====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Hi Michael, As for the defunding of higher education, perhaps we should consider the problem in terms that even a neo classical economist such as Mankiw could understand: it's possible that students will not pay tuition that reflects the total social benefit of their education. If tuition and thus university budgets are however determined by what students calculate to be the value (discounted future income flow) of their education, then universities will be underfunded--classes and ta's will be cut, remedial services will be reduced, discussion sections will be eliminated, class size will increase. It's possible however that much of the benefit of an excellent higher education system is a positive public externality, and those positive spillovers range from raising the productivity, creativity, and coherence of others in your work team to raising public empathy for others the burden of whose lives would otherwise remain a mystery. In short, we have to make a public or social case for public higher education. The market will under-provide higher public education, and society as a whole will be the loser. It's not that this kind of talk of market failure is my favored approach, but perhaps it could strike a chord. rb ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
