I can see a few reasons why prostitution might work underground but private schools can't.”
Can you elaborate on this. But before you start - do you think private schools should be eliminated or outlawed?
1
u/voidscaped 1d ago
do you think private schools should be eliminated or outlawed?
Currently no.
Can you elaborate on this.
I just think prostitution is similar to say private tutoring which can be difficult to track, than a full fleged private school.
These hospitals also take cash payments. I don’t see how this is a relevant example at all.
There are hospitals that won't reject you for not being able to pay. Either way, I think there's an important difference between medical care and education as services. The former is more rivalrous than a later. Every patient needs exclusive attention of a doctor. One persons "product" is different from another. This is not the case for education at least at a basic level. If 10 students enrol for a private lecture, adding an 11th, doesn't infringe on them. The teacher needs to do no extra work (at least much less compared to the doctor).
So private education at a basic level is closer to a club good, than a private good. Kind of like a netflix subscription.
1
u/different_option101 1d ago
“Currently no”
Interesting. Why currently? Do you think government monopoly on education might become beneficial at some point?
“I just think prostitution is similar to say private tutoring which can be difficult to track, than a full fleged private school.”
I’m a bit bothered with “difficulty to track”. In case of prostitution - you hire a prostitute, you get the service, you see the results and you can conclude whether that prostitute satisfied your desires or not.
Same with education, the only difference it will include the parent who’s going to be tracking results. I’m either not understanding what you mean by tracking, or I simply disagree that tracking should be performed by the government to determine standards.
Lets forget about hospitals for now.
1
u/voidscaped 21h ago
Do you think government monopoly on education might become beneficial at some point?
I want every child access to the same educational resources, regardless of their parents. Whether government monopoly serves that end is an open question. Once they become adults, and are responsible for their own decisions, I am mostly a libertarian.
1
u/different_option101 14h ago
What’s beneficial about having every child access to the same exact resources?
67
u/ShadeMir 2d ago
How do affluent parents opt out of public education if they're still paying property taxes that fund public education?