9 thoughts on “The anti-profit mentality in education”

  1. Posted 21/08/2012 at 12:25 | Permalink

    If it is wrong to profit from education, it must be wrong for teachers to be paid. Just because their profits are labelled as salaries they are profits none the less.

  2. Posted 21/08/2012 at 16:51 | Permalink

    Fine to say that it is wrong to profit from education so long as you are in the priiveliged position of securing capital by force from taxpayers to whom you are not obliged tp provide a return.

    However, as only governments can do that the argument becomes a Trojan Horse for an exclusively state run education system.

    All other investors will properly and sensibly require a return on capital invested

  3. Posted 21/08/2012 at 20:15 | Permalink

    It’s about time that someone started arguing, in earnest, for privatising education.

  4. Posted 22/08/2012 at 08:00 | Permalink

    I’m sure that a campaign to ‘privatise education’ would go down like a lead balloon. However a campaign to restore the basic human right of parents (i.e voters) to choose in education would certainly appeal much more to the general public. The number of parents who have been negatvely affected by the lack of choice continues to grow and is perhaps close to tipping point. All we need now is a politician with balls.

  5. Posted 22/08/2012 at 12:44 | Permalink

    “learning has always been separate from the forces of the free market”

    Seriously? Is the editor completely unaware that EVEN NOW 7% of school children are educated privately, as are most children under 5. What about adult education? What about the legions of private schools in the C18th and C19th.

    That statement is simply a lie.

  6. Posted 22/08/2012 at 13:51 | Permalink

    You’re right, of course, JB. And I wouldn’t want to stop those local authorities who think they can run schools better than the private sector to continue to do just that – without any subsidy from central government beyond that available to all schools via education vouchers. Not at all a new idea, and if a Government should wish to favour (say) inner-city schools or the poor or “difficult” children or any other special classes of child, then it has only to increase the value of the voucher in those cases.

    And as you say, all we need is a brave politician, one who won’t baulk at the thought of “privileged” children – those whose parents now scrimp and save to educate them privately – benefiting too (to his electoral detriment, if that newspaper editor is at all typical). It’s a matter of principle – which, I suppose, is why we haven’t apparently any politicians who will embrace the idea.

  7. Posted 29/08/2012 at 17:35 | Permalink

    Much more recently than the 19th century we had a semi-free market in education.

    In the 1930s my mother’s parents paid for the two of their four children who did not get county scholarships to go to Grammar School. My grandfather was a railway signalman. Working class aristocracy, perhaps, but their living standards would not be tolerated today. They valued education, and it could be found priced at a level they could afford.

  8. Posted 31/08/2012 at 11:32 | Permalink

    Thanks GH. This is facsinating and more research is required to find out why these fees were phased out and for what reason. I wonder if you could find out how much they were paying? Perhaps if you could find out the name of the school and then I can investigate.

  9. Posted 06/09/2012 at 10:11 | Permalink

    It is absurd to state that education has always been separate from the free market. Our current education system is a very recent development in human society – most education was on the job, under the auspices of guilds and apprenticeships; most definitely free-market related.

Comments are closed.