“If the only motive was to help people who could not afford education, advocates of government involvement would have simply proposed tuition subsidies.”

Sure, but I wouldn't call Friedman a free-market guru. He still likes government intervention. He doesn't ultimately believe in the free-market system.

Governmental involvement motives are masked by public ignorance, lies, and a fear that truth would expose the advocates of despotism.

O yes, so our educational system is to rely on the compassion of the human race - give me a break. Isn't that the same re tax dollars - who will decide where those tuition dollars go. Its an idea without too much thought. The idea is good but not its reality. We will revert back to the old school of thinking and wars will ensue. We come out with these grandiose statements without any thought of their consequences.

RBESRQ, I think you missed the point. Mr Friedman is not advocating tuition subsidies, he's suggesting that there are other motives. Read the first part of the quote.

Get a life Milton. Community education has been with human beings since the cave days. The educational systems in America and around the world are not government schools but community schools. The problem some have is deciding whether or not they are or wish to be part of the community. My guess is that most of the anti public school really do not want to be part of the community or part of the public.

Waffler, define government. Define community within a format that has executive, legislative, or judicial functions.

Jim, so is he saying that if education subsidies were for the poor that advocates for government involvement would support it? If that's the case, yes, he is probably right. But, why, have a subsidy if there is a free state system - would the subsidies be used by those who can already afford to send their children to private schools and therefore defeat the purpose of the subsidy. Those who are poor cannot afford to send their children to private schools regardless of any subsidy. Basically, what you are doing is subsidizing the the rich- for my edification are parents given any tax relief on the money they spend on private education, if not perhaps this is something we should look at..

Mike community is your and I. Government is the city counselman, school borard member, etc. that you and I elect to lead us.

Waffler, oookaay thanks. I guess that explains but one difference between you and me, and your comments. Also, I don't elect anyone to lead us. My efforts go to choosing servants to serve and protect your's and mine sovereign authority, powers and rights.

Good point, Milton. I don't know where in the world RBE got the idea the 'state' is compassionate -- governments destroy, kill, imprison, steal, enslave, and monopolize and can justify it all easily. Do some of us benefit from this process? Absolutely -- in a democracy run by passion instead of reason, there are always those that are plundered for the sake of others (not necessarily the majority either). Waffler, the publishers of school textbooks are fairly standardized in each state. Most everyone in a public school has had textbooks from Macmillan, for example. I don't know if anyone has noticed this, but in a textbook there are no authors' names listed and no real controversial issues covered. It is strictly party line, plain vanilla, and FULL of stereotypes and politically corrected phraseology. If you didn't get a good and solid exposure to this for many years, the propaganda in it would be quite evident when reading the material now -- read the textbooks of Canada or Mexico or Britain! ;-) It isn't hard to see their prejudices in their textbooks -- that's how transparent ours are to them. People clamor over 'diversity' but all they ever suggest is making everything homogenized in the end. Personally I resent the process of social conditioning, especially since the one's professing it are hardly the examples I would like to emulate.

I see some people are missing his point. He isn't saying in a free state system there would be subsidies, he's referring to our current government. Also he's not advocating subsidies himself either, just that if you were going to do it all you would need are subsidies, but that's not all that is there so it's clear there were other motives involved.

The same can be said of the recent healthcare bill. Social Security and Medicare. Rather than just helping people in need, it controls the lives of the entire population. That is the real goal of the statist.

"‎A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another; and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the dominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, an aristocracy, or a majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by a natural tendency to one over the body." ― John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) English philosopher, political economist, feminist, civil servant. Wiki: Mill's conception of liberty justified the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state control. Source: On Liberty