Aside from the important issue of how it is that a ruler may economize on communication, contracting and coercion costs, this leads to an interpretation of the state that cannot be contractarian in nature: citizens would not empower a ruler to solve collective action problems in any of the models discussed, for the ruler would always be redundant and costly. The results support a view of the state that is eminently predatory, (the ? MK.) case in which whether the collective actions problems are solved by the state or not depends on upon whether this is consistent with the objectives and opportunities of those with the (natural) monopoly of violence in society. This conclusion is also reached in a model of a predatory state by Moselle and Polak (1997). How the theory of economic policy changes in light of this interpretation is an important question left for further work.

The case for subsidization is weak, and the case for State (government, generally) operation of schools is non-existent. It’s a very large argument, but I believe that tax subsidies to the education industry benefit system employees and other contractors to the system and harm students, families, and taxpayers generally. Corvee labor is a tax, which falls most heavily on children of the least politically adept parents. Poor and minority children labor unpaid as window-dressing in a massive make-work program for dues-paying mambers of the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel. Compulsory attendance laws and child labor laws put on-yhe-job training off limits.
…
Consider the last paragraph of this article (pardon the shameless plug for my blog)
…
http://harriettubmanagenda.blogspot.com/2008/08/whats-linear-differential-operator.html

At lunch today Eugene observed that Punahou found ways to accommodate the golfer Michelle Wie’s career (she and Eugene were classmates). We had to work to find ways to accommodate Eugene’s talents and the path we found may not be easy for others to follow, but I wonder how much talent never finds such opportunities for development. Is it only because we have clear measures of Math ability that the path opened to Eugene? If some auto mechanic or chef were to mentor a mechanical or culinary prodigy, would child labor laws and compulsory attendance laws permit such accommodation as we found for Eugene?

Except for #1 and #4 (which go together, since the State cannot subsidize education without a definition of “education”) there is contemporary empirical evidence that educated populations exist in States which do not feature #2, #3, and #5.
2) Up into the early 1990s, the government of Singapore did not compel attendance at school.
3) Compulsory attendance statutes do not mean much unless the State compels some school to accept students rejected everywhere else. Call these default-option schools “the public schools”. Depending on what policy makers hoped to achieve with the students in these schools, likely these schools would cost more, per pupil, to operate than schools which assemble their clientelle by mutual agreement. I do not see why the State could not put the contract to operate these default-option schools out to bid periodically (like private prisons).
5) In Hong Kong and Ireland, 90% of students take tax subsidies to independent and/or parochial schools. In the Netherlands, close to 70% of students take tax subsidies to independent schools. In Belgium, about 65%. Close to 40% of schools in Singapore are independent or Church-operated (they tend to be smaller than government schools, so less than 40% of Singapore students attend independent schools).

To clarify, I’m assuming there is the possibility that some people might be better off now than with no redistribution of money because otherwise they couldn’t afford anything. Also that even though what they are getting now may not be what they would like best they at least consider it better than nothing.

Well the current education funding regime redistributes money. This at least appears to be valuable to the people getting more money than they put in. What is your take on that?

Yes.

some of us …place a high value on the existence of public education…

, do you equate “public education” to:
1) tax support of school
2) compulsory attendance staturtes
3) State (i.e., government, generally)-operation of schools
4) State-defined curricula and
5) policies which restrict parentss’ options for the use of the taxpayers’ pre-college education subsidy to schools operated by government employees
…
?
…
The government of a locality is the largest dealer in interpersonal violence in that locality (definition). I also value public education, and that is why I oppose the government’s role in the education industry. Taxpayers get nothing from a State (i.e., government) presence in the education industry that they wouldn’t get from an unsubsidized, uncoerced market in education services, except for drug abuse, vandalism, and violence.

You have some interesting studies, but I am always uncomfortable when conclusions are reached to pit two large categories agains one anther (charter vs public, public vs private, public vs homeschool). Especially when I read my examples and realize it is alway something vs public. I don’t know for certain what measures were being used, but there might be some different findings if the measures included tolerance for differences and looked at subsets of publics based on such things as diversity.

But there is one feature that I would expect homeschooling to excel at that I don’t see a lot of in public schools and that is socialization across ages. Because home schools look more like families, this is something that I would expect them to be strong at–and something that I have sought in places outside of school for my own children. Age/grade grouping is really a very artificial way of doing things–and the only place in life that it is experienced, that I can think of, is in the schools.

But, I would also like to remind you that some of us don’t pay taxes “at gunpoint,” but view them as a responsibility of living in a highly ordered society, participate in the democratic options for decision-making, and place a high value on the existence of public education–despite constant efforts to make it better.