There is a cynical presumption that those parents who do not send their children to school do it of their own “free” will. Certainly Government of India thinks so, as is obvious from the terminology they use. However many people in the population also agree with that. Especially those whose own children go to school and they have to pay with some, minor or major, degree of economic hardship to themselves. My own parents believed that and educating me and my brother wasn’t cheap for them.

The comment above about John Galt from Atlas Shrugged reminds me of my own confusion when I was sixteen.

However, I’ve come to question that premise over the years. I am not saying that all those parents who are working their children or sometimes even selling them for cash or kind are not doing it “willingly”. At least some of them may be doing it willingly as their best option. But the question remains, is it out of “free” will? Certainly, you’ll agree that we all do many things, unwillingly or half willingly, but do them anyway and then justify it as the best possible choice… perhaps resigned to the situation. Many have said so, even you, about choices and you hear the same about democracy, that it is choosing between the lesser evil.

You said:

Here’s what I find confusing. If something is good and free, it wouldn’t have to be made compulsory, would it?

That too is not necessarily true. For example: Let’s say the H1N1 vaccine comes out and the Government makes it compulsory and free for every citizen to get a shot. Would that not qualify as good, free and compulsory? We see Polio camps setup every few months. They are not compulsory, but are free and few would doubt, good for the parties concerned. Another rather fascinating example is the National ID under the watchful eyes of dear Mr. Nilekani, which is being touted as “compulsory”, “free” and “good” (Now that I’m quite opposed to by the way) So I think the more interesting quality is the “good” here. “Good” for whom?

You may be opposed to NREGA or “Right to Education” programs but I think its wrong to equate that with:

It seems everyone has a right to a bail out from the government — sick automobile companies and banks included

I think ethics (not to be confused with morality) should be a foundation for societies, and there is something unethical about my nation when I see children being used for all kinds of labor when they should be going to school. However, by no stretch of my imagination do I see anything unethical in an “Automobile Company” or “Bank” going down because of mismanagement.

While its no joy seeing my tax money used on inefficient and corrupt public programs, I tend to get more pissed off that my taxes are subsidizing and substituting for the millions of dollars worth of taxes waived off to companies like Reliance, Kingfisher etc. or the useless weapons that we are amassing. That’s what I mean that your focus is wrong. I’m all for no taxation without representation and yes I’d like to see lesser government or even no government and ultimately no paternalistic nation state.

In terms of providing things for free, well health care is going to benefit the whole population.But what should taken care of is that quality is ensured(like our education system,which we all love); Of course it is the rich who are taxed, it is the rich who pay more for health care. But the question would be – will a wage laborer first of all if he is employed get money either in terms of a loan or as a gift from his employer if he falls ill?

Unless there is a sense of responsiblity among the employers, there will be a need to have government intervention in certain areas.

Destination Infinity

It is quiet obvious a poor parent will look at the child and think of him/her as an extra hand to work and earn some money. Is that right for the child? To give the child a fighting chance to improve his life. I am not sure in this case the parent is competent enough to take that decision.

So, you are saying an incompetent adult who can’t provide for his child, still goes ahead and has kids; Puts the kids through the misery of childhood labor. Decides not to educate his kids even when that is provided for free by the rest of us.
Now, why is it that forcing this moron to send his kids to school is acceptable, but forcing him not to have more children than he can provide for, is not acceptable?

just like you, I have been reading this blog for a long time but never commented much. But Arguments for the sake of logical extension is not always desired. English language in that way can be deceptive. Atanu is arguing the title.. “free and compulsory” being kind of oxymoron. As is evident from innumerate schemes of kangress, this “policy” is also probably drafted by a bunch of clueless civil servants after some 100 meetings on how to implement this. It would have been apt to mention free education. If citizens still want to live on Rs.2/kg rice, free electricity and more hopes of loan waivers..they would be fulfilled as long as these schemes are pledged heart and soul to some gandhis or nehru’s balls. In any case this this is not a free meal. we have paid education cess for close to 10 years now and I am sure it would be increased in the days to come.

Europe was an example where this kind of policy is successful (mildly maybe). The blog writer and even you did not give any example or logic(except ofcourse if you count paternalistic) where this is not. Which was my point.

Thats something that i keep asking. I just go insane reading the innovative election manifestos that win elections. Rice for 2 Rs a Kg, free color television.

The public education system is in a complete mess. Bad pay scales, inadequate staffing, stretched out teachers who are compelled to do stuff outside their sphere of work, interference, lack of facilities to name a few. Without even consolidating on that front, they are now adding to the mess by trying to accomodate more children. Instead they should try to encourage philanthropism(organisations/individuals) in the education sector by providing attractive tax benefits/discounts (something similar on u/s 35 on steroids). I would rather pay directly to a well deserving NGO and save on tax than have my tax dollars trickle through all the pockets before it hits the needy.

yeah right! compare a bunch of half-a-million population countries in europe with a country of size of US. That’s real mature.

I have been reading your blog a long ti

Does you Kangresss party pay you to read this. It may be news for you, but it’s *not* mandatory..

I have never commented on it (as it requires registration…in this day and age !!!)

precisely

http://giridharmadras.blogspot.com/

Looks like AI has a “right” to claim this (in additional to bail out?) per govt policy. This policy is so in violation of fundamental economics. Unimaginable how these are formulated…

Yoga

I agree with that as far as that goes to determine their lives and not somebody else’s. Let’s say that an irresponsible drunkard moron or some religious prick who thinks that girls don’t need education has a kid. Does that mean that the kid has to suffer the consequences of being born to that father? Shouldn’t society try to mitigate that as far as possible, if not completely. If education is not compulsory and he chooses not to educate his kid, doesn’t the kid start his adulthood with a big dis-advantage? If the whole society is full of such morons, then obviously the kid suffers the consequences that cannot be helped. But as long as these are possible outliers, I support the fact that the society should lay down some rules.

Regarding health care in the US, the current free market or whatever form of private insurance it is, has obviously failed. I’m sure you’d be aware of its failures. What obama proposes is not a nationalized healthcare that runs doctors and hospitals but a govt insured healthcare!!

There is so much talk about free and socialism about this health care reform, but I don’t understand; how we could talk of poor people as freeloaders when so many of the people have inherited wealth and can enjoy society’s resources without having to contribute anything to society, just because they were born in certain wombs. If you say that’s how it is and suck it up, then I think that this health reform is going to offer some safety net for people at a cost to society and everyone better suck it up.

“I am very suspicious of any policy that seeks to force people to do something because it would do them good. It is paternalistic, and if paternalism had any beneficial effects on the welfare of a society, then India would have been long ago a developed economy.”

The only plausible reason you gave for your suspicion is that “its paternalistic”. Thats it. Period. You then extrapolate it to suggest that this is the reason why India is not a developed economy. Have you looked …umm…I dont know..Europe. Free health care anyone.

“So by making education compulsory, the admission is that at least some of these are not true. Perhaps the adults are not competent and responsible. If so, should they be voting? Or more importantly, should these adults be having children?”

You are just peeved that Congress came back into power. Who do you prefer ..BJP?