Quote Originally Posted by CountArach View Post
So States are competing with each other now? That's just brutal. No child gets to pick their school and most parents would be unwilling to change what State they live in simply because education is inadequate.
I
I understand that idea... but what about when their resources are insufficient?

Unless you propose complete privatisation (Or even majority privatisation) then nothing is going to change... State-level taxes would have to raise by a lot to pick up the slack from a lack of an interventionist Fed.

Further to all of this, there are unequal earning potentials between States. New York, with it's proliferation of big businesses and wealthy citizens, would (and does) have a far superior earning potential compared to Montana, with it's proliferation of rural communities. This means that when it comes to educating their citizens, a citizen of New York is going to have an advantage... despite the fact that a citizen of Montana is still an American...

Also in regards to government becoming too bloated by spending highly on education at a federal level - surely economies of scale would dictate that a federal government can do the job much cheaper?
Of course states should be competitive. Competition in general helps everyone and is what our entire system is built on. Why is it brutal? States have to get their priorities straight with what they should be spending money on. Infrastructure, courts, and education should be at the top. The Federal government has its own functions, and education is NOT among them. States know how to govern themselves better than the Federal government anyway, so with less federal intervention and bureaucracy people would probably end up paying a lot less.