<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Matching, markets, and morality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://knowledgeproblem.com/2012/10/18/matching-markets-and-morality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://knowledgeproblem.com/2012/10/18/matching-markets-and-morality/</link>
	<description>Commentary on Economics, Information and Human Action</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 00:13:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew J. Coulson</title>
		<link>http://knowledgeproblem.com/2012/10/18/matching-markets-and-morality/#comment-35994</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew J. Coulson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://knowledgeproblem.com/?p=10072#comment-35994</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Michael,
You describe it as &quot;misguided carping&quot; to say that, in the context of education at least, Roth&#039;s pairwise matching efforts are &quot;work that really doesn’t even need to be done, if the free market were allowed to operate.” You then characterize it as &quot;a wooden insistence... on... laissez-faire.&quot; Unless I missed something, your only effort to support this view is the claim that sometimes “the best we can hope to do is make things suck less.” 
Having spent twenty years studying comparative education policy historically and internationally, I am happy to say that we can do much, much better. If you or your readers would like to review the empirical evidence for the superiority of education markets over government school monopolies, this is a reasonable starting point: http://www.cato.org/pubs/articles/coulson_comparing_public_private_market_schools_jsc.pdf
Best,
Andrew Coulson, Director, Cato Institute Center for Educational Freedom]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Michael,<br />
You describe it as &#8220;misguided carping&#8221; to say that, in the context of education at least, Roth&#8217;s pairwise matching efforts are &#8220;work that really doesn’t even need to be done, if the free market were allowed to operate.” You then characterize it as &#8220;a wooden insistence&#8230; on&#8230; laissez-faire.&#8221; Unless I missed something, your only effort to support this view is the claim that sometimes “the best we can hope to do is make things suck less.”<br />
Having spent twenty years studying comparative education policy historically and internationally, I am happy to say that we can do much, much better. If you or your readers would like to review the empirical evidence for the superiority of education markets over government school monopolies, this is a reasonable starting point: <a href="http://www.cato.org/pubs/articles/coulson_comparing_public_private_market_schools_jsc.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.cato.org/pubs/articles/coulson_comparing_public_private_market_schools_jsc.pdf</a><br />
Best,<br />
Andrew Coulson, Director, Cato Institute Center for Educational Freedom</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
