Markets are not magic. Poor parents will still be stuck with shitty schools teaching their children because reputable ones won't want to serve their area, leaving an effective monopoly to prey on them.
Hell, chances are even if it started with a thriving competitive market it would, before long, conglomerate into an effective monopoly anyway. That's the biggest problem with "free" markets, the big players can ensure they are rarely fair markets by throwing their weight around.
There is exactly zero evidence to support your thesis, please show me where this has happen in the places where backpack funding has accorded.
Poor parents are the ones that are helped the MOST by backpack funding, rich people already send their children to better schools, no one wants to send their child to government schools, NO ONE. they all suck
They are forced to by economic circumstance and government regulation, backpack funding removes both of those obstruction
Further this idea that it would devolve into an "effective monopoly" is not backed by any data of any market, and should such a result occur it will likely be a direct result of restrictions placed on the funding by government (i.e no religious schools, no online schools, no co'ops, no education pods, no homeschooling programs, etc)
In my mind backpack funding should be a widely open to just about any educational resources not just brick and mortar schools in the local geographic region that teach the exact same curriculum as the local public schools. That would be pointless
> Further this idea that it would devolve into an "effective monopoly" is not backed by any data of any market
I'm sorry, do we live on the same planet? This happens in all sorts of markets all the time.
I agree that public school system sucks, but I think one of the reasons it sucks is that the wealthy people don't have to deal with it and see it only as an additional tax they have to pay and therefore fight against its efficacy as a means to justifying its elimination. Unfortunately this plagues all government institutions.
I've told you about two countries where this have actually been tried, I would expect you to dig into those to support your claim? I'm also swedish so I'm talking about the debate going on here. If you want swedish sources to translate I'm happy to provide those.
Markets are not magic. Poor parents will still be stuck with shitty schools teaching their children because reputable ones won't want to serve their area, leaving an effective monopoly to prey on them.
Hell, chances are even if it started with a thriving competitive market it would, before long, conglomerate into an effective monopoly anyway. That's the biggest problem with "free" markets, the big players can ensure they are rarely fair markets by throwing their weight around.