MPG writes: >So there's some corruption, incompetence, dishonesty in >public education? No kidding, "Haim." Humans work there.
You know, Mike, I am starting to think you are avoiding the question.
What is the point of being corrupt unless there is money, and lots of it, to be corrupt over? We can call this "The Willie Sutton Principle". You will recall that the famous depression era bank robber was once asked, "why do you rob banks?" To which he laconically replied, "that's where the money is". The question we are investigating is not whether public officials are more or less corrupt than captains of industry. The question is whether there is a veritable torrent of money flowing through the public school system. You said the system is "vastly underfunded", although you have not troubled yourself to make your case.
I am grateful to you for suggesting a way for measuring, not the total amount of money flowing through the public schools since we already know it is vast, but financial efficiency. It seems to me that if an institution can keep on functioning despite losing money to waste and fraud, we can assume that the total amount of money in the system must be very much larger than that AND that the money is not being efficiently allocated (otherwise it would be missed, you see).
In other words, how can the D.C. public schools misallocate $12 million and no one knows about it until auditors discover it? It can only be that millions and millions of dollars are being used for things that have little to do with educating children.
It necessarily follows (you will recall that mathematics is the art of careful definitions and necessary consequences) that there is a huge flow of money in the public schools and that much of it is being spent very badly. Vastly underfunded? I think not.