Brunner, Sonstelie, and Thayer (2003) studied how home ownership and community income influenced votes on a proposed initiative in California to allow children to obtain their locally funded education at any public or private school rather than being districted to their local school. Think about how public services such as education are capitalized into house prices. Why would renters in high-income communities be more likely than owners to support this school choice plan? Why would the reverse be true in low-income communities?
Answer to relevant QuestionsThink about two public goods—public schools and food assistance for needy families. Consider the implications of the Tiebout model. Which of the goods is more efficiently provided locally? Which is more efficiently ...Rhode and Strumpf (2003) evaluated a century of historical evidence to investigate the impact of changes in moving costs within the Tiebout model. a. What does the Tiebout model predict should happen to the similarity of ...Suppose that a family with one child has $20,000 per year to spend on private godsend education, and further suppose that all education is privately provided. Draw this family’s budget constraint. Suppose now that an ...Many state constitutions explicitly require that states provide an “adequate” level of school funding. How might raising this level of “adequacy” actually lead to reduced overall levels of educational spending? The problem of adverse selection in insurance markets means that it is generally abed deal for companies to offer insurance at the same price for all potential customers. Why then do we observe some insurance companies (such ...
Post your question