Without the state, we wouldn't have X.
That's the template used against us all the time.
Education is a common X. Why, without state involvement our people would be ignorant and the poor would barely be educated at all!
(That's so very different from our current situation, right?)
I understand why people might think this way.
But they're dead wrong.
James Tooley has spent years chronicling the astonishing, previously unknown phenomenon of low-cost private schools in the developing world. They educate more students than the state schools at lower cost and with better results.
If parents in the developing world can afford to send their children to non-state schools, does this alone not blast to smithereens the lazy without-the-state-we'd-have-no-education argument?
Of course it does.
Meanwhile, Tooley has been helping establish more such schools in various poor countries.
And now he's bringing the no-frills, low-cost private school model to England, his home country.
Great, right? He'll save money and get lots of people a good education.
You'll never guess:
Some people hate this idea.
Some people hate it so much they pulled out all the stops to prevent him from doing it.
Now why would they do such a thing? Out of concern for the students?
Can you guess who might want to stop this?
And incidentally, note the absurdity: the free market can't produce low-cost education, but when it does we'll do everything we can to shut it down!
These people are deranged.
Either way, Tooley's story is remarkable, and told in episode #1292 of the Tom Woods Show.
A member of my private group just posted this:
Well worth the listen:
I promise you will stand up and cheer.
And while you're standing, subscribe (for free, of course) to the Tom Woods Show: