Libertarians: How will the market provide education at an affordable price?

Question

Just a question, not trying to offend you.

Competition cannot lower the price of a service lower than it costs to produce it. At the moment, the average cost of educating a child to the school is approximately $8000 per year. Nobody is going to sell a service for a lower price than it costs to produce it. So the price for education (as we know it now) is always going to be, on average, more than $8000 per child per year. Which is pretty expensive considering that many people earn only $20,000 per year.

The only way to provide it at an affordable price would be to change the way we educate children so that it becomes cheap enough so that the majority of people can afford it. Of course, at this point you will say that the market will provide a solution. Yes, it probably will, but how long is it going to take? How many people will become illiterate before the market comes up with a solution?

Can you think of a cheaper way of educating children? Would removing sports achieve this?

Properly Precious: Secondary schools have more than 1 teacher.

Answer 1

First, I think most libertarians agree that the government should pay for elementary schools and high schools, as in a democracy, being able to read and write, and having some basic knowledge of government, history, and science are necessary for a person to be a responsible voter. As a libertarian, I support a voucher system for K-12 education, and privatization of all education beyond that level, with government-sponsored loans available for people who cannot afford college. This might make me a little to the left of some doctrinaire libertarians, but I think it's for the best. I think the discussion in Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom" is on point here. I realize later in his life, Friedman proposed privatizing all of education on the grounds that the fraction of families who really couldn't afford to educate their kids was small enough that charity could fill the gap, but I prefer his earlier work.

Many schools waste a lot of money on administration that they would not need to spend if they were private schools. That could cut perhaps 10% off the costs. Sports could cut a few percent more. I'd be surprised if you could find other ways to cut costs much without cutting quality. Property taxes would be dramatically reduced if schools were not government funded, so that would solve the problem for working class people, but not for the very poor.

Really, though, the market solution would have to be shaming the schools into taking on a reasonable number of need-based scholarship students. Special education would be a much more serious problem, as it is extremely expensive - costly enough to wipe out even middle class families.

EDIT:
Properly Precious - you are missing some costs. Fringe benefits for the teachers can raise their costs to well above their salaries. A principal making $100,000 a year in a school of 200 students adds another $500/year. The school nurse and guidance counselor add another $500. Teachers usually teach only about 70% of the school day, getting a few free periods. In elementary schools, the students have a period or two a day in art, music, gym or something else. That costs another $800/yr or so. The school library needs books and a librarian - another $600.
Maintaining the school building and paying for heating will cost something. Janitors and repairs to the school building cost money. $8000/yr isn't too unreasonable. This actually underestimates the costs, in some sense, since the costs of building a school are usually not included. I'm sure private schools could streamline some of these things, but most schools are quite efficient, and it would require real innovation to make things cheaper without doing something like reducing salaries to teachers (and that, of course would either result in worse teachers, or would require better working conditions).

Answer 2

No offense, but your numbers are based on figures generated by the current socialistic educational system supported by the Federal and State governments and all but openly left-wing Teachers Union. IF we provided the 'service' in the way they do, you're absolutely right: market forces cannot be brought to bear. If we removed sports programs, that would be like knocking the tip off the iceberg and would probably be counter productive: the social backlash would end the reform program in short order. No, the answer is a long term 'climate change' through out the educational system toward making people step up and assume responsibility for what they do. Parents, students, teachers and administrators must decide what is right and do it.

Answer 3

I don't accept your reasoning. No one is in a position to determine what is an "affordable" price. That notion is arbitrary.
Competition does lower the cost of production. The cost per student varies greatly in school districts. $8,000 is a low figure. The worst school district is in Washington, DC. The cost per student is $21,000.
Duquesne, PA is the poorest town near Pittsburgh, PA. Before the state closed the schools down, it was costing over $20,000 per student...and most were failing or dropping out. The best school district in the most affluent neighborhood, Mount Lebanon, was spending $12,000 per student and most went on to higher education.
Larger school districts, less administrators, less overhead, larger class sizes, more accountability all will lower costs and increase quality of education.
School Districts get their money from taxes, not payment of tuition. Education will continue to be funded by taxes.
The market solution is already here. It is called vouchers. Unions have a strangle hold on school districts and will not permit vouchers.

Answer 4

It Does NOT cost $8000 per year to educate a child, This a figure that the GOVERNMENT has given. Private schools will be much cheaper once we close all government schools. Competition will drive the market like it does everything else. Government is NEVER more efficient than private enterprise.

Answer 5

Yes, Ten good textbooks at $50 each, pencils, paper and art supplies at $500 a year. Sports cannot cost $7,000 a year per student. Somebody needs to get priorities straight. Once the buildings are built and the technology installed, (you can now get a good computer for a couple hundred dollars), all you need is to pay the teacher's salaries. Let's see: 20 kids at $3,000 each per year per teacher is $60,000. That sounds pretty good. What else are we paying for?

Answer 6

Education is good, because it teaches you how to learn, how to discipline your mind. Knowledge for a Christian is knowing the word, knowing your God, His nature, His will, His outlook on things. Wisdom is looking at things from God's perspective and putting them into action. Knowledge is great, but too much of it can puff you up if you don't counteract it with fruit of the Spirit. Ever know a person who's very knowledgeable, but has no temperance and no love? Their knowledge is almost useless in the long run. But wisdom? You find that and your soul shall live, because when you find wisdom, you find the way God Himself looks at a situation. Proverbs 3: By wisdom the Lord laid the earth’s foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; by his knowledge the watery depths were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew.