×
It's not every day I read something by someone who's work I respect that makes me question whether I should ever take anything they say seriously again. But this post by Megan McArdle qualifies. I should say, before I start in on it, that I'm not personally dead set against vouchers. I wouldn't implement them now myself, but I do think they could be part of a solution in certain circumstances. But Megan's argument almost makes me question that open-mindedness. Here she is on parents who sent their kids to private schools while opposing vouchers:
Vouchers don't work... this argument is incompatible with removing your own children from failing schools. Either the school makes a difference, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, why are you moving to the suburbs in search of a better school district for your kids?What? Seriously? Lets think about this for a second. What could possibly make a parent who believes vouchers are a bad idea choose to send his or her kids to private school? Perhaps it's the fact that elite private schools spend way more per pupil than public schools because they can. If I'm a rich parent, I put my kid at a disadvantage when I put him or her in public school, not because private schools are somehow superior, but because enrolling him or her in private school allows me to pay for a higher level of education service. It doesn't follow that opposing vouchers makes me a hypocrite. I could support making funding for education more equal, but, since that isn't going to happen tomorrow, I'm not morally obligated to punish my child for the failings of our political system. And how does McArdle respond to this? With a breathtakingly nasty bit of snark about the current system:
