Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!flink
From: flink@umcp-cs.UUCP (Paul V. Torek)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Newsflash! [Subsidized Education]
Message-ID: <1110@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 5-Aug-85 12:51:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1110
Posted: Mon Aug  5 12:51:34 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Aug-85 17:11:44 EDT
References: <955@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 32
Keywords: Attn: Larry Tepper

> ... Daniel K McKiernan has convinced me (by USPS mail)
> that the externalities involved are too minor and to hard to identify to
> justify a policy of subsidized education...
> 				--Paul V Torek

Since someone asked:  the only serious externalities I could think of
involved in education are those associated with research and invention.
Education keeps people off welfare, but welfare wouldn't exist in a 
libertarian society, so that wouldn't apply in my antilibertarian argument.
Education makes better voters, I think, but McKiernan disagreed (which 
shows, I guess, how subjective that judgement is); and besides, democracy
wouldn't exist in Libertaria either (except in voluntary organizations).

Education promotes research and invention, which in turn have positive
effects on people not party to the relevant transactions.  But only some
types of education do that, and only indirectly.  And subsidizing education
in order to promote subsequent activities is bass-ackward; better to just
subsidize research directly.  And invention wouldn't have significant
externalities in McKiernan's version of Libertaria, because they would be
copyrighted and copyrights would *never expire*.  

One other way in which education of an individual might benefit the public
at large is that it makes him less likely to turn criminal.  But, again,
this is only an INdirect effect; if we want to discourage crime, we can
do that more directly.  (Although, since deterrence is imperfect, there
will still be some positive externality associated with education's effect
in reducing crime).

So that's why I've succumbed to the libertarian argument on education.  
OK, socialists and centrists, where did I go wrong?

--Still the reluctant centrist, Paul V Torek, umcp-cs!flink