FranzKafkaOverrated

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Monday, 27 June 2011

no matter how many times you say it, it's not hypocrisy, and it wouldn't matter if it was

Posted on 13:06 by Unknown
One more thing. The favorite argument of the pro-voucher movement gets amplified again, this time courtesy of Andrew Sullivan:
If Christie were acting in such a way as to limit the opportunities of other children while his own children were enjoying benefits not available to others, then where his kids go to school would be the business of the public. The fact President Obama sends his children to an elite private school while seeking to kill opportunity scholarship vouchers for poor kids is just such an example of hypocrisy that is very much the business of all Americans.
Jesus.

Look, guys. This is what Obama is doing: he's a) paying for his children to attend an expensive private school and b) opposing public subsidies of other people doing the same. In other words, he is defending the right to pay for something with private funds while opposing using public funds to pay for the same. You can agree or disagree with that on the merits, but that is hypocrisy? Huh:? Is everyone who has health insurance but is opposed to socialized medicine guilty of hypocrisy? Is everyone who owns a car but doesn't want to pay taxes for public transportation guilty of hypocrisy? Isn't supporting the right to pay for something yourself while not supporting government paying for it a perfectly common argument in American politics?

We already pay for other students to go to school! It's called the public school system. There is literally no other issue where this thinking is ever applied. I am not allowed to take my "share" of the taxes I pay that go to the FDA to have my meat inspected privately. I'm not allowed to take my "share" of the taxes that go to water filtration and use it to buy bottled water. I'm not allowed to take my "share" of parks department taxes and use it to landscape my lawn. And on and on. And if someone has supplemental health insurance, and opposes providing access to similar coverage publicly, I might not agree with it, but I don't mistake it for hypocrisy. Saying "don't pay publicly for what I pay privately" is not the same as saying "don't do what I do," particularly when there is already a publicly funded alternative to what is being privately paid for.

Oh, and by the way, even if there were hypocrisy, it would say nothing about the merits of school vouchers. And the merits are bad! Vouchers don't work! The evidence that exists is profoundly negative!

How does this stuff persist?
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • what I mean when I talk about empiricism and self-determination
    In my Bloggingheads appearance, I mentioned to Conor my prediction that the empirical case against the notion that you are mostly responsibl...
  • self-implication
    Adam Serwer points out , correctly, that liberal excuses for extrajudicial killing make their opposition to torture nonsensical. The questio...
  • the backwards causation
    Since reading educational research changed from being an amateur interest of mine to being a daily professional commitment, nothing has been...
  • pacifism and intention
    Note: Because I am incompetent, I accidentally deleted this post, and I can't find any way to restore it through Blogger. I had to go in...
  • Randy Moss's unforgivable blackness
    I don't have a real rooting interest in the game tonight. But a part of me is rooting for the 49ers, only because I'd like to see a...
  • Is Franz Kafka Overrated?
    No.
  • Benghazi: the worst of both Republicans and Democrats
    This Benghazi mess is enough to make you really despair. For years now, liberals have pushed back against the "both sides do it!" ...
  • Sabermetricians, like all nerds, must accept that they've won
    I'm not going to excerpt too much, because its a paid subscription service, but today on his (excellent) daily baseball missive The Slur...
  • moral support necessitates moral distinctions
    Chris Hayes is in quite a bit of hot water online because he said that he was uncomfortable calling dead soldiers heroes. Since his show st...
  • Ms. 21st century
    I occasionally get emails from people who find my critique of the Internet generation cruel. Last week, I got an email that said point blank...

Categories

  • I'm mostly kidding (1)

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (218)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (42)
    • ►  April (39)
    • ►  March (37)
    • ►  February (35)
    • ►  January (43)
  • ►  2012 (139)
    • ►  December (26)
    • ►  November (26)
    • ►  October (15)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  June (13)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (7)
    • ►  February (11)
    • ►  January (14)
  • ▼  2011 (143)
    • ►  December (9)
    • ►  November (12)
    • ►  October (18)
    • ►  September (11)
    • ►  August (23)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ▼  June (12)
      • there are very few great baseball players in the m...
      • typical sentiment re: college educated employment
      • no matter how many times you say it, it's not hypo...
      • note and an important link
      • Adam Serwer is observing
      • the way stuff lives on in the Internet
      • reax, updated
      • the only necessary argument against routine infant...
      • the tendency towards grotesque in TV
      • wishing doesn't make it so
      • shifting state university funding from taxation to...
      • EVERYBODY CAN'T BE THE ONLY PERSON ROOTING FOR THE...
    • ►  May (21)
    • ►  April (27)
    • ►  March (7)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile