The problem is what they see as inefficiency. Social services, education, and a bunch of other things that are actually beneficial to society they consider a waste of money. There is overlap in what I consider inefficient and waste, but it is small. This does make the cut though.
education, and a bunch of other things that are actually beneficial to society they consider a waste of money
For education, at least, I agree with the majority of (non-MAGA) Conservatives. Education should be treated like food, not like roads: government should ensure everyone has access in a diverse competitive market of providers, but not be a direct producer.
50 or 100 years ago, I could much more see the argument that education is a natural geographic monopoly. Now I firmly believe that education is suffering from lack of innovation and competition.
What do you mean by “diverse competitive market of providers”? All I can imagine is religious schools like Catholic, Presbyterian, Suuni, Shi’ite, Taoist, Satanist, and then language schools, vocational schools, universities, sport schools, etc.
Also what do you mean by a “natural geographic monopoly”? Schools are neither natural, nor geographic, nor monopolies. Take Gemany for example. It has 16 different school systems. France has one school system but schools are given quite some leeway. The Netherlands has an extremely complex system with multiple exits and entries. And as for monopolies, there are often multiple schools in the same city, town, village or neighborhood.
I’m curious to read what you mean by those statements.
Conservatives who grumble about the inefficiency of government spending are not wrong
The problem is what they see as inefficiency. Social services, education, and a bunch of other things that are actually beneficial to society they consider a waste of money. There is overlap in what I consider inefficient and waste, but it is small. This does make the cut though.
For education, at least, I agree with the majority of (non-MAGA) Conservatives. Education should be treated like food, not like roads: government should ensure everyone has access in a diverse competitive market of providers, but not be a direct producer.
50 or 100 years ago, I could much more see the argument that education is a natural geographic monopoly. Now I firmly believe that education is suffering from lack of innovation and competition.
What do you mean by “diverse competitive market of providers”? All I can imagine is religious schools like Catholic, Presbyterian, Suuni, Shi’ite, Taoist, Satanist, and then language schools, vocational schools, universities, sport schools, etc.
Also what do you mean by a “natural geographic monopoly”? Schools are neither natural, nor geographic, nor monopolies. Take Gemany for example. It has 16 different school systems. France has one school system but schools are given quite some leeway. The Netherlands has an extremely complex system with multiple exits and entries. And as for monopolies, there are often multiple schools in the same city, town, village or neighborhood.
I’m curious to read what you mean by those statements.