A libertarian defends public education (sort of)

As a libertarian, I am at odds regarding the role of  Public education in society.

Most libertarians would embrace a laissez-faire, free enterprise means of delivering education services to our children. 100 years ago, when the need for a good education was not so critical, a laissez-faire form of education system would have been acceptable to most citizens. The majority of citizens either worked on the farm or in factories. The need for an advanced education was not so critical.

Today, it is commonly accepted that one would never exceed a standard of living beyond the poverty level without at least a  college diploma or a tradesman's certification. In addition, everyone wants a good future for their children. Finally, a countries overall standard of living is dependent upon an educated workforce that can produce the goods and services required to compete successfully in both domestic and world markets.

 For these reasons, it seems self-evident to me that in benefits everyone and society in general to achieve the highest level of education possible for all citizens.

Not all of us are created with equal opportunity or ability. Some children are born into wealthy families where the cost of an education is easily born. Others are less fortunate. Some children are born with innate aptitudes for learning and academic achievement. Others are not born with these gifts. Most children are born with natural talents  which can be developed to their advantage and to the general advantage of society.

Libertarians believe that government has a legitimate role to play in protecting private property and the personal safety of its citizens. An educated and productive citizen is arguably more safe than one who is failed to achieve the necessary credentials and skills to be a productive member of the workforce. There are all kinds of examples of men and women who failed to find their place in society. These people can be found in our prisons or amongst our homeless.

The current public education system which is delivered on a monopoly basis and using a monopoly workforce is less than ideal. Unions have become too powerful and have shaped the attitudes of our teachers that their needs exceed the needs of the  children they teach. These teachers wish to be treated as professionals yet behave as a blue-collar workforce under union rule. They can't have it both ways.

Monopolies have been outlawed in the private sector for many good reasons. Yet monopoly delivery of our education programs is not only allowed, but is lauded  as the best system in the world. Can anyone explain this double standard to me?

Every child needs to be prepared to enter and compete in a workforce that demands such a high degree of skill, knowledge, and ability to work within teams. To limit access to a good education for any child would be a great disservice to both the child and society in general. For this reason, I believe that  every member of society benefits directly by enabling every child to achieve his or her potential to become a productive member of society.

The question is how to achieve this objective.

 I believe in competition for its ability to best bring the best out in people.

I believe in competition for its ability to allocate human resources effectively and efficiently.

I believe in  competition for its ability to provide incentives for individuals to Excel and for businesses to deliver services in such a way that customer satisfaction is attained in a cost-effective manner.

A modern education system needs to be one based on a Competition and not Monopoly  model.

Voucher systems have been used with mixed results in other jurisdictions. In theory, it seems to be a model that could combine some form of  limited public funding as well as the best features of competitive delivery. I favor constructive and enthusiastic debate on this topic, or any other model that would help us to move away from a monopoly system.

The very thought of any form of “social engineering” with respect to an education system goes against the grain with me. However, education is one domain where I believe it may be necessary. Call it a “two-tier” education system if you will,