[Eran]

They are for communally run and operated schools which is what I am arguing for, as opposed to the privately owned profit-motivated alternative.

Do you also object to privately owned profit-motivated food providers (aka supermarkets)? How about privately owned profit-motivated clothing providers? Or housing providers?

How is education different from food, clothing and housing? After all, parents make food, clothing and housing decisions for their children. Why not educational decisions, regardless of the nature of the provider?

If most people agree with you, they aren't going to send their children to for-profit schools. Such schools will not be viable, and will disappear (or fail to appear in the first place). Rather, parents will send their children to community-organised, non-profit schools. I would have no issue with that.

If some parents disagree with you and, for whatever reason, prefer sending their child to a for-profit school, why not?

Parents are not. Parents often aren't aware of international evaluations of educational quality, parents can't guarantee that the schools in their city are quality, etc., especially if they do not have access to a democratic process that can guarantee it.

I parents are so unaware of international evaluations of educational quality, how are they qualified to use the democratic process to ensure high quality public schools?

The mechanism for democratic insurance of quality (whether in education, product safety, professional certification, etc.) is always indirect. People elect those politicians they trust to recruit professionals who make the actual decisions.

The very same process can work without government. Those parents who aren't aware of international evaluations of educational quality can still identify those people / firms / institutions they trust, who in turn recruit / employ professionals to make the actual decisions.

Your parents did not have enough money to send you to private school? Without public school, you would have had no option whatsoever.

Wrong. A voucher system would have provided mike's parents with enough money to send him to a modest-cost private school. Or perhaps they could have augmented those vouchers by a small amount and send him to a higher-cost private school to which they couldn't afford full tuition.

[mikema63]

Parents are not. Parents often aren't aware of international evaluations of educational quality, parents can't guarantee that the schools in their city are quality, etc., especially if they do not have access to a democratic process that can guarantee it. I don't think you need strict curriculum either but it is important to have SOME curriculum and SOME standards of education.

Politicians don't know anything about the individual child or what he/she can do, parents don't have any other children around to look at as well. Considering that we are arguing about international evaluations I do think it is quite possible for parents to be aware of them as well.

Your parents did not have enough money to send you to private school? Without public school, you would have had no option whatsoever. You would have been one of those kids with the right to work so that your family could scrape by while some wealthy capitalist reaped the rewards of your labor. This is liberty and justice?

You completely ignored my point about school zoning and tried to change the subject, I passed by two good schools on my way to a bad school just to satisfy some bureaucrats ridiculous zoning map.

I suppose ignoring any idea of vouchers or charity being in place in this world without public schools yes, but we are arguing about vouchers which would have allowed me to go to those two other public schools or a private school.

The cited article makes the case for why the structure of Finnish education is superior to ours, and within that context shows the importance of the freedom of individual teachers. That is not an argument for private education.

It wasn't you asked for a source showing that Finnish teachers had a large degree of autonomy.

[libertarian_4_life]

The year is 2012. Internet is available almost everywhere on Earth.
Self-education is very much a possibility today.

Public (and private) school are tools to indoctrinate students and to teach obedience.
obedience = success
disobedience = failure

Too many schools (especially public schools) are "factories" which mass produce workers to perform low to medium skilled labour and service jobs.
Since China became a manufacturing giant, western students will find it more and more difficult to obtain manual labour and service jobs for which they were educated.

I spent many years in public school and at least 5 years in college/university.
Not one of my teachers was an entrepreneur.
Most of my teachers spent almost their whole career in education, and have little industry experience.
Too many students are mislead to believe that jobs are easy to find with a "good education".

The one thing I think which would improve schooling and not cost anything is ....
stop forcing students to study things which they dont want to study.

The success and prosperity of future industries depends on the most capable students achieving success in their fields.
Turning poorly educated students into average students will benefit society only a little.

[mikema63]

The teachers union is unlikely to go for it, some subjects might be unpopular enough that teachers may have to be fired and students wouldn't take as many classes (probably/usually) so some more teachers could lose their jobs.

Certainly students should focus on what they enjoy or are good at and if some students prefer they could go to technical school instead of everybody having to go to college for no reason.

[Harald Baldr]

I would look at John Stossel's youtube videos. They are an excellent introduction to the main issues and ideas tailor made for a contemporary audience.

Alternatively you can take a few hours and read Ron Paul's 50 principles of liberty.

[Less_State]

Hong Kong can be used as good country that had experiment sucessefuly Libertarianism ?

[Rich]

Hong Kong can be used as good country that had experiment sucessefuly Libertarianism ?

You mean when it is was a British colony. Rather like the united States. The great era of small government was before they declared independence.

[Less_State]

You mean when it is was a British colony. Rather like the united States. The great era of small government was before they declared independence.

Yes

America was also a good example of Minarchism in Sec XVIII and XIX .