I remember when television got deregulated in the ’80s, and we finally got an independent TV company (TV3). I remember when it went into receivership a few years later after suffering from poor ratings. Nobody complained that we should never have let private companies run television stations, did they? No, even though TV3 was crap and had horrible shows, it was still better than having only two channels run by Members of Parliament.

I don’t care how awful or crappy or corrupt or inferior these charter schools may be. I want the choice, and the commies can get fucked.

I think you have confused me with mpledger.

I won’t take it personally.

“Are television comapanies run for the sake of the customers?”

The essential point is that, with Capitalism, you can only make a profit by providing goods and services that benefit others (so no, private businesses do not “give shareholders a profit at the expense of the customer”: as in any free trade, both parties consider themselves better off by it.) Also, competition ensures that profits are minimal.

By contrast, in a monopoly situation, the operation is run for the benefit of the operator and the staff (to varying degrees.) In the case of the state’s effective monopoly on education it is the employees who benefit at the expense of students and taxpayers.

“If we go to vouchers then the schools will start complaining that the voucher money isn’t enough. The upshot will be that parents have to pony up the extra. Continuing, ad infinitum, the end result will be that the voucher will be essentially worthless and education will have been privitised. And a childs education will depend even more heavily on parental income.”

You are forgetting one thing: market discipline.

This is the equivalent of leaving out gravity in a physics theory.

Why is it that supermarkets cannot keep raising their prices “ad infinitum”?

Well if you say that is happening I’m sure you have something to support the allegation?

No, I’ll say that the Min of Education will reorganise schools in a city felled by an earthquake in such a way that some suburbs will not have an operational public school within a reasonable distance. When parents complain they’ll say they can only afford to open a new school throuh PPP and call it a charter.

The taxpayer doesn’t pay for bussing kids to school (although I believe the rate payer subsidises fares). And, in any case, the bus companies are withdrawing services to schools for bussing school children around e.g. Wellington. I don’t see how a wonderous new bus system is going to evolve to ship kids every which way to school.

[DPF: So your conspiracy theory involves the Govt arranging an earthquake just so it could force students from state schools to charter schools.

PPPs are a very separate issue to charter schools. As far as I know, no charter schools are even planned for Chch. They are likely to be in areas like South Auckland where there are lots and lots of schools within throwing distance of each other]

Nope, they are run to give shareholders a profit at the expence of the customer.

Ah, you miss an extraordinarily important point there mpledger. The reason they return a profit is because cusotmers buy their products or services. In order to return a larger product they must improve their efficiency (manage costs), increase their customers or increase the spend of their customers.

So, yes the television companies are run for their customers – poor rating programmes = reduced advertising revenue = reduced profit = reduced return to shareholders. The same holds true for the electricity company, where there is competition.

A monopoly provider will benefit even with a willful disregard for the customer where demand is inelastic – where customer really have no choice; no alternatives, no substitute products or services.

Are television comapanies run for the sake of the customers? Are electricity companies run for the sake of the customers?

Nope, they are run to give shareholders a profit at the expence of the customer. Why would schools in the free market be any different.

One only has to look at private schools to see that they hit the parents up for money (or the equivalent) at every instance of parental contact with the school.

If we go to vouchers then the schools will start complaining that the voucher money isn’t enough. The upshot will be that parents have to pony up the extra. Continuing, ad infinitum, the end result will be that the voucher will be essentially worthless and education will have been privitised. And a childs education will depend even more heavily on parental income.

No RN, it seems DPF’s lack of understanding of the zoning system is the lead topic!

And, of course, attacking the man instead of the argument, but that’s just standard fare on Kiwiblog.

The irony of this comment should not be lost….

And, of course, attacking the man instead of the argument, but that’s just standard fare on Kiwiblog.

Unfortunately in the current situation we find that those who can do…..those who can’t teach.

If you think they force pupils to attend a particular state school based on their address, then you in fact don’t know how school zones work.

im not sure you got enough emotional shit into your comment. i dont quite get the image of children being made to work in factories.

CARGO CULT SCIENCE

[DPF: I know precisely how school zones work...

And yet you still made a claim that there were:

…state schools where pupils are forced to attend based on their address…

And then said that this was because of zoning.

Odd.

Feynman…

I think ordinary people with commonsense ideas are intimidated by this pseudoscience. A teacher who has some good idea of how to teach her children to read is forced by the school system to do it some other way–or is even fooled by the school system into thinking that her method is not necessarily a good one. Or a parent of bad boys, after disciplining them in one way or another, feels guilty for the rest of her life because she didn’t do “the right thing,” according to the experts.

And a clip of late Feynman’s BBC interview on the same topic is found here on Youtube.

Feynman on social sciences

One just have to look at the topics & publications that Prof. O’Connor is currently doing or has done in the past.

It’s pure fucking useless. This is one of the department that University should downsize. These are the so called experts that Feynman refereed to. They’re experts in education, but if one asks to see their students records that they have taught over the years, I bet anyone here that their records will show that they’re no better teachers than their other average colleagues from the same department or faculty. I mean you wouldn’t expect to see their former students’ records to be skewed to have gained more A grades (or above) in their exams. And yet, they seem to know superior methods of how to educate children to achieve higher.

This pseudo-intellectual professor should STFU. Oh, by the way, MikeMild does regard Prof. O’connor as an intellectual that his opinions is worth listening to. You would expect that from MikeMild since he doesn’t know what intellectual and pseudo-intellectual. I bet that MikeMild regards paranormal experts as intellectuals.

Lots of middles class kids who are in zone for James Cook in South Auckland bus to Howick every day. It needs a motivated parent who is willing to support it. It weakens the poorer schools.

I’m kinda reluctant to use the words “white flight”, but i’m struggling to find another term that’s as correct.