Awkward Utopia

Please let me know if I misrepresented you, so I can keep this as accurate as possible!

—

5:00 p.m. The as-yet-officially-unnamed Education Committee meets.

—

We reviewed the data that had been collected.

Bob brought to the attention of the committee a useful document, the Florida School Indicators Report.

I explained that, of the five regions we’ve been discussing and according to my research, Orange County (ie. Orlando) has the second lowest ranking, the second most favorable ratio of private to public schools, and the third lowest spending-per-pupil. Alex suggested we should be seeking a county with a failing school system that is not already saturated with private schools (as the Jacksonville area is).

Matt (himself a product of the… impolite… streets of The OC) noted that graduation rates are higher in Orange County than Duvall and Broward.

Bob noted that the quality of the job market is better in Miami than Orlando, with Tallahasse, Gainesville, and Melbourne being the highest in the state. Josh offered that Melbourne also has a strong school system and is therefore a poor choice. I offered that Tallahassee might also be a poor choice, since we’re looking for a stable customer base. As the state capital and a major university town, there might be a rapid turnover rate.

Christian proposed we consider Miami, as it is has a poor public school system and a growing economy, and is a port city which would facilitate… future expansion plans.

We narrowed the discussion to Miami and Orlando.

Alex said Orlando is stronger for corporate sponsorships. There was a discussion of how much of, say, Disney’s upper management resides in the Orlando area. Most believed it is a significant percentage. We voted to operate under the assumption that our school will be located in Orlando, while still leaving other options open.

Christian said specific location within Orlando is less important than what skills we’d like to endow our students with. What type of people are we trying to produce? I asked whether this is meant to be a “vocational” elementary school, where we prepare students for certain professions. It’s not. We’d like to turn out well-rounded students.

Our goal is for our eighth-graders to be on par with other schools’ graduation seniors. The idea is to compress the curriculum into a shorter time period using extended school days and an extended school year.

Bob thinks we should start kids learning grammar, rhetoric, and log

ic in the early years. I believe foreign language instruction is crucial. Last week there was some discussion of cooking, athletics, and the arts. We decided to begin discussing curriculum and size during our next meeting.

—

5:45 p.m. The regular meeting commenced.

—

Zach M wants to discuss pirate economics. Chris W thinks the pirate paper’s thesis is idiotic.

Matt M moves the conversation toward religion and economics. Is rational choice a cultural phenomenon or a universal human trait?

Alex V, our official spokesperson for Austrian Theory, says robbing a bank can be considered rational and wants the term defined.

ZM: Religion gives utility to its adherent in the same way anything else does.

MM clarifies: Can religious or cultural factors cause people to do things that are not in their own best interests?

ZM: Promise of heaven/threat of hell are incentives to act.

MM: But is it possible that people might have other reasons to do things that are not self-serving, that don’t involve a fear of hell?

AV: No. Giving away one’s money can be in his self-interests just as much as taking someone’s money is. It might not be sensible though.

S Slade: It’s easy to counter. People get utility from doing nice things for other people. They’re still utility-maximizing.

ZM: That’s why people volunteer.

AV agrees.

MM: Is religion a big determinant of a society’s economy (eg. Is it hindering African nations)?

ZM: Muslim culture would be screwed if they couldn’t export oil because their religion prohibits other capitalistic activities.

SS: Also it’s common within Political Science to assume that the Protestant Reformation was a prerequisite for capitalism. Catholicism says greed is a deadly sin. Selflessness and vows of poverty versus the infamous protestant work-ethic.

AV politely disagrees: According to Rothbard’s The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 1, Catholicism is based on the market. Property rights is the key factor. Does land belong to the church or the individual?

ZM: But the Soviet Union was an atheistic society with no property rights.

AV: Property rights are necessary for capitalism. There could be an atheistic society with no property rights and it would fail.

ZM: Who owns Saudi oil fields?

Bob L: Princes.

ZM: So there are no property rights?

Josh N: Religion also influences the treatment of women. In the US, the economy grew as women have played a bigger role. Where women are excluded because of religion, that is 1/3 of the workforce that is not working.

SS: And is that really rational?

JN: It’s still rational choice. Women choose to obey the laws/their husbands because they get more utility than if they disobeyed and were beat.

AV: If those women don’t want to work, they are maximizing their utility.

SS: Yes, on a micro level people are maximizing. But if they were to throw out the system in favor of a different system in which women can work then everyone’s utility would be greater.

MM sees my point but says I’m looking at it from our perspective and not theirs.

JN: It’s about marginal utility and marginal cost.

AV: And society is not a single entity. No collective action.

SS: So their beliefs are really that strong? Or is the state imposing that system?

BL: We are giving too much credit to the role of religion. We’re saying under their system “women aren’t allowed to work.” That’s false. We’re not placing any value on the work done in the home, which is important! Without a capitalist society, all oil revenues go to the princes. People are not able to consume products that would free up time for women to do work outside the home. The system is unproductive. It perpetuates the status quo.

AV: There’s no private investment.

CW: There’s no inventive to generate wealth.

ZM: Without the system, would their religion adapt?

BL: Yes, it has in the West.

CW: Religion is infamously malleable. See Indonesia, which is Muslim and has a female president.

BL: IIRC, the Koran makes little mention of women’s roles. Without the system, if women still didn’t work, it would be their choice based on their religious views, which is okay.

AV: The absence of property rights for women (men don’t allow women to work) is stunting their economy.

CW: They wouldn’t be able to do that if they didn’t have support of the state.

BL: A family wouldn’t survive if the husband didn’t let his wife work while other wives were working.

CW: Why don’t we ever talk about women beating their husbands?!

There’s a random discussion of Drudge Report.

AV: This issue is pertinent although I don’t know why.

ZM: There is a resurgence of religiosity.

SS challenges him: My understanding is that Europe has become secularized while America has remained consistently religious (with a slight increase at most). I think it’s more that the “Religious Right” has suddenly become a political force.

AV: Where did this movement start? Why is religion getting involved in economics suddenly after the post-Adam Smith gap?

MM: Religiosity has been fairly consistent.

Krysten R questions that claim.

JN: Maybe people are just shifting to a different type of religious practice (eg. smaller churches).

CW and ZM are disturbed by this.

SS: Well I was surprised that Europe which I think of as the birthplace of Christianity is becoming more secular while America is not.

ZM: This country is shaped by its Puritan heritage. That’s why we’re uncomfortable with sexuality compared to Europe.

AV: We have no one religion here.

ZM: No but we have a single set of values.

AV agrees.

ZM mentions Al Gore’s new book, Assault on Reason, which talks about religion, reason and fear in a rock, paper, scissors relationship. He deftly avoids an imminent tirade by CW.

AV: Well I believe the economy is made up of individuals. They may choose not to do or have some things. The economy is the manifestation of people’s desires. Religion may contribute to those desires. It only stunts the economy if the state is imposing its religion on the people, not if the people happen to be religious and take that into consideration.

ZM: What about President Bush?

AV: It would only be a problem if he were imposing his religion on people. Otherwise the economy is maximized. It’s not a problem if religious people elect a religious president.

MM: There’s a possible correlation between religion and growth.

CW challenges this.

MM: Economic growth is not the same as utility. It’s about preferences.

AV: For some people, living hand-to-mouth might be utility-maximizing.

SS moves to adjourn to watch the GOP Primary Debate.