Wisconsin students learn what markets do for society, which a leading candidate seems not to get
In 2018, the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction adopted the Wisconsin Standards for Social Studies to guide economics instruction in the state’s public schools. Those standards introduce students to fundamental economic concepts including property rights, supply and demand, prices, profits, incentives, and competitive markets. The standards were carefully formulated by experienced teachers and curriculum specialists, and they reflect best practices in economic education. They do not endorse any political party or candidate, but they do present market economics as the framework through which students should understand how economies function.
That sets up a striking contrast.
Francesca Hong, the leading Democratic candidate for governor, identifies as a democratic socialist and has built her campaign around proposals that would substantially expand government’s role in the economy. If Wisconsin’s economics standards are intended to teach students how markets work and why they matter, many of Hong’s signature policy proposals overlook the very tradeoffs students are expected to learn.
Consider one of the high school economics standards, which asks students to “assess how property rights are defined, protected, enforced, and limited by government.”
Economists have long argued that secure property rights encourage investment because individuals and businesses are more willing to take risks when they can expect to enjoy the returns on their investments.
Hong’s platform, however, calls for a significantly larger governmental role in directing economic activity through higher taxes on high-income earners, expanded regulation, publicly owned grocery stores, and a state public bank. While each proposal has its own rationale, together they represent a philosophy that places greater confidence in government direction than in private ownership — yet without addressing the cost in investment incentives that the standards ask students to assess.
Another Wisconsin standard asks students to “differentiate between supply and demand and the resulting impact on equilibrium prices and quantities produced.”
Students are taught that prices are more than numbers; they communicate information about scarcity, consumer demand and producer incentives. When governments prevent prices from adjusting naturally, shortages or surpluses often result. Rent control has long been one of the classic examples in introductory economics. It shows how limiting prices reduces the incentive to build new housing.
Hong supports allowing Wisconsin municipalities to adopt rent control ordinances. That proposal may make housing more affordable for some current tenants, but it also leaves out one of the central lessons Wisconsin expects students to understand: Price controls change incentives and often reduce the supply of the very goods policymakers hope to make more available.
The standards also ask middle school students to “evaluate how profits influence sellers in markets.” Far from portraying profits as merely rewards for business owners, economics instruction explains that profits serve an important social function. They signal where consumers want more goods and services, encourage entrepreneurs to innovate, and attract investment into successful industries.
Hong frequently argues that essential services such as food retailing, housing, healthcare, and banking should rely less on profit-driven businesses and more on public institutions. Her proposal to establish government-owned grocery stores reflects that philosophy while missing the key incentive Wisconsin’s standards teach — that the profit motive is one of the primary mechanisms through which markets allocate resources efficiently and encourage innovation.
Perhaps the clearest contrast appears in the standard directing students to “evaluate how incentives determine what is produced and distributed in a competitive market system.” This principle lies at the heart of market economics. Producers respond to consumer demand because doing so creates opportunities to earn profits. Consumers reward successful businesses by voluntarily purchasing their products. Government establishes the rules of the marketplace, but markets themselves determine what succeeds and what fails.
Hong’s platform embraces a different vision. It calls for a much larger governmental role in housing, healthcare, banking, childcare, labor markets and food access, often arguing that markets alone cannot deliver equitable outcomes. Rather than relying primarily on competition and consumer choice, many of Hong’s proposals call for government ownership, regulation or redistribution to produce desired outcomes.
Those policies may serve worthy social goals, but they carry a cost the standards teach students to consider: a reduced role for market incentives in determining prices, investment and production will lead to misdirected investment and will foul up production. These are the very outcomes that Wisconsin’s economics standards emphasize throughout the curriculum.
None of this means Wisconsin students should never learn about democratic socialism or government intervention. Quite the opposite. Students should examine competing economic philosophies and understand the arguments for and against each.
What is striking, however, is that Wisconsin’s own economics standards consistently teach the importance of prices, profits, competition, incentives and property rights, while one of the state’s leading candidates for governor campaigns without admitting or even seeming to understand their value.
Perhaps that is simply democracy at work. Or perhaps Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction should add an asterisk* to the economics standards: *“The following principles will be taught in class, though not necessarily practiced in Madison.”
That would at least keep the lesson plans honest.
Scott Niederjohn is dean of the Batterman School of Business and the director of the Free Enterprise Center, both at Concordia University Wisconsin, and he is a visiting fellow of the Badger Institute.
Any use or reproduction of Badger Institute articles or photographs requires prior written permission. To request permission to post articles on a website or print copies for distribution, contact Badger Institute Marketing Director Matt Erdman at matt@badgerinstitute.org.
