WL>  MS> "Internal customers" in private industry have a 
WL>  MS> different relationship with "internal suppliers" than 
WL>  MS> anything existing in the public schools, because there is 
WL>  MS> no equivalent to the taxpayer's right to quit paying (by 
WL>  MS> voting down school tax hikes), set payment (the same way), 
WL>  MS> or get the service elsewhere (private school, 
WL>  MS> homeschooling, Sylvan).
WL> 
WL> Now your arguments are more cogent.  It is amusing, though, that a
WL> few posts back you were arguing the the article was irrelevant 
WL> because
WL> public school's customers DON'T have any option about paying, and now
WL> you are arguing the article is irrelevant because public school
WL> customers DO have an option about paying. 
    There are two subsets of K-12 public school "customers".
    One is the parents of K-12 kids.  They have comparatively little option 
about paying, because they are a tiny minority of voting-age citizens...and 
also because choosing to transfer Junior to a private school still leaves 
them stuck paying for the public schools (+tuition).
    The other subset is people without school-age kids.  They are 3/4 of 
voters in the next county, and as such can easily vote down any referendum 
for higher school taxes.  This is the subset of "customers" who _do_ have 
choice about paying,
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------