Somehow or other, I never did get around to putting The Corporation (over two hours of lefty-licious propaganda in documentary form!) on my Netflix queue. Which, as it turns out, is too bad, since it includes this rather jaundiced but, at any rate, well-harmonized musical summary of Milton Friedman's position on corporate social responsibility and school choice. You can watch the whole thing, full-sized, at Google Video.
Let Friedman Ring
Comments to "Let Friedman Ring":
So that's why the lefties own pop-culture: they can translate their ideas into songs without sounding creepy.
I like the song! It's like a snappy synthesis of Vaughan Williams and Sibelius.
kebko | September 13, 2006, 12:04pm | #
Man, how depressing.I hear some variant of the idea that the "free market makes the rules" so often. For so many adults to have thought about the world so little that they think that phrase makes any sense, is just depressing.
crap-action-jackson | September 13, 2006, 12:18pm | #
That's some stupid shit.Tim Cavanaugh | September 13, 2006, 12:19pm | #
When in doubt, trust prosody.THE corporatiON?
impossiBLE?
competitiON?
This is like something a space alien would write. What kind of lyrICist puts acCENTS in toTALLy ranDOM placES in THE words?
val | September 13, 2006, 12:37pm | #
I hear some variant of the idea that the "free market makes the rules" so often. For so many adults to have thought about the world so little that they think that phrase makes any sense, is just depressing.
Erm whacha talking about? I think that phrase makes alot of sense to alot of people, especially here.
Elmo | September 13, 2006, 12:37pm | #
Well, it's a fact that, by and large, private schools turn out better educated students that the public schools do. So, is Milton Freidman trolling to be the Privitized Corporate Education Czar?No tenured laggards, no "you can't fire me, I'm union" laggards, no taxpayer money for retired laggards. Either turn out educated students or get a "real" job.
Students would become students, because parents would be accountable for them. No "mall dwellers" in the classrooms.
But, , , , , Corporations come and corporations go, , , so what to do with the education process for the students when the individual corporation starts to go down the tubes?
It's thought provoking. It'll never happen, but it's still thought provoking.
ed | September 13, 2006, 12:47pm | #
This is like something a space alien would write.Or a not-very-good songwriter.
It's Ludwig alright, but closer to Von Mises than Beethoven.
GILMORE | September 13, 2006, 12:48pm | #
"The Corporation" was a horrible, horrible documentary. I had to stop 1/3 of the way through. It hurt.since note - which ever one of you said ya didnt like documentaries... well, you suck! Yes, they are pretend-objectivity, but sometimes that method yields rich stories. "Hell House" was one of my recent favorites.
http://www.hellhousemovie.com/hellhouse/index.html
JG
digamma | September 13, 2006, 1:09pm | #
Er, I saw The Corporation a couple of years ago and I have no recollection of this song. Can anyone confirm that it was actually in the movie?Mr. F. Le Mur | September 13, 2006, 1:23pm | #
Well, it's a fact that, by and large, private schools turn out better educated students that the public schools do.Really? Do you have a reference for that?
dpotts | September 13, 2006, 1:25pm | #
Well, it's a fact that, by and large, private schools turn out better educated students that the public schools do.Sorry, but when you look at who actually attends private schools, and factor in parental/community involvement, overall health and well-being of students, and even the level of expectation regarding school performance, it's almost apples and oranges. Of course private schools turn out better students, but implying that this success is solely attributable to private enterprise is a bit misleading.
That being said, The Corporation was a pretty crap excuse for a doc.
downstater | September 13, 2006, 1:27pm | #
"Well, it's a fact that, by and large, private schools turn out better educated students that the public schools do."does this fact take into account the conditions placed on public schools requiring them to educate poorly performing students, lazy students, and trouble students? is it possible that these conditions may skew the overall quality of graduates between public & private schools?
further, private school educators aren't offered tenure? incredible idiots, despite accountable parents, aren't passed along through grades in private schools just as they are in public schools? have you attended a private school?
i think a better comparison between the quality of graduates would not be of overall quality, but a comparison between those students who applied themselves (re: took advantage of the institution) and achieved accordingly. In short, are the top grads of the private school significantly more educated than the top grads of the public school? i would wager that the gap would be significantly closer if not nominal or non-existent.
"Either turn out educated students or get a 'real' job."
spoken like someone who has never taught a day in their life. i swear, education is the only aspect of life i have encountered where normal advocates of personal responsibility are happy to pass it off onto someone else.
(NOTE: i do not hold a preference between public/private schools. both types have institutions which offer excellent, and pathetic, educational experiences. i do prefer that comparisons be fair.)
dead_elvis | September 13, 2006, 1:48pm | #
I'm with Cavanaugh. The music itself is mediocre, but the word setting is just bizarre.downstater - If you only look at those students who apply themselves fully, you miss out on important issues such as the motivation that leads to this. Even in the worst schools, you'll find a few students who succeed due to personal diligence alone. In judging schools, you can't just look at the few exceptional students. You must look at how the average and even underperforming students progress.
downstater - If you only look at those students who apply themselves fully, you miss out on important issues such as the motivation that leads to this. Even in the worst schools, you'll find a few students who succeed due to personal diligence alone. In judging schools, you can't just look at the few exceptional students. You must look at how the average and even underperforming students progress.
Elmo | September 13, 2006, 2:50pm | #
Mr. F. Le MurSee the next two posts below your critique.
Downstater
>>>>>Suggest you read the first part of the same paragraph again. When the "laggards", (surely you aren't denying that they exist in our education system), are weeded out, all you will have left are the kind of teachers you seem to project yourself to be. I'll support that kind of teacher group.>>>>>
And
>>>>>does this fact take into account the conditions placed on public schools requiring them to educate poorly performing students, lazy students, and trouble students? is it possible that these conditions may skew the overall quality of graduates between public & private schools?>>>>>
I think the problems you address could be handily incorporated into the privatized system, just as it is now with "magnet" and other special needs schools.
But did you notice that I also emphasized that although the idea of privatizing our education system was thought provoking, that it would never happen?
And yes, I have taught. Only about three years, but I have taught. I have taught kida who did NOT want to be taught. But I had one advantage. That was that their parents knew why they were there, and when the students found they either passed or failed on their own merits, they became different people entirely. They brought with them different aptitudes, but those aptitudes were taken into account. Other than that, when they realized they were there to learn, they applied themselves.
Those who could not become part of the learning process were transferred to a more suitable group of their peers. Some came back later and were models for the others.
What a difference it makes when the road gets narrow.
downstater | September 13, 2006, 3:07pm | #
Dave Bi agree, so long as those categories are compared to like categories. public underperformers v. private underperformers, public average students v. private average students. throwing them all in the mix and taking one big average is not quite a fair comparison as the public school will have more underperformers and trouble students which the private school is under no obligation to deal with.
Elmo,
no, i certainly do not deny the existence of laggards. however, i do not accept the notion that these people are not present in private education. perhaps i wasn't clear about the scope of my response. i fully understand many of the benefits that a private school offers over a public school. my contention was based on what i perceived to be an unfair comparison.
Jennifer's statement is the most common one i've heard about the problem of public education: the inability to dismiss those kids who do not want to be there. (paraphrasing)
kebko | September 13, 2006, 3:22pm | #
"I hear some variant of the idea that the "free market makes the rules" so often. For so many adults to have thought about the world so little that they think that phrase makes any sense, is just depressing.Erm whacha talking about? I think that phrase makes alot of sense to alot of people, especially here."
Markets don't make rules - they follow them. The distinction is that government should make the rules & markets should operate within the rules. Where libertarians would generally find problems are where the government takes over market actions, so that it is the referee & the player, or where market participants manipulate the government so that market players are making the rules that they will operate under.
It's a basic distinction between the role of government and the role of the citizens of that government. To describe market activity or privatization with "the market makes the rules" suggests to me such a muddled & simple view of the world that I can't see how a citizenry composed of such people could ever self-govern in a coherent way - which pretty much describes modern democracies. Every time I see this, I lose a little bit more hope as to the sustainability of modern capitalist democracies.
Dave B | September 13, 2006, 3:35pm | #
downstater - If you're only going to compare kids who perform on the same level, you're essentially forcing the results to show that the two schools are equal. Why shouldn't the elevation of an average or underperforming student to a higher performance category show up positively in the results for that school?Lumping everyone together isn't a good way to tell the difference either, but your proposed solution is just as flawed. The only way I can see of finding the truth would be random assignment of a test group to schools, but that probably takes too long for anyone to invest in.
downstater | September 13, 2006, 3:54pm | #
Dave Bthat's a good point about measuring improvements. i still think the disproportion of underperforming students would weigh against a public school though. if a private school class of 15 students has 2 underperforming kids, and one moves up to become an average performer, and a public school class of 30 students has 5 underperforming kids and 2 move up - the private school has a better success rate of moving underperforming students up than the public school despite the public school advancing more underperforming students and with a smaller teacher:student ratio to boot.
in the end, i suspect that random assignment would be best as you suggest. i'm just skeptical of such a comparison because a private school's pool of students is selective/unrandom to begin with. it seems to me that if we're going to measure the performance of the school, we would need to be assured of a constant of a population as possible on which their performance can be tested.
very interesting topic and one of much discussion in my family (lots of teachers). thanks for engaging, but i've gotta run.