I went to the link in Jeff’s blog and read Virginia Postrel’s article. While it is clear that the Texas policy, referred to as “Robin Hood” has lead to perverse consequences, as a libertarian I find the implications that Postrel draws from it quite disturbing and disappointing. She concludes by saying that just because this particular program doesn’t work we shouldn’t reject the whole idea of stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Pointing to the authors of the study Postrel first points out that:
“The economists are quick to note that their critique is not a condemnation of redistributing school funds. Rather, it’s a brief for bringing well-established principles of efficient taxation to bear on school finance. Transfers, Professor Hoxby argues, should be funded through a statewide tax, while local taxes pay for local amenities.”
Concluding with her own opinion on the subject Postrel states that:
“Just as ideological foes of electricity deregulation exploited the California experience to attack deregulation in general, some people opposed to redistribution on principle now point to Robin Hood. [Horrors] But…Robin Hood does not represent the only way to transfer funds to poor school districts. What was the fundamental reason for the failure, according to Professor Hoxby and Ms. Kuziemko? “Lawyers, not economists, designed the system.”
Yes, leave it to economists to design an efficient form of theft.
