Making News?

JW,

Every now and then, a completely obvious piece of news is presented so breathlessly that it simply must be mocked here at Smarter Than Y'all. Such was the case Monday morning, when my search for "Jeff Fisher Shot Dead By Titans Fans" stories led me to the following headline in Nashville's Tennessean: "Poor kids' teachers earn less in Metro (Nashville)."

Well, my goodness.

Perhaps I should begin by explaining that public school teachers (at least here in Smarter Than Yall country) are not currently ordered to and fro by a beaurocratic entity determined to spread the best teaching across the racial and socioeconomic spectrum. As surely as you and I breathe, that day will one day arrive, but it hasn't yet. Instead, individual teachers apply for individual jobs, and individual principals hire them. Thus the existence of the following truths, as voiced by reporter Jaime Sarrio:

"Some of Nashville's hardest-to-educate students are taught by the district's least-experienced, lowest-paid teachers"

and

"The district's top earners with the most experience and education are more likely to work in schools with fewer poor and minority students."

Let's parse these earth-shaking revelations for a moment, first by admitting that teachers will choose a tolerable environment if allowed to do so. Next, let's remember that principals boasting good schools will naturally receive the most job applicants. Finally, let's assume that principals will act rationally by hiring the best of those applicants--i.e., those with the most experience, the most education, and, inevitably, the highest salaries.

All of this is as obvious as any other market phenomenon, right? So why the frantic reporting, particularly when this is the exact sort of thing that gets white people called racists?

In fact, the issue isn't racism at all but the rather predictable tendency of humans not to make their lives harder than necessary for purely altruistic reasons. Furthermore, the "best" teachers remain so in part by gravitating toward students capable of achievement. As Patrick Welsh wrote Sunday in an article as prescient as Sarrio's is precious, many "poor and minority students" simply aren't.

Now that's news.

-GM

GM,

Not only is your last statement news, it's news that, if true, should be swept under America's rug. I'm not sure whether I should agree with you or call you a racist, un-American cynic (read: modern-day liberal). If "poor and minority students" truly aren't capable of achievement, then one of two ideals must be right.

1. The Liberal Point of View: The notion of the American Dream only applies to those whose foundation is strong enough to set them up for success. No amount of hard work or God-given intelligence can even theoretically offset the disadvantage of being born to a single mother who collects welfare checks and looks to overpopulate the planet in order to increase the dollar amount on them. Only if he were to somehow be rescued by a more responsible part of society (i.e. put into a private school with richer, whiter people) would he be able to improve his hand in life. Therefore, we must use our government to correct this societal imbalance--to right the wrong created by the inherent inequity of births.

2. The Libertarian Point of View???: While it is impossible to rise above certain unfortunate situations, the more fortunate have no responsibility to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. Even though some people have no chance whatsoever, I expect them to respect my property and family until they die of starvation. If someone wants to house and feed them out of charity, I won't stand in the way.

I can only assume that you fall into category No. 2, GM. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but our point-counterpoint format doesn't give you the chance to elaborate. I believe that every generally healthy American has a chance to live a happy life--even to control his fate to a certain extent. And if our school system fails to make that a true statement, then maybe we should be shuffling teachers around until the best wind up in the inner city. Of course, that would ruin the incentive for teachers to excel at their jobs, but maybe, just maybe those who get into teaching do it because they want to make the world better, not just for the summer's off.

-JW