Monday, July 30, 2007

Deep Thoughts: Why Universal Education And Not Healthcare

Recently I have been polling people I come across with these three questions. Their answers are usually very similar.

Q1. Is the government funding public schools with our tax dollars so that every American can receive an education a good thing?

Common answer: Yes, everyone deserves an education and the taxes we pay are worth the cost.

Q2. Would it be better if the government disbanded its funding of public schools so that private companies could take over so we then pay less taxes?

Common answer: That would be terrible. The only people guaranteed an education would be the affluent. (Like other countries where this is the case.) A large number of Americans wouldn't be able to obtain an education. Everyone deserves an education. Plus, companies would drive up the cost of education above what the government charges in taxes since companies are out to make profits.

Q3. If we, as taxpayers, support universal education and feel "every American deserves an education even if it takes taxes" why don't we hold similar views about universal healthcare?

Common answer: Ah, well, it's different but I can't exactly explain why.

So that is my deep thought for tonight. I actually don't support universal healthcare since I don't know enough about it. But I think whatever it takes to get everyone health coverage is a bare minimum we as a society should be willing to sacrifice. Just like a basic education.


  1. Before NCLB, schools were run by the counties, so you had an environment where states could experiment with different methods, where schools were aligned with the communities in which they taught, and it was easier to improve schools because you only worked with a few at a time.

    The risk with nationalized healthcare is equivalent to the risks associated with nationalizing public school education - you get one President who appoints a talentless lackey to be in charge of the thing, and it sucks for everyone.

    Show of hands - who here *doesn't* think GWB would appoint a pharma ex-CEO to run national healthcare? Who thinks that would be a good idea?

  2. Maybe you American's should try running it like the Belgians do, they have a subsidized public system, a community system and a subsidized "free" aka catholic system, however each kid has the funds attached to them, so if the kid leaves the school to go to another, the funds move with him/her, this forces the school to provide a better education.

  3. Hi Friends,

    I Find Absolutely FREE PlayBoy & Penthouse:

    If I find something else I'll inform you.

    Best Regards,

  4. "Show of hands - who here *doesn't* think GWB would appoint a pharma ex-CEO to run national healthcare? Who thinks that would be a good idea?"

    I'll agree Bush only seems to appoint people who want to suport him first, not the country.

    I also agree that a nationalized healcare system may be more dangerous than a state run one. I meant any universal healthcare system run by any level of government.

  5. please shed your naivety by listening to george carlin's meta-education.


To add a link to text:
<a href="URL">Text</a>