dwig@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Simon Buckingham writes in reply to Srinath Srinivasa:
> > Srinath, you seem to be advocating that because competition does not
> > appear to be working, we need political governments to provide quality
> > education, care for the aged and drinking water.
>
> Could you spell this out a bit more for me? I tend to think of education,
> health services, and urban inftrastructure as essentially long-term
> concerns, whose success or failure is measured across years if not
> decades.
Hi, if we set our goal to be high quality and widely available schooling,
water and health services, then we need to ask ourselves which means we
use to achieve this valauble end. Currently the model is and has been for
50 years that the government is the primary and overwhelming provider of
these services. It is also a fact that the government has not proven
itself successful at delivering these services in a high quality manner.
To realize such noble ends, I advocate the use of private sector rather
than public sector provision of education, health services etc. to
stimulate the incentives conferred by market forces and stimulate a wide
variety of choices for different people with different inclinations-
vocational/ practical courses, home-based distance learning, technology
colleges and so on. Such services would be accessible by all- people who
can afford to pay for such services is a country free of income taxes
would do so- others would be financed through indirect sales taxes on nice
but not necessary purhases. This is defined and explained at
http://www.unorg.com/socpol.htm
regards simon buckingham
--Simon Buckingham <go57@dial.pipex.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>