Convince me 'school choice' is a good thing.

I had to explain what is the meaning of profit, before we can continue the discussion. It appears that you think profit is an end-goal of a free-market institution that delivers goods or services, when in reality it is a prerequisite for the existence of that institution.

This is a difference without a difference. If a business can make a profit by selling an inferior product, will it? If Apple can dress up a second-rate computer with a shiny exterior and sell it for massive profits, will it?

First of all, at what cost? Are you going to set a limit on how much we spend on such institutions? Would we simply spend an arbitrary amount of money to keep them operating? How do you know if they're efficiently using the funds to deliver the goods/services that they promise to deliver?

If we can figure out budgets for other government institutions which allow them to properly do their jobs, then we can figure out a proper budget for schools. The baseline would be equal funding.

Secondly, is that even morally right? There is no moral imperative for doing so, if the cost of "building institutions whose pulse is not tied to their ability to do profit", then you're eliminating most efficient measurement of the viability of those institutions. Any other measurement of the institution's ability to deliver said goods and services is prone to failure.

How, exactly, do we measure the viability of NASA or a philosophy department or the EPA? By how well they do their jobs. Is NASA generating research and organizing space missions? Is the philosophy department producing books and articles, and does it have a good placement rate for students? Does the EPA's work keep our skies clear? None of these organizations are measured by their ability to produce profit.

So we both agree that it should be implemented. That is the morally correct action to take indeed!

As I've said all along, if the schools are equally funded, then I don't care how the money gets there.

However, independently of funding reform, we already know that the voucher system will make an improvement of an education.

Yeah, you keep saying this, but your example was Sweden, and in Sweden, schools get a lot more federal funding. They don't have Normandy vs Ferguson situations.

Well, firstly, let's not fool ourselves that there is a simple answer

I'd like a straight answer because you keep sliding back and forth between descriptive and normative claims (e.g., you define a business, and then collapse the statement that X is a business into the first claim).

Yes, there are terrible public schools, and yes, there are good charter schools; but there are also great public schools and terrible charter schools. The terrible public schools can be made great, regardless of your claim that they can't.

/r/AskTrumpSupporters Thread Parent