Category Archives: Education

A Shining Example

Education, Theory and Ideas

Earlier today, Doug pointed out how Bernie Marcus believes in the power of free enterprise to improve the world, rather than government action. His belief in the power of private action over public action is backed up elsewhere.

Late in 2005, the Georgia Aquarium opened, immediately becoming the world’s largest. It will be a boon to the Atlanta economy, and is widely regarded by everyone I know who has been there to be absolutely amazing. It creates jobs, it improves tourism, and is a shining example of the rise of the modern Southeast in American prominence.

Of course, we’ve heard things like this before. That’s the typical refrain whenever a sports franchise, or a public group, or anyone else comes before the people looking for tax dollars to fund a project. The NFL franchises tell us of all the jobs and tourism they’ll bring, if only we give them hundreds of millions of dollars to build a stadium they should finance themselves. It’s an argument that often rings hollow.

But in Atlanta’s case, there’s a difference. This $250M aquarium wasn’t financed by government. Atlanta’s tax dollars weren’t used. It was a gift from Bernie Marcus.

In 1979, Bernie Marcus co-founded The Home Depot, opening its first stores and its headquarters in Atlanta, GA. By revolutionizing the home improvement industry, The Home Depot became one of the fastest growing companies in America. Nowadays, their stores make use of vast spaces, with some likely including cantilever racking options amongst others to keep well stocked on everything needed. A modern day success story, the company made its place in history for its great impact on reducing the costs of home ownership in the United States, and making buying things like frames to put your poster art prints in, for example, a breeze.

Bernie Marcus knows The Home Depot would not have achieved its full potential without the incredible support of the citizens of Atlanta and Georgia, including customers, associates and stockholders. This is why he wants to give back to this great community, with a gift that reaches as many different lives as possible — young and old, male and female, those who will visit for entertainment and those who will visit for education — just as The Home Depot has touched the lives of a broad and diverse customer base.

In his vision, he also wants to promote economic impact for the city and state, bring growth and new jobs and help create a destination to inspire visitors to stay – and stay longer.

Bernie’s $250 million gift to Georgia is the fulfillment of his appreciation and vision. He now asks you to join him in making the Georgia Aquarium the best it can be.

In the world of the statist, $250M aquariums, built with no desire for profit to the person who puts up the money, would never happen. After all, businessmen are horrible people driven only by money, and if you want something benevolent done, you turn to government. I don’t believe that, Bernie Marcus doesn’t believe that, and he’s put his money where his mouth is. This isn’t only a shining example of “The New South”, this is a shining example of the power of private activity.

Brad Warbiany
https://thelibertypapers.org/

Teacher’s Unions: Enemies Of Free Speech

Education, Free Speech, Individual Rights

Labor unions exist to protect the interests of their members. All their members. Right ? Well, not so fast. Let’s say you happen to be a member of the teacher’s union in the State of Washington who doesn’t want your union dues used to fund political activities you don’t believe in. Well, at least according to the Washington Education Association, too darn bad:

SPOKANE, Wash.–Teachers unions are supposed to promote the financial interests of, well, teachers–but not in Washington state. Here, the Washington Education Association is fighting some 4,000 nonmember teachers who don’t want their paychecks raided each year and used for political activities that they don’t believe in. “The right of free speech is being trampled” by the union political spending, complains Scott Carlson, a business teacher in Spokane. “And that’s a right I hold very precious.”

Too bad the unions don’t. The WEA derisively refers to teachers like Mr. Carlson who want their money back not as free-speech advocates but “dissidents.” The goal is to squash these dissidents by overturning Initiative 134, a law–approved by 72% of Washington voters in 1992–that requires unions to obtain written approval from teachers before dues are spent on campaigns or candidates. Back in March, the unions got a surprising assist from the state Supreme Court, which ruled that the paycheck protection law places “too heavy” a burden on the free-speech rights of the union.

That case is now before the United States Supreme Court, and, as Stephen Moore explains in the Wall Street Journal, the stakes could not be higher:

At issue is whether workers have the right to effectively declare themselves conscientious objectors to the unions’ multimillion-dollar political war games. “All we are saying is that no one has the right to take our money and spend it on causes we don’t believe in,” insists Cindy Omlin, a recently retired speech teacher in Spokane. “If you want my money, ask for it, like private charities, political candidates and businesses do.” Ms. Omlin was one of 250 teachers who successfully sued the WEA in 2002 to get half their dues refunded after a Washington superior court found the union guilty of “intentional violations” of the paycheck protection law.

The outcome of this case should be, one would think, blindingly obvious. No organization, especially not one that you are required by law to belong to in order to hold a job (which is apparently the case with the Washington Education Association), has the right to take your money and use it to fund political causes you don’t agree with. It is, after all, your money, the product of your labor. Of course, it helps that the WEA has the state, and even the State Supreme Court on it’s side:

The Washington Supreme Court defended its ruling by arguing that the benefit to the individual teachers was trivial compared to the “heavy administrative burden” that complying with paycheck protection would impose on the union. That attitude incenses Jeff Leer, who for 10 years has been a phys ed teacher outside Seattle. In an interview, Mr. Leer fumed: “I wonder how these justices would feel if I reached into their pockets and took $200 to support causes they don’t believe in.” He told me that when he investigated the candidates that his union dues were going to support, “it was nearly 100% opposite of the way I voted. How is that fair?”

In others, the Washington Supreme Court is saying, it’s just too darn inconvienent for us to worry about your trivial little rights. What’s appalling about that is that the State Supreme Court’s decision seems to directly contradict state law on this very issue:

Washington law states unambiguously that a union may not use dues “for political purposes without the affirmative consent of the nonmembers from whom the excess fees were taken.” The Washington Supreme Court somehow twisted these words to mean that the unions can spend as they wish unless workers object and affirmatively opt out. That’s a big distinction, because the unions make it as time-consuming and cumbersome as possible to get the money back once they snatch it.

And, at least in the State of Washington, they’ve got the Courts on their side.

H/T: The QandO Blog

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com

Public vs. Private Discrimination

Education, Individual Rights

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a private school in the state of Hawaii can discriminate in favor of Native Hawaiians

SAN FRANCISCO — A divided federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a private school in Hawaii can favor Hawaiian natives for admission as a means of helping a downtrodden indigenous population.

The 8-7 decision by a 15-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned an earlier ruling by three of the same judges that the Kamehameha Schools policy amounted to unlawful discrimination.

In making their ruling, the 9th Circuit focused on the plight of Native Hawaiians, but missed a broader distinction between this case and cases involving public discrimination:

Admission to the elite school is first granted to qualified Hawaiian students, and non-Hawaiians may be admitted if there are openings available. Only one in eight eligible applicants is admitted to the school, which serves about 5,400 students at three campuses.

(…)

The Kamehameha School was established under the 1883 will of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop as part of a trust now worth $6.8 billion. The trust subsidizes tuition and is designed to help remedy some of the wrongs done during the U.S.-backed overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom in 1893.

In other words, the Kamehameha School is a completely private organization. As such, unlike a public school, it should be permitted to set whatever admissions standards it desires. Unfortunately, the distinction between public and private institutions has been seriously eroded by Supreme Court precedent over the years, so it is quite likely that this case will be treated in the same manner as the affirmative action policies of the University of Michigan were.

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com

What If Coffee Shops Were Run Like Public Schools ?

Education

Over at The American Spectator, Andrew Coulson wonders what might happen if coffee shops were run the same way we run public education:

Imagine what would happen if coffee shops were run like schools. Let’s say that state and local officials granted Starbucks a “public coffee” franchise, paying it $10,000 annually per customer (about what the public schools spend per pupil) to keep us all in caffeinated bliss.

It would be the espresso shot heard round the world.

Not everybody likes the same brand of coffee, and the decision to let Starbucks give its product away for free would drive most other suppliers out of business. Coffee drinkers would get mighty steamed about that. Aficionados of competing shops would demand the right to spend their share of the coffee franchise money on the baristas of their choice. Most importantly, suppliers like Iron and Fire would have to work even harder than they are already to meet the demand of the various companies. It’s not like they don’t do their absolute best already. Or it’s not like the idea of something like the JoeFroyo sell sheet is not an option that coffee shops can look into if they want to make a change and introduce more drinks to their menu. It is understandable that every business wants to succeed, but there is no harm in working together, especially if you want to keep your customers happy.

Of course, if things played out the way they have in education, these dissenters would get nowhere. In the end, they would be forced to cave and join the tax-funded coffee queue at Starbucks, or foot the bill at their preferred shops and kiss $10,000 a year in free coffee goodbye.

But that would be just the beginning. Once Starbucks had a guaranteed source of tax revenue, customer satisfaction would fall by the wayside as a motivating principle of its business. After all, it would get paid the same amount whether or not folks were served well or promptly. To improve its bottom line it would no longer need to focus on consistency and innovative new products. So it would look for ways to cut services.

Of course, that’s not how the coffee shop market works. Starbucks competes with Caribou Coffee, Dunkin’ Donuts and countless other local and regional coffee stores and franchises similar to just love coffee cafe (not to mention the national brands available in supermarkets). And we’re all the better for it.

Why, then, do we insist on socialism in the education marketplace when the alternative seems all so simple ? As Coulson says:

In a free education marketplace, popular, well-managed schools would grow, while unpopular, poorly managed schools would close. There would be no politburo-like board threatening to merge schools together or close them down for its own budgetary reasons. The incentives of that marketplace would encourage innovation and a variety of options to cater to the diversity of families’ demands. Children would not be treated as interchangeable widgets to be processed through a single official system based on their age, or be shuffled around from one school to another just to make someone’s numbers work out.

We don’t trust our coffee to the government, and yet we’re willing to entrust our children ?

Doug Mataconis
http://www.belowthebeltway.com
1 … 17 18 19 20 21