Question

What are some paternalistic benefits and possible issues with government intervention in the educational system

Answer 1

Today, education is largely paid for and administered almost entirely by government or non-profit institutions. This condition has gradually developed and is now taken so much for granted that little specific focus is no longer devoted to the reasons for the special treatment of education even in countries where institutional and intellectual enterprise is largely open. The consequence was an indiscriminate expansion of the duty of the government.

A second is the presence of significant "neighborhood consequences," i.e., one individual's action imposes substantial costs on other citizens for whom it is not feasible to make them pay or produce substantial gains for whom it is not feasible to make them compensate him circumstances that make voluntary exchange impossible. The third is derived from an ambiguity in the ultimate goal rather than from the difficulty of voluntary exchange, namely paternalistic concern for children and other irresponsible people. The belief in freedom is for groups that are "real," of which we do not include children or people who are insane.

Generally speaking, this issue is avoided by considering the family as the basic unit and hence the parents as responsible for their children; however, to a considerable extent such a practice is based on simplicity rather than theory. The question of drawing a reasonable line between acts justified on these paternalistic grounds and actions contrary to the freedom of individuals responsible is obviously one that can not be addressed satisfactorily

Without widespread acceptance of some shared set of values and without a minimum degree of literacy and education by most people, a prosperous and democratic society is unlikely. Training is related to both. As a result, the benefit from a child's education accrues not only to the child or his family, but to other members of society; by fostering a healthy and democratic society, my child's education contributes to the welfare of other people. Nevertheless, it is not possible to classify the persons (or families) who have benefited or the money cost of the benefit and therefore to bill for the services rendered. Therefore, there is a significant "neighborhood impact."

Only certain types of education can be justified on these grounds by government subsidies. They do not justify, to anticipate, subsidizing purely vocational education that increases the student's economic productivity but does not train him for citizenship or leadership. Obviously, drawing a sharp line between these two kinds of learning is extremely difficult. Some general education adds to the student's economic value— in reality, literacy has ceased to have a marketable value only in modern times and in a few countries.