Ross Gittins Wants Government to Provide Education for Education’s Sake

How else is one to read this?

How is compulsory provision of education justified? Because Gittins values knowledge for its own sake. Okay, now, should we increase funding? Oh yes, because we value knowledge for its own sake. How long before the government publishes mass editions for free distribution of Bertrand Russell’s “‘Useless’ Knowledge” and forces kids to read it? Perhaps Gittins can even turn Albert Jay Nock into an excuse for government intervention.

This entry was posted in Ross Gittins takes potshots at economics and taxpayers. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Ross Gittins Wants Government to Provide Education for Education’s Sake

  1. Ted Kramer says:

    Education is a merit good and a microeconomic policy. It is a far more important product/service for people than most others, except law and order or health…but assists both of these as well. Next for me comes environmental management, not environmental exploitation.

    • Benjamin Marks says:

      But, Ted, food and clothing are important too. It could be argued they are even more crucial for survival than education. So do you think the supply of food and clothing should be forcefed to the population (just like compulsory attendance laws and compulsory curriculum laws)? Do you think it should be funded by coercive property expropriation (taxation)?

Leave a Reply