Piling on For-Profits

In the slow news time of August we have been treated to a series of reports of increased attention to community colleges and for-profit higher education on the grounds that the public is being ripped off.  The main charges against the for-profits are of enticing the public to sign up for student loans for high priced degrees (higher than the underfunded public sector) that are never finished or if they are, the career pay is not commiserate with the degree costs.  Students default on loans, hurting both the graduate and the public who guarrenteed the loans.

It appears that a large part of the problem many in Congress and in the public have with for-profit education is that it is capitalist.  In my duties as Devil's Advocate I have to point out that it is a bit ridiculous of us to get outraged about for-profit publicly traded companies doing everything legally allowed to maximize profit for their shareholders.  That's what you wanted when you were demanding a business model and saying that the private sector could do it better.  In defunding public education we are going back to the days of first century of this nation when most education was private and we had a pretty clear class system.  

While I do have my doubts about the ethics of some of the business models I have witnessed, I can't stand with the tar-and-feather crowd in the current instance of lumping all for-profits together as scheming evil-doers out to bilk students and the public out of their hard earned dollars.  As the pendlum swings we start by deciding that some previously public activity is costing more than we would like to pay.  The public then complains about inefficiency and "waste, fraud, and abuse" by public employees.  Then we complain that the public entity should be run more like a business.  Then we start turning it over to private business, followed by the complaints of "waste, fraud, and abuse" in the private sector, particularly that someone is making profit from something we see as a fundamental right.  In the end we try to close excess profit loopholes.  Eventually we notice that the costs really don't change that much from when we started and the quality of work is about the same, so we move to the next thing of outrage.

I can't defend the most outrageous money making conduct of some for-profits, but I can't find fault with the majority trying to be for-profits.  The common cause of outrage appears to be anyone making a good living at something the public sees as a right.  (Right to health care: doctors and pharmaceutical companies make too much money.  Right to higher education: faculty are paid too much and have too generous benefits, textbooks cost too much, organic is too hard.)  If freedom isn't free, neither are our other rights.  Our leaders need to remind us of this, but our elected officials only give voice to our childish demands for something for nothing.  If you don't want to pay taxes for public education, you will pay for private non-profit and for-profit education, as least until the public stops supporting education at all.  This may well bring us full circle back to the class systems of the founders.

Be it defense contractors or education businesses we must remember, caveat emptor.  It's what capitalism is all about.

And let's not forget that nobody is really looking at the value of non-profit degrees.  Not the earning power but the ability to generate value for a business or the community that the degree holder gained with the degree.

T.S. Hall

Note from the ODA

As noted in my Defense of Marriage post, in my opinion bad arguments are the bane of good science and should be exposed to the light of day as part of creating a scientifically literate society.  At the same time I am hesitant to get on a soapbox that diverts attention from the purposes of this blog.  But, hey, it's my blog!  So, I will warn readers with the label "Office of the Devil's Advocate" when I venture into this territory.

What does the Devil's Advocate have to write about today?

In the last couple of weeks folks effected by the Gulf Coast oil spill have become more vocal about the perceived unfairness of the way BP funds will be distributed to compensate for lost income.  Specifically, these folks have noted that they have been deriving a large part of their incomes from cash business transaction for which they keep no records to avoid taxes.  There is even some talk about having congress change tax law so that these folks can get an amnesty from their tax law violation and make claim on the oil spill funds.

Lets see, people working in an underground economy, not paying taxes, demanding and getting government services, and asking for an amnesty from their illegal acts because "those were in the past" as one person stated in a radio interview I heard yesterday.

Does this mean that the Gulf Coast communities universally support immigration reforms that would give amnesty to all illegal immigrants currently in the country?  There certainly appear to be parallels.  I am sure the tea party movement and libertarian and conservative media will be all over this demanding these scofflaws be dealt with the same fervor they show for Arizona's ID check law.

We would all be well served to remember that our own illegal, immoral, or ethically questionable actions that we justify by saying that we are just ensuring that our families or businesses are able to make do are no more legal, moral, or ethical than those actions of others.  BP and company cut corners to save money or effort, which they thought was justifiable.  Fishermen and an apparent entire Gulf Coast community used a cash economy to avoid taxes to take care of their families and businesses.  Illegal immigrants cross the border for their families and quality of life.

T.S. Hall