Catallarchy hosts the Carnival of the Capitalists this week.
Meanwhile, Radley Balko finds the Libertarian Purity Test. I scored a 160, but with a few caveats. Quoting myself from the Agitator thread:
...it might have been lower if one really argued some of the premises of the questions. For example, you could view school vouchers as an improvement over the system we have today because it injects some consumer choice into the equation. But the money being spent is still taxpayer money and the operating principle is still collectivist, so the "improvement" is marginal to others.
UPDATE(3/11/2004 3:14pm)
You can view a whole bunch of bloggers' results here.
ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.
Drizz,
If the taxation is your only concern (and I agree it's a big one), you'd still probably have to say that vouchers would be an improvement.
But if you, like me, are concerned that the strings that will inevitably come with the government funding will ultimately hurt the quality of "private" schools, then it becomes a lot more iffy.
Posted by: Gil on March 9, 2004 12:49 AMOne of the problems voucher proponents don't seem to address is the very nature of their proposal: if we are allowed to "shop around" for the public schools we want, that doesn't mean a damn thing for those families who live in rural areas and the only school district for fifty miles is the one they already live in. Working with public education in Texas reaffirms this point for me regularly. Half the state is composed of school districts as large or larger than the counties they reside in.
It isn't just the urban-based schools (where you might actually get a choice among "competing" districts) that are having trouble.
I am concerned that, as someone else put it, "government money means government control."
Posted by: Drizz on March 9, 2004 07:55 AM