Private Education in China — You Read It Here First

Bloomberg’s Singapore-based columnist Andy Mukherjee writes about the private-education boom in China:

At the end of 2005, some 15 million students were enrolled in 77,000 non-state schools. That’s 8 percent of the 197 million Chinese children aged 5 to 14 years. Privately funded schools in India have twice as large a share of the total market.

Expect the gap to close quickly.

Nine years ago, Ma Lei of Fudan University wrote about the growth of private schools in China for Cato Policy Report:

In Wenzhou, more than half of the 600 million RMB spent on education comes from the private sector. That’s a claim that few, if any, communities in the United States can make. …There are more than 2,300 privately run kindergarten classes in Wenzhou, in which more than 90 percent of all children of kindergarten age are enrolled. In addition, there are 21 private high schools, which educate about a quarter of the total high school student population.

James Tooley has also written at length about private education for the poor in Africa and India. His work, and its exciting new directions, are discussed in this Atlantic article.

European Commission Pushes Hypocritical Regulatory Message

The bureaucrats in Brussels are infamous for promulgating directives that add to the regulatory burden in European Union nations. Yet the same bureaucrats are pressuring national governments to adopt deregulation targets. This do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do message certainly rings hollow, though European consumers would benefit if politicians reduced red tape. The EU Observer reports:

EU leaders have agreed to a somewhat stronger goal on cutting red tape in their national legislation, despite previous reluctance to commit to a reduction of 25 percent of administrative burdens. …The move comes after last-minute pressure from the European Commission, urging governments to make a clear commitment to cut national bureaucracy which accounts for half of the bloc’s administrative costs. …Brussels believes red tape reduction would boost the EU economy by the equivalent of 3.5 percent of GDP and free up an estimated €150 billion for investment but only if national targets are included.

Will Halliburton Escape America’s Bad Tax System?

Some politicians are denouncing Halliburton for moving its headquarters to Dubai, but this is not a full-fledged corporate “expatriation.” Halliburton is only moving its headquarters, not its place of incorporation. Under US tax law, Halliburton will continue to be taxed on its worldwide income so long as the company is still chartered in Delaware. The move does not save the company one penny, at least from a tax perspective. To advance the interests of shareholders, however, the company should seek to change its place of incorporation. America’s worldwide tax system, combined with a high corporate tax rate, make it very difficult for multinational companies to compete in global markets. Unfortunately, it is now increasingly difficult to escape the Berlin Wall of American taxation, though Halliburton executives presumably are looking at the options. The politicians, meanwhile, should stop demagoguing the company and instead lower the coporate rate and shift to a territorial tax regime so that American companies can compete on a level playing field. ABC News reports:

The much-maligned defense contractor Halliburton is moving its corporate headquarters from Houston to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. …Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-N.H., called the company’s move “corporate greed at its worst.”  …Fellow Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has investigated contractor fraud, is planning to hold a hearing. “This is a surprising development,” he said. “I want to understand the ramifications for U.S. taxpayers and national security.”

The Smart Card Alliance Thinks Privacy Is Bunk

A spokesman for the Smart Card Alliance says:

Privacy concerns are all perception and hype and no substance but carry considerable weight with state legislators because no one wants to be accused of being soft on privacy.

That’s Randy Vanderhoof, the Smart Card Alliance’s executive director, quoted in a Federal Computer Week article on the collapsing REAL ID Act/national ID plan.  He was speaking of Congressman Tom Allen’s (D-ME) bill to restore the 9/11 Commission-inspired ID provisions of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

Mr. Vanderhoof and the Smart Card Alliance couldn’t appear more dismissive, ignorant, and unserious about issues that are a core problem preventing uptake of its products.

FBI and Patriot Act

With all the excitement over the Second Amendment ruling, I’ve hardly had a chance to welcome the scrutiny that is now being directed at the FBI for its illegal use of “national security letters” (euphemism for super-special FBI search warrants).

Throughout the debate concerning the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, government people would taunt civil liberties advocates with the line: “Where are the abuses?”  We would patiently explain that the new police “tools” (euphemism for powers) were executed in secret.  The pols would usually just repeat their mantra in a louder voice, as if secrecy was irrelevant: “But you have not identified any abuses at all!”

Well, more abuses have now come to light and it’s a pleasant surprise that the development is at the top of the news.  But we should not be surprised.  Look at the incentives.  FBI agents get awards and promotions by breaking cases.  Agents do not get jailed or fired for skirting the law or disregarding civil liberties.   There’s no teeth behind the rules that were broken, just talk (‘We are studying the report … agents may need retraining’).  Lawsuits are mostly an expensive experience about futility.

Roll back the Patriot Act.  Abolish national security letters.  Not because search warrants are perfect–far from it.  But the judicial “check” in the search warrant application process is better than relying upon the police to respect the law and our rights.

For related Cato work, go here.

Environmentalism as Religion

Following his remarks at the Cato Institute on Friday, podcast producer Anastasia Uglova sat down with the President of the Czech Republic Vaclav Klaus to discuss his views on global climate change. During the interview, the President reiterated his belief that environmentalism is more religion than science, calling it “a very illiberal ideology practically attacking our freedom.” President Klaus’ speech comes a month after calling global warming a “myth” in a Czech newspaper.

Listen to the full interview.