What should our public schools teach?

With Trump the ordinary rules don’t apply.  Mere scandals are hardly worth reporting—the GOP will protect him regardless of what’s he’s done.  But yesterday brought something a bit novel, even for Trump.

Trump lied to Canadian leader Justin Trudeau, claiming the US ran a trade deficit with Canada.

Then Trump joked about the fact that he lied to Trudeau.  It was caught on tape, and it was played on all the TV news shows.

Then he repeated the lie in a tweet.

If you want to claim that it’s not a lie, that we do have a trade deficit with Canada, you are faced with the following problem.  The “Economic Report of the President” signed by Trump, claims the US has a trade surplus with Canada.  So he’s either lying in the Economic Report of the President, or in his tweets.

All this supports Bryan Caplan’s case against public education.  One of the most common arguments for public schools is that they teach civics.  We need a well educated population so that we do not elect bad people.  And having gone through the public school system, I can vouch for the fact that they do teach civic virtue.  My teachers seemed to sincerely want us to be good people.  English classes taught us the importance of character.  In history and social science we learned about various figures who gained power through demagoguery, demonizing minorities, engaging in “the big lie”.  Lots of historical examples were cited.  Indeed if I think back to my middle and high school years, I’d sum up the education as basically emphasizing one point:

Under no circumstances should you ever, ever, ever consider electing a candidate like Donald Trump.

And yet we did.  He’s a textbook example of everything we were taught is bad.  The continual lying, the bullying, the corruption, the racism, the misogyny, the willful ignorance.  Either Trump is bad or public education is useless.

I vote for “both”.


Tags:

 
 
 

32 Responses to “What should our public schools teach?”

  1. Gravatar of JLK JLK
    16. March 2018 at 11:19

    Trump himself is the product of private schools. But I agree, the problem is the electorate, especially the part who voted for Trump. (Worst possible way of selecting leaders except for all the others, etc.)

  2. Gravatar of maynardGkeynes maynardGkeynes
    16. March 2018 at 12:24

    No argument on Trump, but I thought Bryan’s book was not about “public” education meaning public schools, but the “modern” or perhaps “American” education system, private and public. I also wonder whether the public school education you and I got bears much resemblance to what it is today. Personally, I hated all the emphasis on citizenship, which at least at my school was largely steeling is against the insidious Communist threat. Maybe that’s why we’re not all wearing Russian uniforms today, but I rather doubt it. I guess it’s probably as useless today as it was in my day. It sounds like you had a more positive experience than I did. I sure hope so.

  3. Gravatar of Philo Philo
    16. March 2018 at 12:54

    Instead of your last two sentences, you should have written: “Trump is bad and public education is useless.” You are guilty of having wasted words.

  4. Gravatar of Richard A. Richard A.
    16. March 2018 at 13:23

    Trump is lying about Japanese non tariff barriers. Will the msm call him out on it?

    Trump’s trade war: Does the U.S. have the ‘lowest tariffs in the world’?
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/03/08/trumps-trade-war-does-the-u-s-have-the-lowest-tariffs-in-the-world/?utm_term=.740d4e08fd85

  5. Gravatar of El roam El roam
    16. March 2018 at 13:28

    Great post ,simple and sincere . Many theories can explain it , just consider the following :

    Like fluctuation or volatility in equity markets , first , sentiment is overwhelming and exploding , and the price of an asset takes of . Later, things calm down , and the price is going back and dropping and correcting to more reasonable and realistic levels . The same may go for Trump :

    First , the sentiment of becoming sick and rejecting lousy administrations working for themselves and for lobbies in Washington, is taking over and exploding , all, by voting , a ” protest vote” , and naturally for the utmost characteristic figure , which represents the subject of protest ,later then , relaxation and back to more reasonable levels ( next election shall be put to the test ) .

    See Macron in France , as a possible good example or illustration ( Social democrat after rise of the right ) .

    So , neither trump nor public education necessarily .

    Thanks

  6. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    16. March 2018 at 13:46

    “racism, the misogyny”
    Name a single time Trump said anything remotely racist or misogynistic. Otherwise you are just lying by regurgitating leftist dogma.

    I, for one, don’t care the least bit about the manners of one holding political office. I care about his policies and impact on public opinion.

  7. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    16. March 2018 at 13:47

    @Philo u r correct. Sumner quit wasting our time.

  8. Gravatar of Alec Fahrin Alec Fahrin
    16. March 2018 at 15:25

    Americans are just surprisingly stupid on average. Even private education cannot fix a willingness to be ignorant and shut out any and all differing views.

  9. Gravatar of Patrick R. Sullivan Patrick R. Sullivan
    16. March 2018 at 15:55

    For a little perspective;

    https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/spring-2013/the-schooltoprison-pipeline

    ————–quote————–
    In opening the hearing, [Senator Dick] Durbin told the subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, “For many young people, our schools are increasingly a gateway to the criminal justice system. This phenomenon is a consequence of a culture of zero tolerance that is widespread in our schools and is depriving many children of their fundamental right to an education.”

    A wide array of organizations—including the Southern Poverty Law Center, the NAACP and Dignity in Schools—offered testimony during the hearing. They joined representatives from the Departments of Education and Justice to shine a national spotlight on a situation viewed far too often as a local responsibility.

    “We have a national problem that deserves federal action,” Matthew Cregor, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, explained. “With suspension a top predictor of dropout, we must confront this practice if we are ever to end the ‘dropout crisis’ or the so-called achievement gap.” In the words of Vermont’s Sen. Patrick Leahy, “As a nation, we can do better.
    ———-endquote———–

    Can anyone here guess which POTUS took this nonsense seriously? (Hint; not Donald Trump.) Can anyone guess why Nikolas Cruz wasn’t arrested in Broward County, Florida for threatening the lives of his fellow students, before he actually did murder 17 of those kids in Parkland?

    The Superintendent of Schools in Broward County used to brag about how he’d reduced the arrest rates for his students. Just as the Obama Administration wished.

  10. Gravatar of B Cole B Cole
    16. March 2018 at 16:18

    Nice blogging, but I wonder if the fractions of people who attended private schools voted for Trump in even higher ratios.

    As Sumner has pointed out, Trump did very well in better-off zip codes.

  11. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    16. March 2018 at 16:28


    Under no circumstances should you ever, ever, ever consider electing a candidate like Donald Trump.

    If you force that down people’s throat over and over and over again, it’s no surprise when people will do the exact opposite.

  12. Gravatar of Scott Freelander Scott Freelander
    16. March 2018 at 17:05

    Christian, that is a ludicrous comment. There implication is that people other than Trump voters are responsible for their voting behavior. Trump voters need to take responsibility for their own poor choices.

  13. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    16. March 2018 at 21:13

    Ad on: Actually, Hillary Clinton was elected in 2016 in the popular vote, and Trump only won in the Electoral College (which has been making a travesty out of US national elections).

    Given that Trump did well in better-off zip codes, one might even posit that the majority of public-school educated voters did pull the level for Clinton, but the upper classes, heavily seasoned in private school educations, voted for Trump, and then Trump squeaked into through the Electoral College (now depicted as a sacred totem in right-wing circles).

    Actually, I think Sumner is correct when he suspects Clinton is Nixonian in personality. I think Clinton would have been like Nixon, minus his charm or sense of humor.

  14. Gravatar of Rajat Rajat
    16. March 2018 at 21:22

    “Either Trump is bad or public education is useless.”

    I agree with Philo. Either the above statement is wrong or I am missing something. If Trump is bad, public education must indeed be useless, as it failed to prevent Trump’s rise. On the other hand, if you are somehow wrong and Trump is actually good, then public education is working fine and not useless. So don’t you mean: “Either Trump is good or public education is useless”?

  15. Gravatar of Matthias Görgens Matthias Görgens
    16. March 2018 at 22:02

    Scott, you would be better off blaming first-oast the post elections. Remember: Trump was the least liked guy ever to become president. It’s just that the American voting system virtually forces a duopoly of political parties. And as an economist you know how bad a cartel is.

    Ockham’s razor suggests we don’t need to look further. We don’t need the hypothesis that eg Swiss, New Zealanders and Germans would be more virtuous than Americans, they just got luckier with their electoral system. (Singapore is an interesting case, where they currently have a good government despite their electoral system. I am afraid of what happens if the current dynasty ever produces incompetent heirs. China has an even worse problem, since they have even less democracy by far.)

    Add in Jerrymandering etc, and the American political weirdness explains itself.

    A proportional system would be an obvious antidote, but too much of a change to contemplate. (And with its own problems.) A more focussed keyhole solution is to switch so something like approval voting (or even better range voting).

    People are already familiar with range voting from eg Olympic figure skating: you rate all the candidates you feel like on a scale of 0 to 100 (and abstain for the rest), and the person with the highest average score wins the presidency.

    There are variants for electing more than one person at a time as well (eg for electing a country’s lower house etc.)

  16. Gravatar of Matthias Görgens Matthias Görgens
    16. March 2018 at 22:13

    PS please don’t blame the electorate. Not a lot of people actually voted _for_ Trump, even though he certainly has his base of hardcore supporters. People mainly voted _against_ Clinton.

    Trump (and to a lesser extent Clinton) were almost the very definition of Condorcet losers, ie people who would lose most head-to-head competitions against rivals. A voting system that elects the Condorcet loser surely deserves most of the blame.

    (To his credit, Trump did play the game as given. He won nearly 50% of the vote against a very well funded adversary, and critically snatched up enough states. Even if some Russian help was needed to tip him over the edge (I don’t know), he needed to be very close for that to matter.)

    With a more sensible system like approval votinf people can vote for their preferred third party candidate and also for the lesser evil of the front runners. Thus eg Michael Bloomberg could have run as an independent without splitting the vote.

  17. Gravatar of H_WASSHOI H_WASSHOI
    17. March 2018 at 00:35

    I can see he enjoys his job.

  18. Gravatar of H_WASSHOI H_WASSHOI
    17. March 2018 at 00:43

    Maybe US public education teach how to measure risks or catalog of risks.
    The US president is dangerous job for your life. Rich people don’t favor risks,except “moral hazard”.

  19. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    17. March 2018 at 08:04

    Richard, Trump’s lies about everything, it’s not even news anymore.

    Rajat, My point is that if the American public does not believe that Trump is a horrible, despicable candidate, then why do we teach the opposite to our children? It makes no sense. I’d love to be a bratty/jerk/punk/smart alec 8th grader in today’s public schools system. Every time the teacher provided a life lesson, you could retort, “But Trump is exactly the opposite and the American people elected him president. Why should I believe you?” So why are we both electing Trump and simultaneously teaching our children that Trump is horrible?

    I think public schools are trying to teach the right values, but it’s still a waste of money.

    Matthias, I have blamed our first past the post system.

  20. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    17. March 2018 at 12:06

    “So why are we both electing Trump and simultaneously teaching our children that Trump is horrible?”

    beats me.

  21. Gravatar of Jaap Jaap
    17. March 2018 at 14:58

    What about the homeschoolers? Do they get civics courses? How many voted for Trump?

  22. Gravatar of Jack a blumenthal Jack a blumenthal
    18. March 2018 at 07:46

    Respectfully disagree,

    Teachers in k-12 haven’t done a miserable job, although the propaganda of the right in America over most of your lifetime has laid most of our problems at teachers’ doorstep…yet, they still went 40%+ right in many states in the US’s most recent major election.

    I would put this much closer to the primary trend…
    https://mobile.twitter.com/samdolnick/status/975360759948595200/photo/1

    While you were whiling away your working life in Greater-Boston teaching macro and trying to formulate a way for proper monetary policy to find its way into the halls of authority (guess your idea was proximity to Harvard…then maybe they’ll listen?}, thinking that your were a well-meaning conservative who believed in ever-improving data, THE RIGHT was taken over by people who weren’t good faith practitioners of most of the founder’s ideals although they corrugated them into a patriotic package of BS and truly become the postmodern vanguard — there were more causes that were postmodern on the left during the neoliberal era (1965,67,73,81-2017} but all combined didn’t equal the degradtory power of the 2 most powerful strains of postmodernism on the right, since they usually won — but, don’t feel too bad missing this, most at Harvard did too.

    If, because of the work of some loving Americanz the next few years, the United States of America makes it out the other side, stronger than when we went into the neoliberal era, because of the willingness of institutional Republicans to lay aside as a few prominent members of their factions degraded most of our valued institutions for the sake of their pet causes…or even less, a win, the Republican party doesn’t need to be our country’s rightward party.

    There is only 2, and it’s a privilege not a right to be one of our 2 dominant parties.

    I definitely don’t blame 64 million Americans for an education that’s been linear and forward driving…but I do blame a few evangelical pulpiteers, a couple master media manipulators and a Republican party that callously went along with an opposition plan against our nation’s 1st non-white president in dec-jan. 2009, before the dust had even settled on the worst initial downward economic spike since the 1870s…and having no historical sense of moderating that message a few months later when it was realized how deep and bad this thing is and what that would do to the psyche of many middle-aged white people with the 1st minority president just entering office.

    It was shameless and irresponsible, and Boehner, McConnell Ryan et al should have known better.

    Counterfactual: I could have run the GOP from December, 2008 thru 2016 and harnessed the same momentum, disabused the conspiracy theories and racism, relinquish a few media dominators from their 1. or 2. role as chief idea filters…and still ended up with the Presidency, and more seats across the nation (~1450 to their ~1280 on the back of racism and conspiracy theories}.

    The GOPs time as our right-wing party is fast approaching its denouement, and deservedly so.

    The Progress & Liberty (PAL} party believes in America’s and Americans highest ideals and aspirations, the reps have proven for 50 years (on the majority of occasions}, they dont.

    PS In 1965 two roads diverged on a plain, the righties were tired of losing and promised “never again” and they were right…never again would they let principles shine higher than winning, and they didn’t, and 52 years later here we are, thoroughly postmodern and neoliberal and driven to the edge of the abyss by a party with no moral compass and even fewer leaders.

    #PAL

    SINCERELY,

    J

  23. Gravatar of Jack a blumenthal Jack a blumenthal
    18. March 2018 at 08:00

    Respectfully disagree,

    Teachers in k-12 haven’t done a miserable job, although the propaganda of the right in America over most of your lifetime has laid most of our problems at teachers’ doorstep…yet, they still went 40%+ right in many states in the US’s most recent major election.

    I would put this much closer to the primary trend…
    https://mobile.twitter.com/samdolnick/status/975360759948595200/photo/1

    While you were whiling away your working life in Greater-Boston teaching macro and trying to formulate a way for proper monetary policy to find its way into the halls of authority (guess your idea was proximity to Harvard…then maybe they’ll listen?}, thinking that your were a well-meaning conservative who believed in ever-improving data, THE RIGHT was taken over by people who weren’t good faith practitioners of most of the founder’s ideals although they corrugated them into a patriotic package of BS and truly became the postmodern vanguard — there were more causes that were postmodern on the left during the neoliberal era (1965,67,73,81-2017} but all combined didn’t equal the degradatory power of the 2 most powerful strains of postmodernism on the right, since they usually won — but, don’t feel too bad missing this, most at Harvard did too.

    If, because of the work of some loving Americanz the next few years, the United States of America makes it out the other side, stronger than when we went into the neoliberal era, because of the willingness of institutional Republicans to lay aside any scruples as a few prominent members of their factions degraded most of our valued institutions for the sake of their pet causes…or even less, a win, the Republican party doesn’t need to be our country’s rightward party.

    There is only 2, and it’s a privilege not a right to be one of our 2 dominant parties.

    I definitely don’t blame 64 million Americans for an education that’s been linear and forward driving…but I do blame a few evangelical pulpiteers, a couple master media manipulators and a Republican party that callously went along with an opposition plan against our nation’s 1st non-white president in dec-jan. 2009, before the dust had even settled on the worst initial downward economic spike since the 1870s…and having no historical sense of moderating that message a few months later when it was realized how deep and bad this thing is and what that would do to the psyche of many middle-aged white people with the 1st minority president just entering office.

    It was shameless and irresponsible, and Boehner, McConnell Ryan et al should have known better.

    Counterfactual: I could have run the GOP from December, 2008 thru 2016 and harnessed the same momentum, disabused the conspiracy theories and racism, relinquish a few media dominators from their 1. or 2. role as chief idea filters…and still ended up with the Presidency, and more seats across the nation (~1450 to their ~1280 on the back of racism and conspiracy theories}.

    The GOPs time as our right-wing party is fast approaching its denouement, and deservedly so.

    The Progress & Liberty (PAL} party believes in America’s and Americans highest ideals and aspirations, the reps have proven for 50 years (on the majority of occasions}, they dont.

    PS In 1965 two roads diverged on a plain, the righties were tired of losing and promised “never again” and they were right…never again would they let principles shine higher than winning, and they didn’t, and 52 years later here we are, thoroughly postmodern and neoliberal and driven to the edge of the abyss by a party with no moral compass and even fewer leaders.

    #PAL

    SINCERELY,

    J

  24. Gravatar of Travis allison Travis allison
    18. March 2018 at 08:18

    What’s funny is that the trade numbers published by the Canadians state that they have a trade surplus with the US. It shows how sketchy economic measurement is!

  25. Gravatar of Scott H. Scott H.
    18. March 2018 at 11:57

    Thank goodness no other politician lies. The counterfactual of Saint Hillary Clinton looms large in the decision making process here.

  26. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    19. March 2018 at 08:42

    @Scott H.: I ask this of every Trumpista and I have yet to get a good answer. I’m happy to accept that for many people Clinton was just so awful that they voted for Trump so she wouldn’t win. I don’t agree with that tradeoff, I think Clinton was terrible but still better than Trump. But it’s not unreasonable to make that choice.

    What I don’t understand is why those same ‘anti-Hillary’ Trump voters do not now reject Trump, hope for his removal, realize how terrible he is. He did it, he “beat the bitch”, she’s gone forever. Why support the clown? Wouldn’t President Pence do all the same deregulating and tax cutting without being an embarrassing buffoon? I’m no Pence fan but he’s better than Le Grande Orange.

  27. Gravatar of Scott H. Scott H.
    19. March 2018 at 09:28

    @mskings: I’m not a Trumpista. I did not vote for Trump, and I’m not a Clinton hater beyond my general disdain for the Democratic Party. Typically I do vote GOP or Libertarian.

    Nevertheless, I think I can answer your question of why people will continue support Trump over a potential President Pence (I mean unless or until too many damning facts about Russia pop up.)

    1.) Trump occupies the intellectual atmosphere like no other previous politician. He’s always fighting. He’s setting the agenda. His antics overwhelm the mainstream media. An overwhelmed mainstream media doesn’t have time to orchestrate its campaigns against America or American values. Pence would just go into the WH and hide by comparison. Sure, that would make you happy (maybe), but it won’t make Trump supporters happy.

    2.) Trump doesn’t hold on to issues to the detriment of his political aspirations. He talks about fighting the NRA if he has to. He talks about banning bump stocks. He talks about flat taxes not being progressive enough. He doesn’t get hung up on his support for abortion or any other Republican litmus test issue. Most other Repubilicans (lord, and Libertarians too, but that’s another post) are willing to go down with the ship over key issues that have been PROVEN to be losers at the polls. For example, the media would LOVE to get Pence to talk about abortion all day long, and Pence would LOVE to do it. Most Republicans — at least this current coalition — would be thinking “do we have to be THAT stupid about this?”. Trump may be next to useless in terms of running the gov’t, but he’s had a pretty good eye towards how to line up his issues.

  28. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    19. March 2018 at 09:40

    Good post Scott.

  29. Gravatar of Scott Sumner Scott Sumner
    19. March 2018 at 10:24

    Travis, Of course all of these “deficit” numbers are utterly meaningless; they don’t correspond to any coherent real world concept. What does it even mean to say that America runs massive trade “deficits” every year?

    Scott H., You said:

    “He talks about . . .”

    It’s rather pathetic that there are still people who think that what Trump talks about has any meaning. He just makes stuff up. His random comments on DACA, gun control, etc. have no bearing on his actual policy proposals.

  30. Gravatar of Scott H. Scott H.
    19. March 2018 at 11:02

    @Scott Sumner: My point was made in terms of a Trump versus Pence comparison. Do you think Pence will talk about fighting the NRA if necessary? Will Pence talk about lack of progressivity as a deal killer for a flat tax? The answer is of course: no and no, with many other no’s along the way.

    By the way, I believe a Presidential bump stock ban is moving forward to some degree. And Trump has never proposed a flat tax. So his comments may have bearing on policy proposals afterall. Beyond those points, what a politician says still has meaning even if it doesn’t make its way into any final policy.

  31. Gravatar of Mark Z Mark Z
    19. March 2018 at 17:41

    msgkings,

    Arguing that Clinton would’ve been worse does not amount to positive support for Trump. Scott (Sumner) argues (implicitly here) that, no, Clinton would’ve been better. One can disagree with that claim without being a “Trumpista”, or at least I would think.

    Personally, I’m fairly agnostic to which of the two would be worse from a purely consequentialist point of view. I hope the GOP holds a primary and someone other than Trump wins; I’ll likely prefer whoever that is to whoever the Democrats nominate. But if that doesn’t happen, then right-leaning people will, once again, be deciding whether Sanders or Booker or whoever is, in their minds, worse than Trump, and it’s certainly not going to be self-evident to them that they aren’t. That’s one reason many may be reluctant to through him into the abyss: they know they may be voting for him in 2020 (especially if the Democrats take Congress).

    And would one expect them to do otherwise? If you sincerely believe the basic tenets of a party platform, then the stakes are pretty high. What would drive you to vote for someone who opposes everything you believe, on abortion, on free speech, religious freedom, on taxes, etc.? If there were a Democratic Donald Trump, would you vote for Mike Pence? How many pro-choice feminists would vote for Mike Pence over a pro-choice Democrat just as nutty as Trump? Or how many anti-war people would vote for George W. Bush over an anti-war candidate, regardless of how crazy, dishonest, or narcissistic they are?

  32. Gravatar of Laura Laura
    19. March 2018 at 18:19

    Scott:

    We learned from the election that the democratic media-education complex gained sufficient power to determine who won the republican primary. They used their power to place on the ticket precisely the sort of never-win you have in mind.

    We also learned from the election that Hillary had rigged the democratic party apparatus to ensure her own nomination. As the nominee she was such a singularly bad candidate that she lost to the most defeatable candidate.

    Among those with brains adult In the 90s, she lost by a profound landslide and would not have come close were it not for the youth who received those lessons about never-win so recently.

Leave a Reply