Return to the Free Liberal Homepage

December 04, 2007

Find out if you could be on Leno's "Jaywalking"

By taking this test...

The Intercollegiate Studies Institute has a nifty civics quiz (some economics too) here. (Hat tip: Jim Turbett)

While some questions were very easy, others required head scratching and one-by-one elimination. I missed the one on "just war."

My favorite:

50) Free markets typically secure more economic prosperity than government’s centralized planning because:
A. the price system utilizes more local knowledge of means and ends.
B. markets rely upon coercion, whereas government relies upon voluntary compliance with the law.
C. more tax revenue can be generated from free enterprise.
D. property rights and contracts are best enforced by the market system.
E. government planners are too cautious in spending taxpayers’ money.

We could expect people who think government is the source of all wealth to pick answer C.

I don't recall this kind of question ever coming up in high school civics class! I recommend all high school and college students read Hayek's Use of Knowledge in Society essay. Citizens can't understand economics if they don't understand the basics of price theory, afterall.

Payoff from a GMU Economics education:

You answered 59 out of 60 correctly — 98.33 % Average score for this quiz during December: 74.2% Average score since September 18, 2007: 74.2%

I will definitely have to add this to my CV. ;-)

/KDR

Posted by KevinRollins at 04:57 PM | Comments (0)

November 07, 2007

Vouchers defeated in Utah

In a rather resounding vote yesterday, Utah voters killed the nation's first statewide school voucher program that promised tax dollars for private tuition, no matter how much a family earned or whether kids were in bad schools. For supporters of school choice, this was a major setback, moreso because the legislation that had originally been passed by one vote in the Utah Legislature was easily the broadest school choice program in the nation.

Utah is exactly the kind of state that might support school choice, but it looks like even in a friendly state, such a broad choice program is vulnerable. So, what is the solution? Tax credits for educational choice. Rather than relying on the government to divert tax dollars to private schools, tax credits enable individuals to decide how to divert their money to school choice efforts while taking a credit against their taxes. Tax credits poll much better than vouchers and should be the focus of reform efforts. Vouchers just don't seem viable outside of Milwaukee and a few other limited programs.

Posted by PaulGessing at 09:09 PM | Comments (0)

June 13, 2007

A Free Market in Education?

David Brooks of the New York Times has never been my favorite columnist. I've never really thought that he "gets it" when it comes to limited government and personal freedom.

Recently, for example, Brooks wrote a column in which he called himself a "Hamiltonian." While I don't dispute his claim -- he's certainly no 'limited government conservative' -- another statement has me shaking my head:

If you are reading this column, you’re keeping company with somebody in group No. 2. We Hamiltonians disagree with the limited government conservatives because, on its own, the market (emphasis added) is failing to supply enough human capital. Despite all the incentives, 30 percent of kids drop out of high school and the college graduation rate has been flat for a generation.

Just when it needs a more skilled work force, the U.S. is getting a less skilled one. This is already taking a bite out of productivity growth, and the problem will get worse.

How exactly is the educational system in this country a "market?" The answer is it is not a market in any way, but a government monopoly with only a few inroads having been made by charter schools, private schools, voucher programs, tax credit programs, and home-schoolers. While these groups all are attempting to break out of the top-down, government education model, they are a distinct minority.

In other words, Brooks doesn't seem to know what the word "market" really means. If Brooks and other "Hamiltonians" want to create a better-educated work force, perhaps we should create a genuine "market" in education. Until then, calling it a market is absurd.

Posted by PaulGessing at 12:21 AM | Comments (0)

Free-for-all (frfr-ôl) -- n. A disorderly fight, argument, or competition in which everyone present participates.

from Dictionary.com



supportus.png

If you enjoy our site or our print publication, please consider making a contribution today!


SIMPLE AD ERROR VIEW COUNT NOT UPDATED
Advertisement


Return to the Free Liberal Homepage


Subscribe to our list:


About the Free Liberal
The Free Liberal is an independent journal of transpartisan thought.

The views expressed herein are those of the writers individually and not necessarily those of the Free Liberal, the Center for Liberty and Community, or its board of directors.