Bad Ecomomics
This from Peter Saunders in the Australian today:
'First, government spending crowds out voluntary initiatives. If the Government makes huge gifts to universities, other people won't.'
Mixing economic speak with social science= bad economics.
Increasing government funding doesn't 'crowd out' public expenditure at all where government is not using debt to finance that expenditure.
Where is the proof that providing government funding stops people bequeathing money to public institutions?
Where is the research that shows this is the case?
I would say that by allocating money to universities government is sending a message to the community that investing in education is important, and that will encourage more private spending on education.
Where is my research? I don't have any :D
'First, government spending crowds out voluntary initiatives. If the Government makes huge gifts to universities, other people won't.'
Mixing economic speak with social science= bad economics.
Increasing government funding doesn't 'crowd out' public expenditure at all where government is not using debt to finance that expenditure.
Where is the proof that providing government funding stops people bequeathing money to public institutions?
Where is the research that shows this is the case?
I would say that by allocating money to universities government is sending a message to the community that investing in education is important, and that will encourage more private spending on education.
Where is my research? I don't have any :D
posted by timboy at 4:49 PM
3 Comments:
'First, government spending crowds out voluntary initiatives. If the Government makes huge gifts to universities, other people won't.'
Yeah, this is Right Wing crap. If his correct, than the increased benevolence over the last ten years would have made up for the millions that Howard has pulled out of tertiary education. But it hasn't. Australian Universities, try as the will, still don't have the culture of benevolence that U.S. Universities do.
I'm just wondering, what else could we just leave to benevolence: -Roads?
-Parks?
-Hospitals?
-Police?
-Defence?
-Social Services?
-Waste Disposal?
-Water Supply?
-Primary & Secondary Education?
Where do you draw the line!
But I'm getting off track as Mr Saunders was also referring to lost autonomy. But he could be wrong, as dependence on private benevolence could lead to relinquished autonomy!
education and health are as much a private good as defence is. it's a pity they're not funded so. well at least until labor becomes so much of a threat, that liberal has to attack it from the left.
there's a bigger post in that. i'll get onto it.
But I think he was talking more about people donating their money to Universities, rather than privatisng Unversities. (although he no doubt believes that)
From what I understand the deep dark thinking behind these ideas is to drop taxes, whilst creating a culture where people donate money to certain areas. I think its more of a common form of thinking in the U.S. And I find it all very odd, almost scary. And its something, me thinks, our PM believes in.
Post a Comment
<< Home