Originally published in revista 22.

 

Liviu Andreescu objections from "toward a color separation between education and State?" the article "two solutions in the mirror" give me an opportunity to strengthen the libertariana proposal for the abolition of regulations and subsidies in education. Nor could I otherwise, when I see the results of a Phillips system socialism, which except for the autonomy of the Universities in terms of scientific content, is still planned is centralized. Intellectual Exchange creates and inevitable milestones in discussions about education reform.

 

Common elements between a libertarian and a modern liberal

 

A fruitful discussion with a liberal such as Liviu Andreescu is a modern inlesnita of several things. Up to a point, they both use the same theoretical tools to explain the failures of the State. We both know why when you don't pay, the beneficiaries of education are relatively listless towards the quality of service received. We know why education providers, when their incomes are fixed according to bureaucratic criteria, not related with the market demand for their particular service are relatively listless towards a quality of work on. We know why the administrators of public funds for education quality criteria require bureaucratic offered their control levers insile. Then, both of us wish that the beneficiaries of education to have "real" option, not just legal, a good education. Furthermore, we have an understanding of the role of the market in defining "good" education. For example, they both understand the significance of the fact that American schools, public and private, and prefer private companies certifications Toefl and GRE, what are the standards for evaluating selected by free market. Recrutii Romanian American doctoral schools serious I see there are interested anyone "averages" exams given at school in Romania, nor the number of years of study of English and mathematics. Public education and assessment is necredibil.

 

Liviu Andreescu: enclavizarii Objection

 

How far it takes us this common fund, remains to be seen. Liviu Andreescu formulated more concrete result of concerns relating to the privatization of education, too many to discuss them all, but now grant a significance importance enclavizarii risk. What would happen if all the regulations and subsidies would be eliminated? Somehow, ask him, we face a situation in which children follow parents ' standards rather than just to follow state standards? This situation would be better? How informed are parents? Moreover, we know that parents exercise authority over the inevitable evolution. And splitting children authority between parents and serves the State of an autonomous developments of children just by providing a real alternative to this. In a certain degree of intellectual freedom, serves the State real just by guaranteeing a contraponderi or a critical element when applied to parental education. "Liberalisation" would strengthen total but, just now, that parental authority would find support and in the local community, itself issued by designed for vast. Full liberalization could produce a "diverse, plural and effervescent viewed as a whole, but in fact an amount of local fiefdoms, autocratii, uncolored and individuals". On the other hand parents who would like an alternative for their children would be faced with the reality of the costs. An acceptable alternative would be too expensive, too far, or hard accessible in practice.

 

A: demand for critical thinking

 

Objection is serious. I know the parents better than national committees of experts what standards of education would be more suitable for their children? Does. In fact most don't even pretend like you would know.

 

But when evaluating a proposal to liberalise the market, institutional as well as evaluate the initial condition, but not the likely outcome of the market process applied to the initial condition. During the trial, new private suppliers to whom parents may delegate the task of judging educational standards suitable for children. Often parents are becoming aware that others have a high technique proficiency in an aspect of their child's life, and then they prefer to call them.

 

They would delegate does only to those organizations with similar views or ideologies as theirs insile? Some Yes. Members of certain religious congregations could deny children a critique of their own instruction. In general, however, if we look at the reality, they wont want to their children rather than see them profesand their own opinions and philosophies of life. Want to know happy, try to give them a life that puts themselves to shelter any reproaches, and generally would like to see their descendants to be admired and considered, included not only her and those like themselves, but how many groups.

 

Liviu Andreescu agrees that generalized liberalization generally produces diversity. And it is true that in a world that grows in diversity, parents are becoming less able to provide and to judge the value of various private options directly from the life of the new generations. But at the same time they become aware of their own limitations, parents recognize the value of adaptability with which they wish their children to be created. They begin to understand that gaining this mysterious qualities, it is necessary to cultivating child's education to a certain critical spirit and his capacity to judge yourself as many types of situations. For this reason I think the terms of privatization of education, parents will be more attentive to the development of child autonomy than would ever be the State. And at the same time, more honest than about the State of your own limitations. In this light we must prefiguram selection operated by parents in a free market of education and rating of suppliers of education.

 

Another answer: the battle for customer median

 

Liviu Andreescu is worried by the possible choices of parents that would narrow the ideological and religious field of children, and thus, their real autonomy.  But demand for criticizing a thinking includes the authentic exposure to the ideas of others, by contrast with the intellectual disputes and miming reproduction of sentences. Over time the market will be selected those schools capable of offering a genuine intellectual game. Real exposure to intellectual game with other schools of thinking threatens dogmatic habits. And opening cognitive work for local and fiefurilor against breakup shown. Universities in the United States are the best example available, but even they illustrate the imperfect situation of genuine intellectual competition. This because there a teacher has on hand at any time can titularizarii into a State University to housing which will preserve ideas otherwise debilitated.

 

It is of course possible that some suppliers to find their advantage just to serve the community. It can happen as a group to pay enough that school administrators to remove the temptation of admitting her clients that do not meet certain criteria of religion or race. But if we look at the reality of globalization, we recognize the first fight for client median. I mean the battle for the beneficiary, for the profile that describes the largest number of potential customers. This fight, Marat often in corporate terms, will render the service at cheaper or more accessible, to be the most capable of folding on a larger number of beneficiaries, and hence more acceptable to many. The pressure will be so regular cleaning package, standard, uniform, or any sensitive elements, niche or narrow-fundamentalist. The most affordable service will be a neutral service. Further, it will be in the interest of the big suppliers to penetrate new market segments through advertising and promotional offers. Sure bet is that the price of a regular package of education will be lower than the package cost monetarizabile per contributor in the public system. The success of meditations, which are now under the constraint of working with a small number of students per session, says something about the price of education in a market issued by constraints. But the usual package of education affordability is just a pressure towards uniformity. Here is how the market's strength is likely to break down the enclaves.

 

Those two reasons, brought critical thinking and offerers of pressure profile, shows the limits of obiectiei enclavizarii in a free market. But even if the objection is not cancelled, but only weakened, I think the shortcomings are created with much lower benefits. For most, the most important is whether the average level of education would be higher than that achieved by the present public system but at a lower price.

 

Instead, today's objection applies with full force inside her, not States, but at the State level. Today autocratii are those States that produce territorial individuals in order that hinder the uncolored by law access to competitors. With the help of the law, it protects States on themselves and their clientele by pressure from the competitors, be they companies, organizations, communities. While on a private market all these would provide a counterweight to address some criticism of others, both in terms of intellectual and ideological ingustimii and in terms of price, now all of them are waived by the State in order to protect himself from contraponderi.

 

Receipts for education

 

But we can reach concrete proposals for reform that can be sutinute and modern Liberals and libertarian and if objection has some weight. What is the scope of application of the obiectiei enclavizarii? What measures and what steps objection attack leaves untouched? Objection of the privatization idea attacking both the sector and the idea of homeschooling. However, as long as the State education providers closely licentiaza, objection to leave education untouched receipt proposal of "voucherizarii".

Interesting, because the whole system of voucherizarea education is an idea more spectacular than the legal permission of the homeschoolingului. What means voucherizarea? The draw system and the idea of State standards and also preserved the idea of equal opportunities because the State distributes parents vouchers ("vouchers", but for education) in a fair manner. What changes is only the fact that private providers can replace State-run schools if sufficiently many parents prefer to buy with the vouchers to private providers. It is likely that they will work more efficiently than the public schools. I can not hide my joy as the new law of education creates opportunity for education and vouchers at the University level and at the pre-university level. Eliminate administrative mediation. Modern Liberals and libertarienii found a common ground here and if we're careful we may have all won.

 

But we must be aware that State control over the standards. Because the shelter idea education bonds hides increasing bureaucracy. In the first instance we will witness the scandals, appeals and complaints about quality, probity, the suitability of many of the private providers of education that, huh?, make a profit from the money from taxes, from religious schools until the schools do not have the time to different types of certificates. Otherwise reasonable objections can increase the bureaucracy of State responsible for the application of standards. Placing bureaucratic will restrict the possibility for innovation by private providers. In what grade will limit, we now say the situation private universities from Romania, who are constranse the same competitoarele designed for vast public as well, but without the subsidies, and to enjoy those students able to be admitted into a State University without paying. The advantage of freedom of enterprise, innovation, will be reduced. In addition, you might like the State budget allocated to the education sector, summing up the total value of the bonds and the cost of State bodies which will establish and enforce licensing, standards of quality, to grow. It can be and that, in a laudable idea of freedom of choice, to be added over the old system nereformat new tax burdens. For example, the measure by which every newborn receives from the State 500 euros in an educational account will not succeed, taken in isolation, rather than increase the machine state.

 

The tax credits system, simple system of higher bonds for education

 

As long as the system of vouchers is not coupled with a free market for rating schools, in which private foundations to take over from the State the role of licentiator, the State will be able to perverteasca and the idea of the private provider and the idea of free choice. There is a superior alternative to reform education.  The tax credits system, already functional in Florida and Pennsylvania and to a certain extent already brought up in Romania, cupleaza education market with market assessment. Any natural or legal person will be able to donate money to a private Foundation, which granted scholarships to students according to merit. It will receive in return a tax credit ("tax credit"), i.e. recognition of a corresponding tax payments to the State. The liberalization of education won't work outside the evaluation standards of liberalization and free circulation of information, which in turn selects the ways information and correction of dezinformarii. In general, if the services are restricted markets we cannot expect a liberalisation markets to produce spectacular results. In general, support each other's markets. Markets create a working framework for other markets, while the State, through regulations that would inhibit the freedom of specific activities, is the one that weakens this framework or atrophied.

 

Basically, the idea of tax credits continue measure 2% redirection of a portion of the income tax of a civic organizations at the discretion of the taxpayer. But only when this idea would gain a much larger extent it might illustrate the strength of the market. These are not new ideas in Romania. ? at least inta IPO one of your team members who have implemented 2% measure was an extension of the tax credits in all sectors of public services up to 40 per cent. Since then, these ideas have gained recognition and were subject to certain clarifications in discussion clubs.

 

The real option of eating apples

 

I do not see a principled reason, but maybe just circumstantial, for which a modern liberal such as Liviu Andreescu to object in front of such proposals. And I prefer the son prisoner de jure and de facto into something acceptable than to be free, but de facto prisoner into something unacceptable. Both of us want to have as many options. And we both know that, although de jure liberalisation generally make more affordable options, sometimes the State can make some good options more accessible than they would make in the market. Evaluate different blend costs but the market State. These costs are much higher than believed.

 

Arguments by analogy are sometimes the most illustrative: Let's take the example of apples market liberalization and market liberalization.

 

Today it is relatively liberalized market apples. Students have the option of eating real apples? Yes. Still it's easier from the standpoint of the pupils to receive the last break an Apple than to buy it on the way to school somewhere. Many think this is reasonable; Today the State mechanism, not the market, provides children, milk and Apple croissants at the last break.

 

Sure it's good for students to eat an Apple a day. It is good to eat and spinach. Contains iron. Many are good. The problem is that the price that parents pay a hidden mechanism for a service is great too. But citizens pay for pay that il is opaque. Precisely for this reason public funds professionals they can proceed peacefully programs.

 

And not as actual cost is the issue, as well as quality. Here meet a difficulty. The issue of quality is camouflaged in the analogy between education and apples. Are apples provided by the worse state than those provided by the market? Does. Why would the education? Two are the reasons that today the State can provide beautiful apples. One is that it has at its disposal a functional market of fruits where to take them over. He reminds someone how shows offer fruit in socialism? A little worse. And yet, there were not much apples dumber.

 

Why? Here sits the second reason:

 

Ohio quality standard is already given or imposed by nature. Composition "good for us" to Ohio, was caused by a natural process. We don't have than to thank natural evolution which systematically allow proliferation of apples good for people and the proliferation of people who can nurture with apples. By contrast, educational products are not given by nature; they are both made and assessed people's minds. In this sector only free competition can impersonate the discovery procedure of quality and production methods. The new standards that work as a guide in evaluating vendors and products are permanently adjusted the rating agencies themselves under the pressure of the competition in terms of free circulation of information. However, the restrictions applied to the State of the market prevents just this process of discovery and selection. He reminds someone how shows offer Romanian music in full socialism? Here you see the true cost of providing services through State mechanisms and not on the market.

 

Conclusion

 

The new law on education, the proposal has the permission homeschoolingului folk and the coupling of educational account for newborns with proper tax credits include the laudable elements. There are many people, including the one that gave me the opportunity of these notes, with whom I share many things why capitalized. But in my opinion education sector must be completely privatised. A controllable way up there is the extension of the tax credits system. Discussions about changing the content of textbooks were gradually replaced with discussion about the disappearance of the idea of manually. You will need to gradually disappear and the idea that teachers must be State officials, and along with it the idea of clerks and inspectors from the State. The very idea of the Ministry of education as we understand today, you have to disappear. The role of the law of education can't be for example to impose as "academic year structure to have two semesters," and that "the second half will have 14 weeks of didactic activities followed by a minimum of 3 weeks of exams". The specific framework of the education sector should be redefined to the standing of a free market evaluation, not composed of regulations likely to confine freedom activities specific to the sector. The role of the law should be only to punish those who hinder the entry, exit and the innovation in the market.

 

* Center of analysis and institutional development