[ExI] Americans are poor drivers

[Stathis Papaioannou]

2009/7/14 Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>:

>> But you will note that the Taiwanese schools are public schools.
>
> Like the public schools of Washington D.C. and the horrible schools that
> I cited.
> Taiwan spend around 5.02% of their GDP in education where the US spend
> around 7% of their GDP. Strangely, Taiwan appear to obtain more with less.
> http://www.ccsindia.org/policy/ed/Edustats.doc
> http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_tot_exp_as_of_gdp-education-total-expenditure-gdp
>
> In Taiwan, the class are larger, the school are larger, etc.
>
>
>
>> If
>> the schools in one country or state are better than in another (as
>> they will be - there isn't just one way of doing things) then less
>> well performing schools should take note and improve themselves.
>
> Do you know why they don't take note and don't improve?
> Do you believe that a teacher barely able to read or to do math would be
> hired there and never dismissed?
> Why the violence and the unruliness of some schools in the US is unheard
> in Japan or China or Taiwan?

There are better and worse ways ways of running a public school
system, just as there are better and worse ways of running a
restaurant or car factory. The differences you have alluded to are a
reflection of this.

>> This is, or ought to be, a point of national importance.
>
> National, sure.
> But it is not a point of personal importance for so many people in the
> US; either teachers, principals, students and parent of students.
>
>> You seem to be
>> claiming that governments and parents are spending money on public
>> education when they don't care about education;
>
> Government spend money on public education. Where is that parents have
> any say in how government officials spend the money? Or in hiring and
> firing the staff?

Well, parents could say, we want the schools closed and our taxes
lowered. Or they could say, we want to sit on the board of local
schools and have a say in the hiring of staff, or whatever.

>> but if that were true
>> why not just make education private and optional, and either give the
>> taxpayers a large tax cut (boosting electoral appeal) or spend the
>> money on more important things, like palaces and private jets for the
>> politicians?
>
> Because, if you keep education public, you have the excuse to spend
> money to build schools, hire teachers and janitors, etc. and the excuse
> to tax people. No public schools no excuse to tax people.
> Tax are important, as they are used to pay for hire people, that will,
> in change, vote for the party representing them. Or the tax will pay for
> the buildings of schools that will be built by friends of the friends of
> the politicians (and they will be grateful funding future elections,
> selling mansions at lower prices to the same politics, giving direct
> bribes, etc.).
>
> Taking the money from the people will prevent them from having the means
> to buy private education and will starve the private education sector
> for all apart the wealthy. So, after a few years, people will start to
> believe that private education is too costly, there are not enough
> schools to serve all, etc.

Even better, you could collect the tax and directly bribe people. Why
go to all the effort of setting up a public school system, which is
subject to constant scrutiny and potential criticism, a large drain on
funds that might otherwise be used to build a better presidential
palace, or defence, or publicly funded soccer, or whatever?


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou