<p>
</p>
<p>Well, he is saying that it is good for tax-payers to incur a loss that they otherwise wouldn’t (higher taxes) in order for the government to experience a gain in the form of higher tax revenues. In this case the loss is not a broken window but a hit to their bank accounts, and the glazier’s paycheck is instead the occupational training provided to some student.</p>
<p>Thing is, if it makes business sense for somebody to invest in an education now to reap a bigger payoff later, why wouldn’t a bank or other private lender do that? Why would they leave money on the table? It’s much more likely that lenders would already loan money to credit-worthy students, and that the government will wind up extending credit to students for whom it doesn’t make economic sense to provide an education, i.e. the basket weavers and poetry majors.</p>
<p>Anyway, if things worked as he said, then the government has solved its revenue problems once and for all: simply spend money on occupational training and let the big bucks roll in. The track record of governments making investments in the private sector should give him something to think about.</p>