From: sals@random.uchicago.edu (red-head fancier)
Subject: Re: Paying for education
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 05:09:04 GMT

In article <1ifpnnINN3ij@armory.centerline.com> mrh@centerline.com (Mike  
Huben) writes:
 
>> >The government does not owe you an education, nor is the government
> >capable of generating wealth, as you are implying.  The government is
> >certainly capable of redistributing wealth -- but that wealth has to
> >ALREADY be there, somewhere, to be redistributed.

Government can redistribute wealth, but look at how it is redistributed.  
Politicans decide to redistribute wealth on the basis of politics, what  
will guarentee them another term. Does the government redistrubute wealth  
efficently? According to the last figure I heard, 80% of the money the  
federal government spends doesn't go to the "beneficaries" of the  
programs. In private charities the figure is closer to 10-20%. And if the  
government is not obliged to give you an education as you stated and I  
agree with then why redistribute wealth?

> 
> It is in the interests of a nation to ensure that all its occupants are
> well educated to raise their productivity. 

Education beyond the requirment of the marketplace does nothing to raise  
productivite, if anything it lowers productivity by siphonong off  
resources to unproductive sectors.
 Essentially all formal education
> is paid for by means of redistribution of wealth, either by government  
or
> within families because most students have little wealth.

Crucial difference: Government redistribution is forced and based on  
political motives. Family redistribution is by choice and not politically  
motivated.
> 
> >In this case, the
> >government took money from many folks to pay for your education.  This
> >is a sense fair, however, since you will now be forced to pay money
> >until you die, partly for other folks' educations.


If a theft takes money from you I don't consider it fair if money is  
stolen from others to repay my loss and much of the money taken from  
taxpayers is wasted by governments primarly because governments are  
motivated by polticial means.> 
> Essentially the same situation, and same fairness as parents paying for  
a
> child's education as a way of repaying their own educations. 
NOT!!!!!!!

Parents pay for their childrens education by choice I am forced to pay for  
another eductaion.
>  First, government
> redistribution helps ensure access to education for all, 

Government redistribution serves to distort the market by using force to  
obtain money and by removing any connection to merit.
> Third, those
> who benefitted the most (and there is a strong correlation with amount  
of
> money spent) repay the most under government redistribution.
Can you show this correlation??

You also said that few people would make educational loans because they  
are risky. Even if one accepts the assumption that educational loans are  
risky, high risk does not necessarily imply lack of lenders. Many risky  
endeavors find willing backers because of high yield or because of  
personal interest. There are also ways to lower risk for example liens can  
be placed on the earnings of people who do not repay their loans etc. A  
great deal of money is given by private individuals or firms to finance  
education.I attend a very expensive private university ($25K a year) and I  
come from a lower middle class background, yet a large part of my  
financial backing does not come from the government or my family. 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.libertarian:3294 comp.org.eff.talk:8524 alt.amateur-comp:557 soc.culture.usa:9663 alt.activism:20271