Patterns and Puzzles (ver the neat one handed yeas there wl be waves ofinteme debate oer ting ane for socal prograns, Defenders wil package such propa a8 high tur nese that benef most ofsacey and x aly those people whose share of income an wealth coud stand ro ome down, Opponents Well ery she rose ing of iniatves tat inves both the ed ad ‘hese vo be les productive. Bot sides wil nes dis owing ‘har they ae ight "This futce debate eet follow natural frm the lw of history the Jogi of selftrest, and the inevitable elp-serss incentives quandary. “The rwo opposing set of arguments hae been redscovered snd repested for cenaries mainly in debates over social asters tthe poo. Any ead, fhe sca story of extly modern rope roe pal the agua we bear today Long before the Fabian there wasa Left argument that the poo, tides and unedscted were peop who needed lp though no tat of thet own, Many of tha unfrtunstes could never be vsuppoting > that hash work inenives would be cue and wnprodurie: Others wee the able-bodied” whose productive potential could bandsomely repay an) ‘oxi hat wisely invested in the, Ana Tong, before Malthus thre was conservative argument that any combination of taxes and tanses doubly cost Ie erodes incentives to ‘work, to ake rks, and o accumulate both for thos being axed and for ‘hove reciving bene bated on thei low income, Sch system mks the os the elderly and the uneducsted wore off nthe ong, by shrinking {he sue ofthe whole ceonomy and by trapping ther into dependence on public lest. Slchlps the key wo geting oat of poverty and faving Enough saved up fr old age. Accordingly radiional conservatism Keeps redicovering the efisiency of the markeploce andthe ale of ough work4 Growing Public Asie ftom ay simple projection of past hitory nt the fre one an fovea chat the sue debate wllontinu oly by the lagi of sl stere, Himane self neret wl dfs bscase thei caring power endowsnents willalways fer They ae sue to ake opposing sides nany discussion of the ments of wing some peoples tax money to help others with insane tor human development In fe, the whole hatory of debate over sil pro ams i just ashing Back and forth brween to poles of slftre ‘Newly popular arguments in the debate fer shift the balance of power beewee she rwo long fed ples, not ew ides. ‘New fcts cannot end the debate. This party because the egibyiam becweenslfnerets wl prevent cesltion. People have sift sl interests, and thse ar sl he dominant ere povering how people Yrs. These will always be politcal tgo-war between thse who are more likely to benef fom redsebuton and those who would be taxed by “More fundamentally te debate cannot have alse resolution because there rm ecape rom the confit involving the dese to helpers ad ‘he deseo pve them nentvs for sl ep, We are most aie with hs eniltn debates over epg the pos Ina debate over peble saan, fewhat the Americans call welfare, We ae caught within s riangl where the tee comers represent hte soil goals lpg people ina gen tte, [ving them a incentive to avid tae tat, and Keeping daw the program bradger. Any movement within thi tangle most move away fon a ast tte coc ove goal. No new fas cam ale "et new fact can raise the evel ofthe debate, They aml sides with an avearenes of how ex-ased soci spending would aft collective goods ‘hat al profes to cae about soil peace andthe sizeof the economy. The ompetivenes ofthe intelcral markeplcs snd ofthe pial make. place in leroral democracies, allows new fat To exert pres owt "hose collecve goods. At the very leat, new fact can speed up rok ‘ejection of bad arguments Most ofthe fats we need come fom a history dating back co the la cgh teem century. Back thea inthe ae of Adam Smith and the daw of as: {sleconomic, governments hardly imposed any taxes al and there were prtly noel! program by td tandads The facts are no ey fo assemble, because the aly facts ze so scaerd among the achies ad because today’ large social programs ae so complex in chet ef. Ye ‘hey do yield sneer othe big hora questions soe tax based soil spending + Why wo lte in history? Thats, why did no country before the endo he sightenh century have even 9 pereent femal product devote 0 ‘edlacibuive socal peograne?Ptr and Palos s + Why so ig? Thais why did social spending expand wo him over one third of atonal prot 30 many eouneis? ‘Why was thi rise so mach gente sn some counts han in ote? ‘Why no sunset Tha i why di social spending sa share of national ‘eodet sop growing, ft not decline afer about 1989 inthe leading ‘rans? “+ Ho mach has the ite of social pening costa i tems of lost co ors growth? Why hase sing cost Brought sacl spending 01 sumer? + Milroy developing counties and traston eonomies go through esane kino? ‘Thescope ofthis story wil kup widening as this volume prowess. Our ‘ew row tft sain cal spending was so litte efoee the {wemeth century: Geographeal, act Two hopin Wester Europe and [North Ameria alone inthe ighteeth and wneeeh cemute-In the dawn ‘lanl spending, here were only eo kinds of erative tax hased ‘Salagendingo duce pooe rel and public schools. Chapters 3 ough ‘temple withthe pul that England snd Held edi poo ree, but forthe Garman aes and hen North Ameri edn the support for pubic schooling By the period 880-1950, soil peograms had spread enough | at wecan widen our focus to ety-one counties, Fotis period we can slo wrey several government budget categories few kinds of axe and ‘evel soil pening categorie now inciding wnerployment compensa ‘on, public eth, and bowing ses, swell x poor rele and public ‘cling By thie point,» Chapter 7, we can deaw on statistical parterns {swell aon insonal nd budgetary history. runs ou tha the ier eal cof soil spending is best explained by international differences in {epocracs aging, income, and eligon ‘The tbo in sci pening came in the later half ofthe wens ena, Chapter 7 inde that a fw forse again slice wo expla ost of the dference in he soil spending or, with Some counties develop Ing te were ste whe oer ick with minimal goverment housing Publics” suis primacy econdasy > higher pubis” pubic suction Zltenion — Cleetion Sine the controversy af thse programs and the fea tha they damage the ‘coon ans ia dis oxder other progress, this bok wil focus a Bit ‘re esi on social tansfers han on education Te wills copentae Sore on hi ai othe poor, the mont controversial progesm of al ha (nosh socal testers. Wel with nage in which almost none af this exited. 11776, when Adam Sith’ classic lnguiry uo the Nature and Cases of the Wa of Nations was published and the American colonies delored| theisindependence rom Beta, the moder ageof socal spending had not et damned. People pid hacly any taxes forthe octal programs that take tach large ax bite from paycheck today. Mot poor people received Se lige bly from anybody The elderly esived mo public pensions, ily Seca few people survived to beeldey and average working incomes Were tuolow to support many dependents Mest children did not goto school, snd putes bad to pay lor those whe did Poot Rel, Public and Private Inthe ghee century the paymentoftaxpayers money tothe poor oF "porte" as twas called before the 19305, was ust becoming noticeable share of he average wae or the average income anywhere inthe wold ‘AsTabl rr suggests exceeded one percent of matinal income nly nthe ‘Neberlands ain England and Wales By the 18305 Ergandand Waleshad ‘ame the works centr of poo ei, b infact ad in ble debate, ‘he Netherlands having cat bak ns commitments inthe wake othe damage" Groen Publi "ante 1.1 The Low Lvl of Tas Socal Spending in the Late Eighten Contry and Eary Nntenth een Shares of Gos Nona rac’ Segoe ata tet ‘Samay wag country Yor the oor ‘ney egandandWils tye ed : Nett 0 co Alftbercovavis —aryesttns— Zenvae Zavor lie hee oe Wh por sina Lins tan i cima cer on ins its economy suffered inthe war of 1798-2845. Yet even in England and ‘Wales around 1820, 3 Table shows, poe rec wat stl ln thas percent of the income, and this was a high a te share goin any country Fetore ron. ‘Yt eventhisamount of erasers say by todays standards was enough to spark great contovery atthe end ofthe eighth ceaary and te carly nineteenth. Reverend Malthus wrote his famous Esey on Population ‘1798 largely oeitcize England ing prtic of lca poor tle, He 'nged that helping the poor js snited them to have to many chilken, Ging bith to extra laborers would eventually fore wapes buck down (0 the bare subsistence level. David Riesrdo agreed sth Matha cielsns fon this point So did Parkament, when pase the famous Poor Law Re. Fou in 1834, tting taxpayers commitment wo the poor, Even Kant Mary agreed that Fish poor ele was degrading nthe ae eghecnth an eary ‘etch century, both when ha elie wae condescending ive and ‘whe it was cut inthe 1854 corm. He viewed both the ivng ante tak ing away as parts of the sternal contadictons of capitis, Even today «motion ontnue nso onthe ie of ing tax money co help theaterm and Paster . ‘oe ight thik tit the churches and oter private donors seplid the help ha he poo fled to get from txcnsed public elt. Bat this ‘eoventonl wisdom probably wrong. As we sal ein Chapter the lich vue of ery shares gave the poor vey tle in Europe and the ‘nied Snes cron when church ing soclude Private chaty Was not tabince for taxed based poor ff and was not conde ou bythe Inter reo ha public nid. was a complement and the wo row, and cctonal fll together Back nthe epeerh entry both public ad areal were withheld fom the poo. “The Fidry “There mee no public pensions for the elderly inthe ate cigheemcerary+ Rate the eldry hac rely on tht own aes, fay el, se any sdairace groupe they i joined ~ eles they were ul pooe I chey ‘erry oor inhi ld age then hey qualified for vena poor ch, ‘Thsethey received fom local governments alveady included inthe meager poor reef ols shown in Tale = "Te dcr poor may ave been Iter supported than ober pauper, sce ty flo the "deserving category by beng ls able-bodied, ess eter wok, Sr have even auc that efore #840 they were supported feo peioner in he ate twentieth cent Ye thre were mits 0 tty were en both av share of eational product and a a r3e0 ‘eat voppor to an sterage adult income. The elder) recsived a much ‘Slr sare often income than thei share of he whole population, ‘manng hs the average money recived bythe average eleely person mus ie ten well below the sverge income of he whole cout, even fit compared well wich thes to younger papers! Public Edenton ‘Whlethe eldecy pou nay have recived thei share ofthat small oor elf badge chelate chtenth centr schools received only negli ‘ibe ls sme shares of national produc going to publi suppor of “lve of education nthe lading counties in 1833 0 so. Nacoantry (alice ven muchas oneal of 1 percent of atonal income axes Feredusion Sala these shares were, the shares back in the lt ih tech centcy were mich smaller. Taxpayers had Baraly begun to support ‘oct, ciel the cation fhe poo, he ate eighteenth entry ‘hap willow: Why id the pica leader ofthe late eighth cenary belive abl edn’ his ok wil argue thatthe rea reson was he unequal ‘eration of pli voice, not lac of ielectual leaders who sa 2 ts forpbliccholing In fac, otk Adam Sesh in Bein and Thomas1 Grnving abi Jetson in colonial Ameria spoke out fr using taxpayer money to pay forthe education of other peoplerchilen Tei view it worth acting ren ‘hough it was oterrled by he sel nerexs of power prsos opposed taxes for shoals. "ven though Adam Smiths bese knven for arguing in favo ffs mace try he a a ase for having taxes ad goverment pending provide fl thing har individuals would noe provide adequately hemelvex Nationl teense, justice, commercial infnstractre, a publ education should be Funded by exes, or even dei peorded as state seit The case aes from the tame spot, bah inthe Weal of Notions andi toa eco nomics IF inidvls aed to eaprre all he social pins fom pooviing, these thing hen indivi could not be rled pon to pode enough them: [An ese ty of he sovereign somone i that of eeting aad main {aig hoe pbc ntaor nd hone uk ky why oh ey ey helm he highs dere adrasgeos to pet ws a eno ich 2 ‘au tat he scl prot coal ce epay the expec ny deal “mal punter of deny nd which hereon, conor fe et ta 9 ‘ia or na arbre show er or ain, "When the ito Pali mek wha bei oe whol sox tye cannot emai lee oe ase aes by th erwuon of ach ner fhe wey ae amily en ‘hem, he decency nn mn nc fete op bythe pl consti thewhale soe “This isnot cosa that Sich ike taxes and big goverment forteic own sake On the cometary, esa waste ia much of he goverment pending of day expecially in she sbi to productive high ofces, He ald at lena agaist arts on ported gods, sh a Englands infamous Coen Laws. And even where be approved of nee athe basi for thon public instttions and public works," he approved of some kin of ane ad tot others He prefered cher unr charges or proprtonal dct tas fm income: He ised most index aes sles tse taf exc xe) nd woul probably nohave sproved of today hay progres income Sl Smith di approve of charging taxpayers for somethings and one kind of soil spending Semed to rank with national defense tthe topo his lit oftax-worthy public improvements. Smith favored tax support for | public education al levels especialy if th exes were bore bythe oe Fenefclars of educating other people hlden® “Thomas Jefferson agreed with Adam South shove public scholig. kn 1779 Jefierson intel his Bl forthe More Genera ifsion of Kc. ge the Virgina assembly, calling for a tates system of Fe pi ‘emetary schools to be pai or by local txpayers Like Aa Siy he tuain author ofthe Declaration of Independence that everybody and notPaes and Pcies 1 ste parents of school-age cles, was bee fff al white) persons td an oqusl maximum chance to achieves ieral education at public ex. pense Ath secondary level be proposed the bute shoul be shied more patents and ary from axpayers though he ald for fl taxed id ‘the top scoring tedents rom elementary school At the vert eel |ederon again sta case for acbased education, Unhappy withthe pe Ibenance of she private College of Wiliam and Mary, be called for state dmiistation, sate taxpayer funding, and secularization? His Bill was 3 Eating of Anes ctiyIeadershipin public choling ar weshallsce in (Chaps 5. Yeresch time he inrdaced iin Vinin=in 79,8 the #790, and agin in. 1817 ~ it was defeated by those whose selfntrst would be onspromised by propery taxes tat woud pay for comnon schools The ‘ane kindof politcal opposition wasalso characteristic ofthe Baits society that Adam Smith was ying o educate nthe Wealth of Nanos, Staring from hat negligible bse inthe ae eighteen century. sci pend ingasa share ofthe atonal economy rosebalngly over the next one hu Sed yeas then accelerated between 10 and Word War ly and boomed berwoon World Warland aboot 1980, ince 980s share of national rod: sha sen ery le, Table #2 and Figure show the progres of al ‘socal eaters hos exlading public education) for several counties." “The mest obvious pater inthe ese of soil wansersis hat happened tweery OECD county sooner of ater, any in the twentieth cent By 1980 all of them rook more than ro pereent fom taxpayers on behalf of ‘Be poor the elderly and te sick, even mithost ning pubic educational ‘pending, The loud meg here sth dhe ior of axing and eastering ‘Poot jut a eicelany of parte and sigue national hatte. There {vis cormon patesn, and ater chapters wil show tae ts spread ingo sil other counties as their incomes prove I this iffsion process, in which some counties lars fromm others the wisdom and technigoe of ‘eting up soil programs? Probably not As we sal se, some basi a ton fortes were at work i all cours, evoking simi responses that Probably owed tle fo any difsion of kaowledge about tax based sxil Programs "Within tis impressive upwaed trend in all countries there were some insgsing changes eadersbip suggested the blace ets a TAM $sandthetop ational pathsin Fagure Inthe late ninctecnth centr the Socialransler loners were the Scandinavian counties, especialy Deniath ‘nd Norway followed by Brinn. Around toon, thee leaders were joined by Ausra and New Zealand which soddenyinsioed generous publ pension and heh care programs, Before 930, lading role was sumed Ey North America or Japan or any Continental European county blow Scandinavia‘ante 1. Soc Tron in OECD Conai, 8o995, at Rrcntagesof Gros Domestic Prdhct [Utio-1930; Waar unoplaymen pesos Kad and bowing abe) (eosonafo: ORD ald ons 980-1990: OECD now ee) fama 8888 tao gah thy ayaa Rigum Gtr Gat 826 ous One Oe Sta tga6 goal ay Gm oP aoe or “gta ttt tase tag Demsk Gg ha tar tas gt kn maae gays aa find oes aye O78 ogo Os ay [Rh ye ae ie Gamay 403) th BR os See ioe forsee oe feted ofl = te core swan fom esc erery Ilaod Se 8) toss seotay Pe ee ee oe) tet reee cine eras, tsar Jain Sep See Gay Sas ous ar “doy got teoe toek nr ny NEbcdands os) ose cay cgy 099 tal tg agp Ska aay 2789 2570 Newdalnd 017 039 tay nag Sq 24) tour gab tga tea ate ay Noreey tor ops tag Li nap 39 "7ay sry dog Iso aay aT Bm 8 SS Sek oon Sor iyp tat Bot See Sas Ses oy Sy 8p soy 36 akan toa aE er Sermtod Me Se Oe us Seo oe O38 ask [Sue os sas ket er Mon SB Sh 8G Se TA he thoy ae eee Some Unk ipa OBB 98), OECD Ss Fx: Baha 98-9 Ram For shay wh ae ae ee ce met retnnte einen Toe ‘tlh moo put aseer 20 Stgas" bacmally 19984 Growing Public aol Panel A. From 1880 to 1930 abyq of so 1901950 1860080 "HoUMe 2. Soil Taser a Share of GDP, 8-995aterm and Pres ts “The ranks had heen sshd by 1960, however. The upheavals ofthe ‘World Wars andthe Grest Depression cused Continental Europe to shift ramascalycovael progessiveaxaion and expanding socal progeams. ‘ne undeiag reason, to be dicused again in Chaper 7, was «shin the arade ofthe Roman Catholic Church and Catholic polite patie: Intavor of edarbution as 4 mean to brng soil justice ad counter the "hres of Communism. Thus in the postwar er, Scandinavians were joined inthe weltrestate leadership by several thee Coanenal counties — ‘Ast, Belg, France, Germany, aly, andthe Netherlands Through i ‘ll Japin, Switsland andthe United Sates ely resid the rise xing fsceranaering nd they sl hae some ofthe west OECD transfer rates, ‘oday.Chaprer ll tke up the challenge of explaining thee ternational Gieences “The Robin Hood Paradox ‘cal way to summarize the global ory of social spending takes the fom ofa pase that prods unto shin hard about the underpin politcal Sorc The purl this History revels "Robi Hood parades," which ‘edsirbutionromerich to poor islss presen when and tere Seons most ‘eaded, Poverty policy within any ve polity or jrisdcton Is supposed Co ithe poor more, the lower he average income and the pester he income ineqalry, Yer oer time and space, the pate usally the opposite ‘While there ae exceptions to this peneal tendency, the undying ten enc tals uamitakale, bot actess the globe and across the pase vee cots. A global tour of naions shows sack conras inthe shares of {oss domes peodct (GDP) devoted to social security rsx nsrance [programe of central governments. For example, 198s 9 ach pro [rams absorbed sbour 26 percent of GDI inthe sich OFC counties nl only 27 percent im developing counties where poverty and inequality {ie renter Simfaly among sates inthe United State, support fo the [oor takes a lower share of ncome in stats with wore over and p= fx income inequsliy.* What Table 1a and Figue tt ae adding ithe ‘eminr that hile a asc paradox of history. ewan the pore and ‘ore unequal national settings Before Word War Isha he least aspen {the poor = on equivalent in todays prosperous word with lower refs ince inequalities ha the poor get the most generous sport by socal standards. Why shold the pare actos pois be the opposite ofthe pater of estribrion has eypially ested and designed within poli? And why should governments provide les [more soc nance ‘whee private inteance tee (ore) aval? “That piy paradox pray has Bun infin in that aid othe poor probaly asthe most poste effec on labor supply and GDP where Iestiven. To underinetbe paradox thet consider the tradtionaleoncer1“ Groin atic ‘hat sci programs subside eur nd hereon xt labor spy ting ‘employers and GDP) a wll tapers. Thivcosera reasonable today, ‘ten though 2 vast empl nerstare hs taught not fo expect tet ‘respons of labor supply to change in avrage sx wage cea Ye in he ‘more dstane past and inthe poorest countries tay, there are aorta oantrtendencies. Granted, even in thowe poor stings i sale fo baie tha extra leisure was taken when faded, ax Maths ad Beka’ poor law reformers of rig famously heed Rat nuional stats ad Fusing conditions were ven 0 poor that entra poor sce! almost surely ad the eft of keeping more ofthe poor alive and working, Cold the tr labor saply implied by this mortality response have outweighed the ‘ection in labor supply from subsidizing nonrrk’ Tadao, Mala lst complaint shout poor ele hasan od labor supply implication: The more encouraged fry, the moe entra abo ‘pple a geeration or two liter One should take Grose Boers demon ‘tration that Malthus was right sbour poor ri ad extn babies od “mplify iby the extra labor supply hey would ring eve if they remained {8 wellare-dependent asthe average person who recived some ll, If the nec fleet on labor supply was fact posit, then poor rif oul have promoted economic growth, As the caen workers enced the Tabor fore they would raise aatonal product. In fa their extra labor supply would have asd even the comes ofthe propri taxpayers wo fale give that rei when lives were at ake. Tecould have dane th because baving prea supply of labor mean higher reat fo andor, Ie his was dtince posi, hy was the seb not given tothe Pos ‘xcept inthe itsladeof Englands Old Poot Law bene +834? Weeplow the determinants of exly poor rel in Chasers a 1s the Wallare State a Free Lunch? “Another puzale ha beckons is elated to, but large and mere controversial than, he Robin Hood paradox “Kaowing tha higher tax rates and higher subsidies to people who dont proce could discourage pedetvny many of us natal soap tht {axes and transfers should reduce the product ofthe whole scons. “ihen we giver the por don’ we subsidize the sayingin poverty? Whe ‘we pve the unemployed, don't we subsidize noe geting aah? Whe we ve tothe eed, don we subside early recement® And forth Those ara suspicions posea sobering guetion when combine with th se of ‘Social ranser programs shown sn Table 1s and Fg tt. I the elle State counties of Europe ae now spending breween a5 and 35 percent of their nationl predacton less productive people, and ac axing the mote Productive wo pay fori doesn this damage eons growth? Here arses the puzie of potently fre luch I the atpeoductive taxing and Spending ee a big as ag-3s perset of national peda, whyatoms and Passes ” sraate 15. How Soil Tamers aa Share of CDP Corelte ith Growth and Propet wr Count, Shenae “The Cotsen of Carin Bewee he at Shr of Soi sre COP and (Wake Gowhof——Bjike Locka “Time Prod (cbresp ‘ebtvep Shoe wor on pert 3200 oor on simple seg of ee a0 a ‘Naa nd Sa ial wa o-9e Wal, ne = cp Te 4 pent y Ps Wo “hsm ae i Ai Cana ena lan Frome cam ee 9 and ie a, Net SRS ae cet ht a ty Smad ioscan ae oat we see a big negative effect onthe level and growth of GDP pe capita? ren fone rans tat GP he renal of many fren, the negative eet tf socal transfers should have Been vile fo the naked eye if ech dollar transfered caused, a) loss of Sado pee dolar tanseted, That rate of ‘ups lost mes 23-35 percent oF GDP should have put dent of 5-21 scent the sine oe economy And ifthe asproducsive programs have Iisen almost emily since 1960, shouldnt we se low groweh i hose ‘ellrestate counties ince 196° ‘Yer he history of economic growth is unkind o this narra suspicion. \Nether simple ra corcatons not 4 sare weighing of the apparent sources of growth shows any clearly negative net effet ofall that ees {sbuton, Table 3 dramatic the overall purse Nie decades of historic "xperienc io show that ranaering larger share of GDP fom axpay~ (ato raster respons asa egative coneation with ithe the lvl or1" Groming Pubic ‘he ae of growth of GDP pe person. The average corelation ies ‘ro we pooled al the decades of ternational expen insted of art {Sreraging them, we could fad that sal anaes had postive covelatons ‘with both the vel andthe growth of GDP per person The stony pone ortelation with the level of GDP per person underline the Robin Hood paradox Taking all ioral expecences sa single experiment the et the countrys the moze tend 0 transer tthe pot the mck the elder, tnd the unemployed Sofa, any negative edo Hom soil progam "0 practi levels oe productivity om, remains wel hah The puzze deepens bt when we sth rom GDP per person the sual smear fincomeand producti, to GDP per hour worked fees es Sate of labor product. higher sel spending dap laeneves to invest and wo sis labor producti this should mae ce higher spending ‘counties father behind the lower spending ade ke the nied Stats “nd Japan. Yt as others have noted, countries ike the Netherlands, France, And Germany have aught up withthe United Sexes in opt pe bor four infact, in GDP pet hour worked, the United States ranked cow eight ‘ther counties in 92. Sx ofthese eight countries wah higher oop et hour worked were continental welfare sates ‘Since we cae moe abou wll ing thn about labor prodatviy alone, fhe fre lunch puzae even deeper Along wth their nee-Amricn po: Aicivity Bevel people in the counties with higher soil buts to "oy more free tne every Year and rete eae They work fewer hour per employed person. In 1997, for example the average employed Amer Ean putin 1,966 hours and the average employed person i Japan about "sgoohouts. By contrast thei courerpart worked only about 3 hous in West Geemany and Sweden and only 10 in Norway. The eta fee time is valuable as are the extra years olesreenoyed by elder West Eropeam beste hey ree eat nd lve longer, Novi the pale sty ineranonal. Within the United States sine the 1960s, socal transfers have taken assing share of ste proc, and the variance in thes generosty hi lors = and hs bce poste not neatly coereated withthe level and growth of sate prod per capt Hinw can the generous tt, ike Connect, New ey ad Carn staway withing out mot generous wellae and ober antes ea att ‘ear? Why havent they grown more slowly thin other star? Why has tpusines dese them, leaving them wich fewer fem and more wells Sime By thmseles, searaero correlations and bi chars cannot prove or lapeove any argument, nor ean one win the debate about soil spending and growth js by choosing favorite contrat between fo coun The only way out of the purae posed bythe historical eorltons not 2 reeat into selective jurnalic contrast, butt deeriaed mare into ‘nukivariat analysis and istional hry tose what the cst of soilrae and Passer ~ ‘easfers might have boon afer ater explanatory forces have been sven thee du. This fc take the suet of Pat Four An Ecstionl Pazale ‘thie leading pur inthe hiory of socal spending the deni of the iEaersinpublicedoeainn. The intents century leaders in providing mass ‘chooling a taxpayer expene were at the leaders in poor ree. Been, the Netelandy and Scasdnavin led por ele cven though they spent tiny aroun by today's standard een pom mane or ass Primacy schooling the ead wae taken by Pros, few other Gesean sates, {nd Now Amer, Why were the denies so ferent? What made some “uns toward minting the poor while oes peed for taxes 0 for school?| "The nations that led in taxchased ass schonling wee hemes an ‘odd combination, What did the autocratic Geman sates have common sith sur fire North America? What sate did ether set of counties ive that would bis i toward axe for schol? Surly no historical aw disses ba undemocrte Germs monarchies shoul ave wanted all chil diem schooled, rs esualy strange that Upper Canada andthe non Souther Stes ofthe United State should having ote so ery and spontaneously foc higher lca tage, What forces promesed mas pbc education i thse Sunt nd not in Brain, the Worahop of he Word nthe intenth ‘Satur? Chaper goes some answers "Tenn the ett cenary, leadership in education changed again in away that demands am explanation in Chapter Across the century, by Inost measures of edcationl inputs and achievement the United Seats Til ock ico the mide ofthe ranks ad Germany fll the ower bal, ‘mong the top twenty OECD countoes. The aback sot uniou, that [ncn confine to excel nthe nambers of yar spent in school. Yet iexpendtures aa share of GDP, teachers per one hundred stems, and Ist scores: thee oe lenders deity fll back. For German, te tal tme-word explanation for educational vine (ie) fl to expat why ‘German den have aclu dation even he eal went)-Hest ‘Stuy, And why shold US. eben look so urmpeessiv a the elma7y nd sovondary level hen US igh edacation stil leads the word in i pavotts ands exports of educational series othe rest f the woe? Pals ike these al for 2 depet hora ingury-