The reason schooling is hard to change - here in the US - is because the teachers unions and politicians work together to reduce hours, reliance on standards, eliminate "work" (homework isn't good for them!), and increase spend and pay. Government is incredibly inefficient at most tasks - on average things the government does cost twice as much - but it's incredibly terrible at education. Spending has increased - performance decreased ad infinium.
Many, perhaps most, of the teachers are underpaid. If spending more money isn't helping, there are probably too many middle-managers sucking up the money. Remove some of the middle-managers and divert their money to the teachers.
I keep hearing this. I have yet to find a teacher or a school district or a government employee or department or organization of any kind that didn't clamour for more more more funds.
We spend twice what we did in 1970's in real terms; results ... the same.
"Deep defense cuts. Since the 1980s, the Pentagon budget has fallen from 6% to 3% of GDP—not far above Europe’s target of 2%. Cutting U.S. defense spending to the levels pledged by European members of NATO would save 1% of GDP, or less than one-fifth of the Social Security and Medicare noninterest shortfall by the 2040s and 2050s."
Read the budget. Learn something. None of the partisan mantras solve the problem. The only solution is to trim ss, trim medicare, and raise taxes across the board.
Since the 1960s, revenue from total taxation as a percent of gdp is unchanged. Not also the difference in tax revenue between Europe and America stems mostly from policies that tax the middle class not the "rich":
The U.S. already taxes the rich—measured by both tax rates and tax revenues—at levels roughly equal to the OECD average. Yes, the other 38 OECD nations collect tax revenues that, on average, exceed the U.S. by 7.5% of GDP (at all levels of government). However, nearly this entire difference results from the other 38 OECD nations hitting their middle class with value-added taxes (VATs) that raise an average of 7.2% of GDP. And while the progressive avatars of Finland, Norway, and Sweden exceed U.S. tax revenues by 16% of GDP, that gap virtually disappears after accounting for the 14.5% of GDP in higher payroll and VAT revenues that broadly hit the Nordic middle class. Europe finances its progressive spending levels on the backs of the middle class, not the wealthy.[37]
This plan should be a must read for people from any spot along the American political spectrum.
This is naive and wrong. An example of this is Google Fiber and ironically Tesla. When Google Fiber came out, ISPs lobbied to sue Google and local governments to prevent Fiber from being available in their areas instead of competing. When Tesla tried to sell direct to consumer, dealerships sued to prevent it. Entrenched companies will always use the system to prevent competition. Regulatory capture is a term for a reason.
...which even my local CSA seems to manage. Not saying there isn't a burden, but it's nothing like laying fiber or laws which specifically ban direct sales of automobiles.
If there was big money to be made undercutting Big Potato, someone would do it. Even my CSA grows potatoes.
The OP asked for examples of things that prevent ethical companies from outcompeting unethical ones and I provided a few. Hyper-focusing on potatoes doesn't invalidate that.
Your local CSA is also unlikely to be audited by the FDA unless they tried to go larger than your community.
Correct, which is why they agglomerated in the first place. Sectors where you see lots of agglomeration are ones where there are significant advantages to agglomeration.
And yeah, it’s hard to do once, but obviously it’s dramatically harder to do after someone has already done it.
Its interesting how the benefits seem to be dependent on market context. Go to the ralphs, its big potato no doubt. Go to the farmers market and people are there arguably to avoid big potato and big anything else for that matter.
Oh sure: billions of dollars in cash? Hundreds of lawyers? Lobbyists on Capitol Hill? A buddy at USDA or EPA? Lower unit prices on just about every single thing they need to buy? Brand recognition? Strong negotiating positions in 100% of their deals?
Burroughs is the most visual author I know, but neither he nor the reader are fully in control of what's painted. He has the process. I think he works for people with a rich inner monologue, which is leveraged against you. Dredge up some odd childhood memories, rotate some shapes, and then give him another go.
Wow, so much negativity in the early comments. I've been in the space decades and there's at least 2-3 years of education to be gained here. Great piece, thank you!
reply