Just started Joseph Phillips’ book – it is WONDERFUL! Nearly overstayed my lunch hour today, it’s that engrossing.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.ucla04jun04,0,1379906.story

“This fall 4,852 freshmen are expected to enroll at the University of California, Los Angeles, but only 96, or 2 percent, are black – the lowest figure in decades and a growing concern on the campus.”

Of these, 20 are recruited athletes (and hence not admitted for their academic credentials) meaning only 76 made the grade for admission on scholarship (which comes as a shock to me, at any rate.)

But that must be the biggest rebuke to black educators in decades. (I remember when black educators in Calif. were demandingebonics.)

Of course, article considers the usual “explanations” (black students come from lower-income schools which don’t adqueately prepare them, etc.)

But that doesn’t seem to account for the fact that parochial schools (which are woefully underfunded and which often use outdated books and facilities) excel in academics.

There is a huge group out there that is afraid to cut their “affirmative action” security blanket or their “victim status” or their “slave ship hi-jack” past to go bare-knuckles with the present and achieve on their own without “bonus points”.

It is really chicken-sh*t to sit in the corner and gnaw on the bones tossed by the nanny party.

Taking responsibility and thinking independently is often too large a burden for the permanently enslaved.

Neither political party is the pathway to eternal grace; but hanging on to the political party that is the demagogue’s playground is to emulate “step’an’fetchit.”.

Blacks in Washington would re-elect Anthony Williams I’m sure. Joseph Lieberman would probably get most of the black votes in a run against a Republican candidate. Both support school vouchers. The point is that those blacks who will not vote Republican will not do so because of other issues besides school vouchers.

Here is a quote from Joseph Phillips:

http://forum.josephcphillips.com/viewtopic.php?p=5839&highlight=#5839

“As for how blacks vote…once again you are caught up in how people vote — specifically how they vote for presidential candidates. For some reason you ignore that when black people have had an opportunity to vote on things like school vouchers and gay marriage, even affirmative action they do not vote the democratic line.”

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/272550_race02.html

Cheers,
Andrew

It is a great mistake to enter into discussions of governance without a careful reading of Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travels.” Libertarians always take the role of framing the issue: they exercise the providence of what is open to government and what is not. It may seem to be good duty to play God, but amateurs throwing the thunderbolts of the Deity only end up creating chaos. That is why it is important to carefully read “The Lord of the Flies” as well.

Correct! That’s what I meant to express. – Admin

Vouchers enable many parents to become players in the game of education choice. Some private schools will sink to mediocrity because of the new-found wealth of voucher toting students. But some schools will sharpen their mission and other, new schools will pop up.

There is a market place out there. Right now, if you have the bucks, you can make choices. Vouchers will increase the competition. Not all consumers are sharp. Some will opt for fad education, others will go for comfort education and others for the least disruptive day care.

Many children will still be dumbed down, but only because the parents are too diverted or too dumb to care.

I’m sure my regular readers will appreciate the links.

For a basic treatment of why not everything is an externality [despite what some of us were taught in high school and undergraduate school] see the nontechnical and classical article by Nobel Prize winner and former Chicago law professor/economist Ronald Coase entitled “The Problem of Social Costs” http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/CoaseJLE1960.pdf

(1) I believe that you have read much too much into the passing phrase “a common set of values.” By this Friedman was unlikely to have in mind the sorts of things that conservatives mean by “values” – e.g., sexual orientation, a specific profession of faith, “American culture,” etc. Rather, he probably just had in mind things like settling disputes over public policy at the voting booth rather than with machine guns and militias.

(2) Friedman’s view on education is at the extreme conservative wing of libertarianism. [Not true of all his views, but most definitely true of this view.] Most libertarians have long ago come to the realization that with vouchers come the same sort of controls over the content of education that exist with direct government provision of education. Indeed, the situation may be even worse with vouchers, since with vouchers you effectively co-opt many of the formerly private schools who previously had their own agendas.

(3) Most libertarians fall into one of two camps: (a) Outright abolition of the government schools with private charities picking up the bill [or, better, part of the bill] for those who can’t afford to pay for their own children’s education. and (b) The J.S. Mill approach of simply requiring parents to see that their children meet basic standards of literacy, math, etc. by a certain age upon penalty of fines if they don’t.

If anyone would like a reading list I’d be happy to supply it, although this is a good initial primer comprised of some basic articles: http://www.fff.org/issues/education.asp