People Power

Thanks Ben.
I really enjoyed today's discussion. Time to go to bed now, my corporate job is waiting tomorrow morning! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

You are setting the bar lower there. getting better marks on standardized tests doesn't make one smarter. I see a better education in a completely different form.

What about making education better by allowing kids to develop their creative capabilities in a non standardized system? A system that allows every kid to make the best of their own abilities, where they do not have to be afraid that they will fail a standardized test even though their are exceptional in a certain field?

Standardization only suits the corporations who look for cheap workforce with standard knowledge required for a certain standard job.

---

Is this before they can read, write and do advanced math skills?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

I was university educated in a state-run and owned university and when I tore my ACL, I was operated on in a state-run and owned hospital at zero end user cost to me. The country I live in does not have poor education and poor healthcare; quite on the contrary.

---

Great. I'm glad to hear you got a good education, and good healthcare. I never said it couldn't be done in a state-run system, just that I believe a free market system to be better. Zero cost you say, really? So you don't pay taxes then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

I live in a country that also happens outrank the United States in terms of life expectancy, literacy rates, quality-of-life index etc. The United States also happens to be the worst of the industrialised nations when it comes to infant mortality rates.

---

We went over this a while ago. Most of those statistics are bunk, mainly because the reporting mechanisms are flawed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

So then to summarise. Using your criteria: the country I live in is better at providing education and healthcare. Your position based on the free-market providing better outcomes is therefore bunk.

---

Who has said that the education and healthcare in the US is free market? I surely haven't said that. Far from it. There are relatively few private schools, most are state run, but those that are private are mostly among the best in the world. And healthcare is FAAAAARRRR from being run in a free market system. There are currently very few ways to judge free markets vs state-run in those areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

No. The system will produce a more profitable system and totally neglect anything which does not turn a profit.

---

Yes and if a company does not provide what the market is demanding (ie quality healthcare, good education, etc.) the consumers will turn to other avenues, thus reducing the profit of the poorly run company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

How do you know? Seriously, isn't that a bit of a deaf statement?

---

Because humans are imperfect beings. We will never be able to solve every problem in every situation. To think otherwise is naive and foolish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

All was interesting and possible until thinking that something can be better and cheaper part.

---

Things can't be better and cheaper? Wow I guess I should have kept my 286 computer that cost me $2500 or whatever it was from 1989.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Somehow the current industrial production that was moved to China based on the rules of the free market proves that wrong. Yes it got cheaper but quality is much worse and can't see it improve too much.

---

I can not honestly say that everything produced in China is of lesser quality, can you really make that blanket statement? And even if something is of lesser quality when it comes from China, consumers have made that trade-off decision for themselves. If you do not think this is the case why don't you set up a company that provides higher quality goods than are produced in China for slightly higher costs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

There is no free-market in politics.

I'd now like to cite myself on this:


Because politics produces a tendency towards two-party politics, over time the relative market power of those two parties increases. Over time, due to economies-of-scale and other factors like the ability to raise capital and advertising, politics moves towards a duopoly.

That is what exists in America and indeed a great deal of single-seat parliamentary democracies. It's exacerbated by the first-past-the-post voting system and the single-seat presidency.

Your conceit, that "The free market works in politics just as well as it does in economics" might very well be true but the free market fails for precisely the same reasons - hence Duverger's Law.

---

No free market in politics? Tell that to the Federalists, the Democrat-Republicans, and the Whigs. And for that matter just because the two major parties haven't changed their names in over 100 years does not mean that they are static in their beliefs/platforms. Do you think Lincoln would be a Republican today? What about JFK? Just to name two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

You are setting the bar lower there. getting better marks on standardized tests doesn't make one smarter. I see a better education in a completely different form.

What about making education better by allowing kids to develop their creative capabilities in a non standardized system? A system that allows every kid to make the best of their own abilities, where they do not have to be afraid that they will fail a standardized test even though their are exceptional in a certain field?

Standardization only suits the corporations who look for cheap workforce with standard knowledge required for a certain standard job.

---

Oh you must come from the everybody gets a trophy school of thought. Little Johnny can't add or subtract because he's too "creative" for that. Sorry but there aren't really any creative ways to read, or write with proper grammar, or add/subtract/etc. But yeah, let's let the kids be creative about things instead of teaching them what they need to know. That's what the public schools in this country have been doing for 30+ years, gotten us far hasn't it? There is a time and place for creativity, but that time is AFTER kids have learned the basics. We don't teach the basics in this country anymore, and I for one would like to get back to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Lower cost, lower cost, and again lower cost...
Let's not think only about the costs, we are talking about a world where the money wouldn't be anymore so unevenly distributed.
What about the quality of the service, don't they need to meet certain security standards? What about not only being fast but also on time?
Believe me, costs are not most important.

---

I've been getting lectured for only thinking of money for so long, I thought that others actually thought of other things than money.

Costs are not constrained to monetary issues. Poor quality is a cost. Security is a cost. Being late is a cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

No free market in politics? Tell that to the Federalists, the Democrat-Republicans, and the Whigs.

---

They'd agree with me for precisely the reasons I've stated. How many Federalists, the Democrat-Republicans and Whigs are there in Congress? ZERO.
How many Constitution, Green, Libertarian or Modern Whigs are there in Congress? ZERO.

You've successfully demonstrated my point for me. Market Power is the ability to alter price (which in this case equates to votes) and in no way is the market perfectly competitive.