|
|
 Originally Posted by CoccoBill
When your options are to go to a school, or go to the same school with a Swedish curriculum, who are competing over what? How does the competing alter the behavior of the competitors? How do you decide who's winning?
If one school is perceived as better than the other and with comparable cost, more parents choose the better one than the worse one. In this regard, school choice isn't going to be much different than something like food choice, hotel choice, girlfriend choice, etc..
What innovation? If your native tongue is swedish or english, you'll probably opt for an international school with teaching in your language, if available. This could be either a public or a private school. Otherwise you'll most likely go to the assigned one. The small amount of "innovation" I can think of is starting a school or courses in a language not yet available.
It appears the measure of choice is still somewhat decent. In most places in the US, there is not this choice. It is either bear very big costs for private school or homeschooling, or go to the public school you're assigned.
Where my sister lives, there are half a dozen schools all within very reasonable driving distance from her home. Some of these schools are better than others. Fortunately she lives in the zone for one of the better ones, so her kids go to that one. But what about the kids who live in the poorer districts? They're not allowed to choose any of the better schools just a few streets down. They're stuck. And it's because they're stuck that their schools never get better. If parents were allowed to choose to send their kids to any of the public schools in their area, each school would then have an enormous incentive to get better results. As it is now, getting results is not a primary concern since the schools get the same funding regardless of results.
A lot of American economists claim that it is because there is little school choice that we have so many shitty schools and so many kids getting shitty educations. There are lots of places in the country where the worst schools are a several streets away from real good schools. Parents would love to drive their kids to the better school each morning, but they are not allowed to. This would cause incumbent bad teachers to lose jobs; the unions are too powerful to let that happen. This would cause SJW know-nothings to cry "unfair!" And it would cause some of those racist elites to accept that there's gonna be some black and brown kids sitting next to their own Ivy League-bound kids.
School choice increases fairness and equality big time.
The only competition that exists is between the private and the public schools. Are you saying that the government is through competition providing a better service?
The government is stymieing competition to some degrees.
My point was that when in history (I do not yet know of any exception) that this kind of claim is made, it turns out to be wrong. They thought the automobile was going to destroy jobs. It didn't, jobs grew vastly because of it in ways nobody expected. The same with the chainsaw, with the internet, with computers, with the tractor.
We have no idea what AI will do. What we do know is that every time there is a claim that a technology is going to make the aggregate job market worse, the claim turns out to be wrong.
|
Reply With Quote