= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Mark Zuckerberg plans to give away 99% of his facebook wealth over his lifetime - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (50)
No, they don't. They only have an incentive not to screw up so greatly as to get fired. You overestimate the influence that elected officials have over civil servants.
More importantly, you can just look at the outcomes. They are... not great.
Legacy.
And if by "users of the school system" you mean the kids or the parents, no one is accountable to them. Their only effective choice of influencing the system is Exit.
Why would people hired by Mark Zuckerberg to fix the school system do any better? It's not like they are making him any money.
Their incentive is just to spend the money allocated to them while pretending to be doing something useful. Civil servants have similar incentives, but at least civil servants need to please elected official who in turn answer to the populace, while Zuckerberg's employees only need to please their employer who answers to no one.
As opposed to the outcomes of charity-funded school systems?
Aren't school boards elective in the US?
Because he, presumably, would select them by different criteria and because he can fire them much much easier than a politician can fire a union-entrenched educrat.
This is precisely what creates an opportunity for him to be effective.
So do tell, what do you think is the problem?