Stark Choices Ahead for America's Future Concerning Education

It's clear that the United States is on an unsustainable path. A major threat that I blogged about last month is the fear of an alternative to the US Dollar reserve currency. After decades of running budget deficits to retain the flow of dollars around the world, handling debt without global demand will leave us in serious pain. Structural issues such as sluggish employment and trade imbalances pose a great threat as well. The US economy depends on high skilled labor to produce its industrial exports.

Roughly 80% of the US population's highest source of education is high school. Only a few go on to college, and at most take on skilled education using special programs to become certified or community college. However, the demand is high for the highly educated, yet unemployment is at its highest among those with lower education. This means the supply of high labor is low. The most interesting statistic is the distribution of occupation as it relates to education attainment in the United States. Most highly educated individuals are employed in the professional-managerial field, whereas people with just a high school education are employed evenly in various fields such as management, service, construction, to farming. So, is higher education really that much of an importance? With a glut of highly educated individuals, the pay rate will probably decrease. Look at China, generally low per-capita income, but highly educated population which lacks domestic innovation with structural problems of its own.

The major factor involved in skilled labor starts out with education, but in the long run it's all about experience. People with low education are trained with incentive to elevate. Eventually, some return to school, or become the innovators and managers employing foreigners with high skill.  Education in the United States is a problem because it lacks choice. If students learn about choice and competition at a young age, imagine the possibilities of the next generation to tackle the inherited problems of such massive scale. Americans need to be independent and choose their education needs based on demand. A high school educated entrepreneur should not be looked down upon in statistics, so long as they are productive in whatever they do.

Reducing choice forces people into a system in scarce supply. For people who have accumulated living expenses paid for by a good job income - once they lose that job, they demand another job equal to or greater than previous pay. Meanwhile, jobs that require very low skills are available for less pay - those forced through a system without choice rather just stay unemployed and wait it out.

We need to reform education from the start. Here's a revised post about the education game plan:


Experience is the best teacher. For this reason, I look back at how I tackled problems in the education system to get to where I am today. I now realize that the start of my success began in elementary school, thanks to a solid local education system gone rogue.


I received a great education at my elementary school, P.S. 103 in the Bronx. I also had parents who were involved and had the mindset that education does not end outside of the classroom. My mom always pushed me to study hard and master the material from school so that I could go anywhere for college and become successful. I was trained to excel in education so that college finances will be covered through merit based rewards. When I entered fourth grade, New York issued standardized exams that judged your understanding of reading and math and ultimately decided your promotion to the next grade. Exams were a wake- up call to stay on track with my education. Class sizes in elementary school were average (about 20 students per teacher), but this number gradually increased as the neighborhood population soared and more children attended the school. In fifth grade we were given the option to attend a Prep School or Arts School for Junior High. Some applied for the Prep School and attended with financial aid awards, while others remained in P.S. 103 where they were given another chance to apply with the same options for Junior High School. A large number of students were accepted into the Arts and Prep schools, whereas the few remaining students went on to the local public Junior High School. This was when I began to understand the workings of the public school system.


As I progressed through High School, the issue of over-crowded, poor quality schools became intense and I always remembered how my elementary school in the undiscovered corner of the Bronx tackled the issue very well. If this strategy were implemented on a state or even national scale, imagine the outcome. More students will be concerned and motivated about their education with hopes of advancing to greater schools that were once thought of as financially impossible. Best of all, parents and students are given the choice to make their education work. Through my research, I discovered that this system exist across the nation. It is called the Voucher System and it’s a popular topic in Utah (referendum 1). Statistics show that Utah taxpayers spend about $7,500 to educate each child; 50% comes from state funding, 34% from property taxes, and 8% from federal funding. With overcrowding on the rise, government is faced with a serious economic problem of allocating enough funding to accommodate these extra students. The quick solution could be to simply raise taxes, but why should residents suffer when the problem lies within the individual student.


There is a conflict between struggling, average, and gifted students. No Child Left Behind (legislation put forth by President Bush) provides additional funding for struggling schools in order to help students who are behind according to national standards from state exams. I am confused as to how this helps the overcrowding issue and places attention on helping students. This is a bill that needs serious reform. No child should be left behind on a choice; give students and parents the power in deciding what is the best alternative for their education. Also, throwing money at the problem does very little to tackle the quality of the supply – teachers. We continue to reward all teachers on an equal playing field despite wide performance variations. Does a poor teacher whose students continuously perform below standards need more federal money? Children have no voice in the process. Integrating all levels under one public umbrella is shifting focus and resulting in poor results. This leaves our nation’s students behind. The students who want to go elsewhere should use a portion already allocated for them through public education funding for a private alternative. After all, the lump sum of funding already given by the public is a free voucher. Why not issue a voucher with choice to students who wish to advance their education and leave a system that is failing them. When these students are aware that this option exists they will try hard to receive the best education they can. Students will then scrutinize poor teachers, and command equal education quality compared to their hard work. Students will demand a fight to the top, score well in admission to specialized public schools, charter schools, private schools, (judged on merit, not lottery).

Greater choice will reduce class sizes in public schools and increase funding for the remaining children in the public schools by using the left over amount unused by the student going elsewhere. This will also increase teacher salaries in both sectors of education and provide them with the resources they need to help students advance so that they can try again and put their vouchers to use.

Studies show that the remaining students in smaller class sizes will do well in a focused environment dedicated to educating everyone on a personalized level. Some, including myself were concerned about private expenses (wondering if the voucher is enough to cover these students). On average, tuition for grades one through three is around $15,000. In Utah, the individual student will be given $3,000 out of their allocated $7,500 public fund for tuition aid (voucher). This of course will be backed with extra government grants, private aid, merit based scholarships, etc. As for the public system, schools will keep the extra 4,500 unused by this student to help the remaining students on a smaller scale get to the same position in education and ultimately advance from that point on.

This is how I see No Child Left Behind working – we increase choices.  The focus should start with preventing the spoiling of our nation's children each year. We fail a generation each time we continue to use this same system of failure.