S
stinkcat_14
Guest
I never said government can only provide education to the poor. Please tell me one country that has successfully relied on the market to teach the poor?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
SWolf
Guest
Literacy exploded in the United States before Compulsory public schools had a strong foothold.The reason why they are lumped is that if you look at education historically in the US, it has predominantly been public schools that educated the bulk of the children. In the early days as well it would be pushing it to argue that Catholic schools were free market, they were heavily subsidized by in kind donations of labor from nuns and (usually) women who worked at below market rates.
mises.org/library/free-education-and-literacy
Nuns chose to be nuns. Laborers chose to donate their money. How is that not free market?
The amount is inconsequential. They get quite a bit bang for their buck. All of the computer labs I had in college were furnished by corporate donations.The amount they donate is tiny relative to the approx $500 billion that is spent on higher education every year.
S
SWolf
Guest
At one time, the United States.I never said government can only provide education to the poor. Please tell me one country that has successfully relied on the market to teach the poor?
P
Peccavi
Guest
I suggest you look at Jesus solution in Luke’s Gospel - or don’t you trust his advice ?
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Prior to the modern welfare state: every single one. Just because the government monopolizes an activity doesn’t make it indispensible.I never said government can only provide education to the poor. Please tell me one country that has successfully relied on the market to teach the poor?
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
That is actually quite debatable. Most of the schools throughout our history were local public schools and the quality of them was varied at best. In rural areas you have a problem of uneven quality and haphazard attendance.At one time, the United States.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
So there were no public schools in the US before FDR?Prior to the modern welfare state: every single one. Just because the government monopolizes an activity doesn’t make it indispensible.
E
estesbob
Guest
Perhaps you could tell us what it is?I suggest you look at Jesus solution in Luke’s Gospel - or don’t you trust his advice ?
S
sallybutler
Guest
Of course, what does literate mean? Being literate in one century might mean signing your name, but reading was not a necessary skill. In another, it might mean a 4th grade education, now it might mean a college degree. This article makes for interesting reading.Literacy exploded in the United States before Compulsory public schools had a strong foothold.
mises.org/library/free-education-and-literacy
Nuns chose to be nuns. Laborers chose to donate their money. How is that not free market?
The amount is inconsequential. They get quite a bit bang for their buck. All of the computer labs I had in college were furnished by corporate donations.
principals.org/portals/0/content/48743.pdf
I would suggest that the high literacy rates prior to the 1900’s, in addition to not being what we might consider as literate today, did not include all people in the counting. There were slaves, Chinese laborers, migrant workers from Canada, Russians and Spanish in the West, Native Americans, etc. (edited – forgot to include women in the list of not counted)
And perhaps that is why the Pope has some criticisms of modern day capitalism. There is a tendency to say that everything should be done for private money and everyone has a choice and everyone has an equal negotiating position.
S
SWolf
Guest
First, literacy has nothing to do with level of education. I know High School dropouts that are far more literate than College Grads. The thought that someone was counted as literate if they could write their own name is bunk, just like saying if someone graduated HS they were literate.Of course, what does literate mean? Being literate in one century might mean signing your name, but reading was not a necessary skill. In another, it might mean a 4th grade education, now it might mean a college degree. This article makes for interesting reading.
principals.org/portals/0/content/48743.pdf
I would suggest that the high literacy rates prior to the 1900’s, in addition to not being what we might consider as literate today, did not include all people in the counting. There were slaves, Chinese laborers, migrant workers from Canada, Russians and Spanish in the West, Native Americans, etc. (edited – forgot to include women in the list of not counted)
And perhaps that is why the Pope has some criticisms of modern day capitalism. There is a tendency to say that everything should be done for private money and everyone has a choice and everyone has an equal negotiating position.
I found this interesting: freakonomics.com/2011/09/01/were-colonial-americans-more-literate-than-americans-today/
Compare a grammar book for children from the 1800s compared to a grammar book today. Now tell me again how education has improved.
Also, Compulsory Education was not for literacy and independence, but to indoctrinate children to become more productive wards of the State.
S
sallybutler
Guest
And you missed my point that not everyone received that education or was counted in those statistics.First, literacy has nothing to do with level of education. I know High School dropouts that are far more literate than College Grads. The thought that someone was counted as literate if they could write their own name is bunk, just like saying if someone graduated HS they were literate.
I found this interesting: freakonomics.com/2011/09/01/were-colonial-americans-more-literate-than-americans-today/
Compare a grammar book for children from the 1800s compared to a grammar book today. Now tell me again how education has improved.
Also, Compulsory Education was not for literacy and independence, but to indoctrinate children to become more productive wards of the State.
Actually, the education system of the USA is geared towards making more productive employees for corporations.
S
SWolf
Guest
Indeed, many were homeschooled and became literate that way.And you missed my point that not everyone received that education or was counted in those statistics.
Yup, cogs in the machine.Actually, the education system of the USA is geared towards making more productive employees for corporations.
T
triumphguy
Guest
[SIGN]True dat[/SIGN]And you missed my point that not everyone received that education or was counted in those statistics.
Actually, the education system of the USA is geared towards making more productive employees for corporations.
It’s the same in Canada, hence the decline in liberal arts studies.
E
estesbob
Guest
I wish that were true. in the last decade or so the college grads I have interviewed were very socially conscious but very low on skills that would actually help them in the workplace.And you missed my point that not everyone received that education or was counted in those statistics.
Actually, the education system of the USA is geared towards making more productive employees for corporations.
T
Theo520
Guest
So it’s effectively the same, except now it’s in the cities where “you have a problem of uneven quality and haphazard attendance”That is actually quite debatable. Most of the schools throughout our history were local public schools and the quality of them was varied at best. In rural areas you have a problem of uneven quality and haphazard attendance.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
Except you have fewer people quitting after fourth grade.So it’s effectively the same, except now it’s in the cities where “you have a problem of uneven quality and haphazard attendance”
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
Just out of curiousity, are you interviewing people from accounting programs? Because in my experience, those programs tend to deal with less of the social issues of the day. A graduate of a management program perhaps, but in my experience accounting, economics and finance deal very little with the socially conscious stuff.I wish that were true. in the last decade or so the college grads I have interviewed were very socially conscious but very low on skills that would actually help them in the workplace.
S
SWolf
Guest
But could still read better than high-school graduates.Except you have fewer people quitting after fourth grade.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
That of course is debatable.But could still read better than high-school graduates.
E
estesbob
Guest
We get lots of people with non-accounting degrees interviewing for entry level bookkeeping jobs. At one point my supervisor had a Masters in Sociology. One of my current bookkeepers has a degree in History.Just out of curiousity, are you interviewing people from accounting programs? Because in my experience, those programs tend to deal with less of the social issues of the day. A graduate of a management program perhaps, but in my experience accounting, economics and finance deal very little with the socially conscious stuff.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.