America's education system would be more effective if completely privatized.

I appreciate the thoughtful response. I would like to further define my use of the term "unfair subsidies" with an explanation. The word "unfair" is used in order to demonstrate the affects of subsidizations in a relatively free market. The main purpose of a relatively free market is for there to exist perfect competition, or close to it. When a governing force gives money and/or loans to one company and not another, it effectively diminishes the whole point of a free market. Therefore, the term "unfair subsidies" is used when a company(s) is given a competitive advantage over the rest, as a result of political ties. Regarding accessibility, if 100% of the public has access to "free" education, and this education proves itself to be useless, accessibility means nothing. When I mentioned that private schools allow for nearly everyone to afford education, I was referring to access to helpful and effective education. (1) Currently, residents of poor areas in America are forced to attend their local public school. Public schools in poor areas are extremely ineffective, and dropout rates are sky high. To elaborate on this point, in a relatively free market, educational donators would be plentiful. Private scholarships, loans, and grants would be abundant. Therefore, accessibility is neither a problem in public or private education. Although, accessibility is irrelevant pertaining to public schools when quality is sub-par. Regarding the Ford Pinto, opportunity cost must be evaluated. Whether Ford made a good business decision or not is shown through their success or failure. The cost of adding the safety item to the car must be compared to the result, in profit from sales, of adding the safety item. If the safety item was indeed relatively cheap to add, while being greatly beneficial in safety ratings (which leads to sales), it would be a bad business decision to not include this item. Safety is one factor that contributes to marketing the vehicle, and if the vehicle is shown to be unsafe, it will hurt the company greatly. Regarding fast food and the "dollar store" model, there is obviously a demand for it. For example, consumers get to choose between expensive nutritious food, and cheap non-nutritious food. As a result, there exists a wide variety of food, both nutritious and non-nutritious. That being said, fast food companies do have an incentive to provide food that is not dangerous to eat. When someone supposedly dies or exposes a sub-par quality aspect of a specific restaurant's food, that restaurant suffers great losses. In a relatively free market, restaurants must be honest and reveal appropriate nutrition facts if they wish to not loose customers and go out of business. The point that public schools would offer a wider variety of options to the students than private schools would in a relatively free market is a fallacy. There would be a demand for lower-level private schools to offer a wide variety of classes in order for the student to choose what interests him/her the most. Underage students do actually play a role in deciding what classes, interests, and professions they wish to pursue. Regarding the measurement of teachers' productivity in public and private schools, this measurement is taken from actual results from the teachers in private schools. The goal is not just to give the appearance of success, but actually show it without deceiving or lying. A deceiving private school would immediately loose business in a relatively free market. In contrast, the measurement of teachers' productivity in public schools is quite different. Public teachers are extremely hard to fire; therefore, their incentive to provide results is meager. Furthermore, public schools do not have to worry about going out of business from other competition. This also contributes to the lack of incentives for public schools to perform efficiently. Refer to the flow chart below to read how incredibly long and difficult it is to fire a public teacher. http://www.decimation.com... Furthermore, I would like to provide charts and statistics to support my claim. Although our currenty education market is extremely far from a relatively free market, private schools are still able to out-perform public schools in both cost and quality. When the cost of public and private schools are compared, there is a significant difference. Although many people think of public school as "free," the actual cost (paid by taxes and debt) is very large. Throughout time, public school spending has been approximately twice the amount of private school spending. This is a direct result of a lack of competition. (2) http://i.imgur.com... Furthermore, the quality (shown by actual results) is shown to be significantly higher in private schools than public schools. The chart below shows just one example of private schools scoring higher on every part of the ACT than public schools. Private schools have a significant incentive to provide positive results like these, in order to stay in business. (3) http://i.imgur.com... Lastly, I would like to relate this issue to monetary policy. The chart below shows public school spending over time. (4) http://i.imgur.com...; America's national debt has surpassed the USA GDP. Thanks to the national government getting involved/overspending in countless sectors of our economy (including education), America is bankrupt. Our government can spend indefinitely, and can request freshly printed Federal Reserve Notes to fund the spending-sprees whenever they wish. When taxes, printing money (devaluing the dollar, "invisible tax"), and borrowing from other countries is evaluated, we can conclude that America is living beyond its means, and the debt "bubble" is bound to pop in the near future. The education sector of our economy, like any other sector, needs to be privatized in order to yield higher-quality results, pay off our debt, and not go into an economic collapse. (5) The US Dept. of Education was recently formed in 1979, and has no incentive to spend money efficiently. There is no reason for our national government to be involved in education, and it directly conflicts with the powers granted in our constitution. Similarly, the state governments are overspending, and the same affects reside.In conclusion, competition provides incentives for schools to be effective in their results and efficient in their spending. Publicizing our schools destroys these incentives, and is the reason why America is so behind in education, when compared to other countries. Evaluating our current educational system yields this conclusion: public schools over-spend and under-perform, while private schools do not. Therefore, privatizing our educational system completely would be exceedingly more effective. (1) http://www.city-data.com...(2) http://mhodges701.home.comcast.net...(3) http://www.freedomkentucky.org...(4) http://stoneglasgow.blogspot.com...;(5) http://en.wikipedia.org...;