General Polls - US Government- Expand or Decrease?

Print Page | Close Window

US Government- Expand or Decrease?

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57897
Printed Date: November 24 2024 at 22:33
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: US Government- Expand or Decrease?

Posted By: hawkcwg
Subject: US Government- Expand or Decrease?
Date Posted: May 12 2009 at 19:41

          It's a hard concept to grasp for many people, especially for people who don't like change or want somebody "protecting them," and everybody likes a handout.

          Of course this is all theoretical, since this is never going to happen anytime soon, but all empires fall eventually, as time shows. But Is government necessary? Over pros and cons, are they really listening to the people, or are the people just going along with whatever decisions are made?

          Does the government really do any good?
It appears to be that government keeps expanding and expanding and officials hire 20 contracting business, drop a billion dollars of our money, (which has been gun pointed at us- stolen), to go fix one window.

          So obviously the government uses our money to expand this government empire and all its many useless bureaucracies. If we slowly break down everything the government does, it seems unnecessary. Thing like gun control, abortion, gay marriage, and drugs, should these be government problems? Or should they be a more local community decision?

          So lets face it, no matter what inspiration, rules and morality can not be 100% Justly regulated, because any body of people can become corrupted and that especially goes for an extremely large body or officials.

          So does a criminal really learn anything from spending his life in prison system that tax payers pay for is it really necessary? Why not have localized small court systems that fine people and put people to death for however serious the crime. Do we really need a police force? Why not a volunteer police force?

          These have been some of the interesting topics my cousin has brought up in the past, and he is an anarcho-capitalist, and I still have a lot of trouble understanding a lot of his ideals, but that's the problem, these ideals are never going to happen. Not when our government is so big, and not with our officials who love for power can corrupt basic moral rights.

-------------

Replies:

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 12 2009 at 19:43

Easy answer for me; the closest ideology I have is Objectivism.

Get the government out of our lives. Decrease.

-------------

Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: May 12 2009 at 19:46

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Get the government out of our lives. Decrease.

This.

-------------

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 07:00

"In our country, you’re free and so you’re born and so they say, “You’re free,” so happy birthday. And even if you were born to lose--even if you were a complete wreck when you were born--you might still grow up to be president ... because you’re free."

"You’re walking and you don’t always realize it but you’re always falling at the same time. With each step you fall forward. Over and over, you’re falling and then catching yourself from falling ... And this is how you can be walking and falling at the same time."

"Well, he didn’t know what to do so he just decided to watch the government and see what the government was doing and then kind of scale it down to size--and run his life that way." Laurie Anderson

Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 08:17

Im gunna go the Obama road and say:
I don't really care about a BIG or SMALL government, I'd like a SMART government.

Actually, I rather like that. I am liberal, and support social programs/spending all that good stuff. However, there are always serious problems and I'll for some cutting/reforming.

Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 08:50

Brian makes my point really - I wouldn't mind supporting government programs of any type if they could be shown to be successful - if there was accountability, a well-defined goal and set of metrics on which to judge the efficacy of said program, and the will to eliminate a program if it isn't working. However, there's pretty much nothing like this going on in the U.S. Federal government, and hasn't been for a long time.

I'm in favor of more power to state and local governments and decreasing the power of the central government - as I believe the founders of this country wished it to be. Unfortunately that reality has long since died, such that I feel the 10th Amendment has been rendered utterly useless.

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 09:27

I think the central government is a big mess, and a lot of money is being thrown around, and i really don't like the fact that it is our money being put into schools, prisons and abortion clinics. I think those kinds of things should be donation, and volunteer and not affiliated with the central government.

I think the public school systems would also be a lot better if the students could volunteer to go to school, i mean you set yourself up for disaster when you stick kids in a prison and tell them they can't talk to eachother haha. And I was just reading an article about Obama wanting to make the school day even longer and even have it on Saturdays. Kids don't learn anything in highschool, they learn to be "obiedent maybe, and but all they do is cram for tests and then forget all the information. Then they are put into social caste systems and try and not escape from reality with drugs and other resources.

-------------

Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 09:28

Padraic wrote:

Brian makes my point really - I wouldn't mind supporting government programs of any type if they could be shown to be successful - if there was accountability, a well-defined goal and set of metrics on which to judge the efficacy of said program, and the will to eliminate a program if it isn't working. However, there's pretty much nothing like this going on in the U.S. Federal government, and hasn't been for a long time.

I'm in favor of more power to state and local governments and decreasing the power of the central government - as I believe the founders of this country wished it to be. Unfortunately that reality has long since died, such that I feel the 10th Amendment has been rendered utterly useless.

I can't even trust the US Postal Service anymore. They've screwed me out of $104.44. The package I sent was the size of a small refrigerator, and they seem to have lost it. Disapprove

-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 09:52

hawkcwg wrote:

I think the central government is a big mess, and a lot of money is being thrown around, and i really don't like the fact that it is our money being put into schools, prisons and abortion clinics. I think those kinds of things should be donation, and volunteer and not affiliated with the central government.

I think the public school systems would also be a lot better if the students could volunteer to go to school, i mean you set yourself up for disaster when you stick kids in a prison and tell them they can't talk to eachother haha. And I was just reading an article about Obama wanting to make the school day even longer and even have it on Saturdays. Kids don't learn anything in highschool, they learn to be "obiedent maybe, and but all they do is cram for tests and then forget all the information. Then they are put into social caste systems and try and not escape from reality with drugs and other resources.

I've been in favor of a complete redo of the schooling system for a while now; and I think if we trimmed ALL the crap in the government and truly opened up schools to compete in the private sector: not only would schools be more pressured to hire better teachers and meet better standards (or they would be out of business in no time), but tuition would be cheaper and parents could send children to schools that they personally felt met their standards at a much more affordable price.

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 10:00

MovingPictures07 wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 10:37

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

Do you really want American youngster to be even more stupid than they're right now? If schools were made voluntary, most youngster will prefer to try to get some "quick cash money" instead of trying to better themselves and actually making much more money in the future... (as money is the only thing that matters for some).

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

About the question, I want the government out of my life in private issues as abortion (allow it), drugs (legalize them), gay marriage (allow it) and so.... I want government in issues like economy regulation, healthcare system, workers rights, etc....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 10:54

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Well schools not for everyone, so why force it on children that are going to mess up there lives anyway? Have you ever wandered why the school systems are so bad? I'm 17 and love to learn, and have learned a lot more homeschooling than in the public school system, I would love to go to school, if I wasn't forced to go. There is such a thing as people wanting to learn. that's what compelled people to sit down and listen to sessions and lectures by professors and philosophers in old times.

Can you believe they give you a detention at schools for being two minutes late 3 times? Kids spend more time out of the learning environment then in it. They don't put the children in mind, a lot of people and especially in this day and age have a lot of issues and they have no compassion for things like a broken down car.

-------------

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:00

Hey, I gotta an idea, let's excrese the US gorvenment. Tongue

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:05

Slartibartfast wrote:

Hey, I gotta an idea, let's excrese the US gorvenment. Tongue

How dare you make mockery out of this poll. Tongue

I knew you of all people would LOL

-------------

Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:10

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Yup, yup, yup, yes, and....yup. Right on bro.

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:10

Slartibartfast wrote:

Hey, I gotta an idea, let's excrese the US gorvenment. Tongue

*brain explodes*

Does that mean it remains the same because they cancel out? LOL

-------------

Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:13

Slartibartfast wrote:

Hey, I gotta an idea, let's excrese the US gorvenment. Tongue

At first I read that as "excrete" - which, while painful, isn't a bad idea LOL

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:37

Socialism is OK when you're as ridiculously right-wing and individualist as the US is.

To be fair, I'm in favour of expanding the role of British government, as long as it's done in the right way (as soon as the socialists lose the working-class-obsession, I'm on their side).

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Is a brilliant post. As a liberal leftist nowadays, I'd agree with all of those. The one thing I find quite odd about the current government is the complete failure to even really consider relegalising some of the less significant drugs. My fear, really, is that every time we give the government a liberty, they're not going to think of giving it back.

That said, I'm British, so I'm merely speaking from a political philosophy viewpoint, not an American citizen's one.

Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:38

Padraic wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

Hey, I gotta an idea, let's excrese the US gorvenment. Tongue

At first I read that as "excrete" - which, while painful, isn't a bad idea LOL

Maybe that's why Bush always looked like he was suffering from hemorrhoidal discomfort.

-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:45

I have to go number three. Tongue

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 12:48

hawkcwg wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

Problem is that education is vital in reducing crime rates, increasing prosperity and giving people any sort of potential equal opportunities. So, by that system, essentially, poor people would be screwed. That said, I'm just finishing a privately education myself, but you can see that the school is obviously more interested in attracting customers than it is in genuinely benefitting its pupils - which really isn't the way it should be... its benefits seem to me to derive from concentrating a number of relatively smart pupils who have a lot of parental expectations on them into a small space. Additionally, this school has a mostly unlimited power over pupils, I can't even have long hair, or wear a black shirt, or something else which is a liberty which shouldn't be effectively lost to a private corporation for no reason at all other than the chap in charge thinks it looks neater and possibly thinks potential parents would be put off by all the 2 or 3 hippies there would be (just an edit about the 'you're free to leave' argument... well, yes, but it's damn awkward to do so if you're in the middle of an exam-driven year, it's inconvenient if your parents working days are based around getting you to school and you have a sibling there, too, and more importantly, these are guaranteed liberties... it'd be like saying 'don't get ill if you want free healthcare' or 'you have the right to not get a job at that place if you're a woman and you care about equal pay rates'). In short, I'd prefer a good state-driven education system. Unfortunately, I think the government are too nervous about specific incidents and too press-driven these days to try to make general improvements.

The problem with the philosophers thing is a) it was pretty expensive, there's a Plato dialogue I was reading the other day which at least suggests this. b) there's no consistency, and I don't think you can really qualify someone without consistency, and I think private companies need qualifications to help them judge candidates.

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 13:09

TGM: Orb wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

Honestly, I don't think there is any perfect schooling system possible because people are too corrupt to pull it off, regardless of the format.

The U.S. public schooling system, however, is a complete disaster---and the only way we can even begin to fix it is by completely re-structuring it instead of throwing money at public schools who are controlled by idiots who don't know how to effectively spend money. Unfortunately, sometimes it comes down to: who do you want---a completely corrupt government or just alot of corrupt people in the private sector?

Either the system that I proposed in theory would be more effective, or you could have some state control in the way of establishing institutions for schooling similarly to the complete private sector... only with a schooling system more like Belgium's where each school costs $3,000 a year (which is pretty affordable, especially if the government isn't taxing you as much and more money is kept in the hands of people) and you can pick which one to go because there are however many schools within a certain area and they would be driven to provide a better education or else they would be forced to lose revenue. If parents didn't feel comfortable (or students) in the education, then they could very easily move the child somewhere else the following semester or what not.

The problem is that people aren't educated enough to make smart decisions. We don't need a government showing or telling people what to do; we need people to make their own decisions and carve their own paths. There are plenty of job opportunities (or usually, unless the economy is made corrupt as it has been lately by corrupt government officials and corrupt organizations, but that's for another topic) in a completely free market economy for people to make money off of nearly anything.

It's the fact that people piss their money away and AREN'T held responsible for the consequences that we run into problems... because the government just bails you out if you don't make smart business decisions.

In that way, my views on education are still not perfect. The one thing I know for sure though is that we need a better system that will truly be effective and at the same time not lose any of the freedoms of people to get a good education. I think that schools can't do everything for the person though, and the person has to show initiative in learning if the person wants to earn the most out of education---and that's the same in ANY situation. You can always go to the library or learn on the internet nowadays too. There are infinite possibilities; people are just misinformed and lazy.

-------------

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 13:47

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Honestly, I don't think there is any perfect schooling system possible because people are too corrupt to pull it off, regardless of the format.

Mm... possibly, I like to try to have faith in people nowadays, though. It's trying sometimes, but I think we're setting humanity up for failure if we say people are too bad anyway. Yeah, I agree there's no perfect option.

'The U.S. public schooling system, however, is a complete disaster---and the only way we can even begin to fix it is by completely re-structuring it instead of throwing money at public schools who are controlled by idiots who don't know how to effectively spend money. Unfortunately, sometimes it comes down to: who do you want---a completely corrupt government or just alot of corrupt people in the private sector?'

The thing is, the people in the private sector are by definition in it for the money... with private schools, people spend money by definition as an investment in their own future... governments are pretty feeble nowadays, but I think they'd at least try to get the money spent in accordance with an ideal and for the better of the people.

'Either the system that I proposed in theory would be more effective, or you could have some state control in the way of establishing institutions for schooling similarly to the complete private sector... only with a schooling system more like Belgium's where each school costs $3,000 a year (which is pretty affordable, especially if the government isn't taxing you as much and more money is kept in the hands of people) and you can pick which one to go because there are however many schools within a certain area and they would be driven to provide a better education or else they would be forced to lose revenue. If parents didn't feel comfortable (or students) in the education, then they could very easily move the child somewhere else the following semester or what not. '

Again, the schools are then competing for parental opinion, not for more learning or better results. I think education is one of the things that should always be run with an altruistic aim.

'The problem is that people aren't educated enough to make smart decisions. We don't need a government showing or telling people what to do; we need people to make their own decisions and carve their own paths. There are plenty of job opportunities (or usually, unless the economy is made corrupt as it has been lately by corrupt government officials and corrupt organizations, but that's for another topic) in a completely free market economy for people to make money off of nearly anything. '

Well, I disagree there. I think we can achieve more as a united people with a socially-driven government than we can as separate individuals. And I think that the problem is that without a regulatory government, A) individuals get screwed through no fault of their own sometimes, and B) you need a government to protect people's rights, and prevent exploitation.

'It's the fact that people piss their money away and AREN'T held responsible for the consequences that we run into problems... because the government just bails you out if you don't make smart business decisions.'

The free market intrudes into all aspects of many lives, I think, and occasionally you have to sacrifice the principles of the free market - that you suffer for getting something wrong - in order to protect the general electorate from something much worse. I think the problem here was that greed and competition was allowed to get in the way of the main idea... making money to support yourself securely. Problem is, I think, these companies haven't learned from that and are still trying to milk the 'bailout' system. I reckon what we need to do is try to make people think about the purpose of work a bit more.

'In that way, my views on education are still not perfect. The one thing I know for sure though is that we need a better system that will truly be effective and at the same time not lose any of the freedoms of people to get a good education. I think that schools can't do everything for the person though, and the person has to show initiative in learning if the person wants to earn the most out of education---and that's the same in ANY situation. You can always go to the library or learn on the internet nowadays too. There are infinite possibilities; people are just misinformed and lazy.'

Great paragraph Clap

, I think that what countries need to establish from an educational point of view is a reasonable balance between qualifications and encouraging learning. Also, exams are fairly silly as a primary yardstick.

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 14:14

TGM: Orb wrote:

The thing is, the people in the private sector are by definition in it for the money... with private schools, people spend money by definition as an investment in their own future... governments are pretty feeble nowadays, but I think they'd at least try to get the money spent in accordance with an ideal and for the better of the people.

I think it comes down to differences in personal observations here---I actually trust individuals more with money than I do with governments. I think governments are some of the most corrupt people all in a powerful, corrupt setting. They don't care about the people; they only care about power.

Again, the schools are then competing for parental opinion, not for more learning or better results. I think education is one of the things that should always be run with an altruistic aim.

But wouldn't an informed parent want their child to be learning? I know most do. So if there is more learning evidenced by the child, the parents will be happy and continue to support the school.

Again though, I said no plan was perfect and my views on education aren't actually as solid as many other issues I care about. I'm not entirely sure what would be best for it, because I think education is very important.

The main problem now is that our education isn't educating people. It's a waste of time and money on both parts.

Well, I disagree there. I think we can achieve more as a united people with a socially-driven government than we can as separate individuals. And I think that the problem is that without a regulatory government, A) individuals get screwed through no fault of their own sometimes, and B) you need a government to protect people's rights, and prevent exploitation.

I disagree here, and it again comes down to personal beliefs and observations. I think government and regulating bodies restrict freedoms of individuals to truly live and be free of being screwed. I honestly have seen the effects of government screwing people over more than individuals screwing other individuals over.

I'm not for total anarchy, but I think a legal system that actually protects people's rights is needed. The one we have right now is ridiculous, allowing for ridiculous lawsuits that don't make any sense (like the ones you hear all the time---the lady suing McDonalds for thousands of dollars because she spilled coffee on her lap while driving). I think those are cases in point that regulations can be just as corrupt, if not more--than if reason and common sense are crowned instead of the good will of the collective.

People who choose to be stupid and don't educate themselves and don't care about anyone else should not be put on the same level as an honest, hard-working individual who never steps on anyone to get what he wants. I think a united force doesn't work; the latter people get screwed in favor of helping the former.

The free market intrudes into all aspects of many lives, I think, and occasionally you have to sacrifice the principles of the free market - that you suffer for getting something wrong - in order to protect the general electorate from something much worse. I think the problem here was that greed and competition was allowed to get in the way of the main idea... making money to support yourself securely. Problem is, I think, these companies haven't learned from that and are still trying to milk the 'bailout' system. I reckon what we need to do is try to make people think about the purpose of work a bit more.

Well... this is a whole topic in of itself, but the financial bailout system is entirely corrupt---I agree. The companies heedlessly thought they could blindly make decisions and then expect people to bail them out, and they shouldn't. They should file for bankruptcy, restructure, and then successfully rebuild their companies on the basis of honesty and diligence.

It's no coincidence that Ford, who didn't take any bailout money, sold more cars than Toyota last month---whereas GM and Chrysler will suffer.

I could expand here infinitely, but that's for another discussion.

'In that way, my views on education are still not perfect. The one thing I know for sure though is that we need a better system that will truly be effective and at the same time not lose any of the freedoms of people to get a good education. I think that schools can't do everything for the person though, and the person has to show initiative in learning if the person wants to earn the most out of education---and that's the same in ANY situation. You can always go to the library or learn on the internet nowadays too. There are infinite possibilities; people are just misinformed and lazy.'

Great paragraph Clap

-------------

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 15:35

MovingPictures07 wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

Again, the schools are then competing for parental opinion, not for more learning or better results. I think education is one of the things that should always be run with an altruistic aim.

But wouldn't an informed parent want their child to be learning? I know most do. So if there is more learning evidenced by the child, the parents will be happy and continue to support the school.

Again though, I said no plan was perfect and my views on education aren't actually as solid as many other issues I care about. I'm not entirely sure what would be best for it, because I think education is very important.

The main problem now is that our education isn't educating people. It's a waste of time and money on both parts.

Problem is- what the parents see, primarily, is what the school presents to them, and the schools tend to input resources into things that look impressive more than the things which matter... essentially, the students do all the learning anyway, and get grades roughly correlative to what they'd get anywhere else - at least, the resources available to them are hardly better.

Mine, in particular, is ruthless about haircuts, but, frankly, hardly cares about bullying or plain lack of discipline (it's gotten to the point that the idiots in one class of fifteen year olds or so have on a couple of occasions tried to stop the school's chess team taking the school's chess sets from their room to use for chess training, which is offered by the school complete with an instructor brought in, and, frankly, that's an obvious problem in discipline, but because it's difficult to manage/doesn't appear to the outside world, it has no effect on 'sales' and nothing is done about it)... also, I think changing schools is pretty difficult for most people already, (have to admit, I'm sort of sketchy about how the American qualification system works, but if you're doing modules which stretch over the term boundaries, relocating tends to put you at a disadvantage), and when you've prepaid a term/semester, financially discouraging. Even more so if the schools which are obviously better at teaching will be at a higher price range.

And I don't really know about the second bit, but I think education will always serve, in part, to train people to be able to take the sh*t a bit better and get on with others... education is important, but I don't think it's the only aim of schooling. I'm non-American, so I see this only from a political philosophy perspective, I admit.

Problem is that what I think you'd see from voluntary education is a lot of people dropping out without thought about the long term, and I think general education is pretty important.

Well, I disagree there. I think we can achieve more as a united people with a socially-driven government than we can as separate individuals. And I think that the problem is that without a regulatory government, A) individuals get screwed through no fault of their own sometimes, and B) you need a government to protect people's rights, and prevent exploitation.

I disagree here, and it again comes down to personal beliefs and observations. I think government and regulating bodies restrict freedoms of individuals to truly live and be free of being screwed. I honestly have seen the effects of government screwing people over more than individuals screwing other individuals over.

I'm not for total anarchy, but I think a legal system that actually protects people's rights is needed. The one we have right now is ridiculous, allowing for ridiculous lawsuits that don't make any sense (like the ones you hear all the time---the lady suing McDonalds for thousands of dollars because she spilled coffee on her lap while driving). I think those are cases in point that regulations can be just as corrupt, if not more--than if reason and common sense are crowned instead of the good will of the collective.

People who choose to be stupid and don't educate themselves and don't care about anyone else should not be put on the same level as an honest, hard-working individual who never steps on anyone to get what he wants. I think a united force doesn't work; the latter people get screwed in favor of helping the former.

About the McDonald's case... it's not as ridiculous at it sounds (+she wasn't driving at the time, I think... arguably makes it even more stupid, though). She had third degree burns because McDonalds were heating up the coffee to the point where it would, when served, be too hot to be drinkable, and the overwhelming majority of the awards were either punitive damages against McDonalds or covering legal costs. Plus, lots of it was taken away on the appeal. I also think the papers tend to leap on the 2 or 3 ridiculous cases a year rather than the number of decent ones.

Can a child, aged 11 or whenever it is they enter secondary schooling, be considered capable of 'choosing' at what level they can educate themselves, or even really appreciate the value of education? Again, I think it'd create an inequality of opportunity... I'm not someone who's for the whole everyone-must-be-completely-equal thing, but I think you need to give people at least the possibility of achieving something no matter how poor their parents are, or whether their parents care about their education.

The free market intrudes into all aspects of many lives, I think, and occasionally you have to sacrifice the principles of the free market - that you suffer for getting something wrong - in order to protect the general electorate from something much worse. I think the problem here was that greed and competition was allowed to get in the way of the main idea... making money to support yourself securely. Problem is, I think, these companies haven't learned from that and are still trying to milk the 'bailout' system. I reckon what we need to do is try to make people think about the purpose of work a bit more.

Well... this is a whole topic in of itself, but the financial bailout system is entirely corrupt---I agree. The companies heedlessly thought they could blindly make decisions and then expect people to bail them out, and they shouldn't. They should file for bankruptcy, restructure, and then successfully rebuild their companies on the basis of honesty and diligence.

It's no coincidence that Ford, who didn't take any bailout money, sold more cars than Toyota last month---whereas GM and Chrysler will suffer.

I could expand here infinitely, but that's for another discussion.

I can understand where you're coming from on this, and yeah, it's for another discussion. I don't think that those companies ever expected to need to be bailed out, though. They just lost touch with the security aspect of making money.

'In that way, my views on education are still not perfect. The one thing I know for sure though is that we need a better system that will truly be effective and at the same time not lose any of the freedoms of people to get a good education. I think that schools can't do everything for the person though, and the person has to show initiative in learning if the person wants to earn the most out of education---and that's the same in ANY situation. You can always go to the library or learn on the internet nowadays too. There are infinite possibilities; people are just misinformed and lazy.'

Great paragraph Clap

Hey, it happens sometimes. And Tangerine Dream rule.

Posted By: rpe9p
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 16:49

Well, I'm a republican so I generally want to decrease the role of government to only what is necessary, but im surprised some of you actually think we could survive as a country with a voluntary police force or with school being optional. That would be a complete and total disaster.

While im not in favor of all the current spending, it isnt just for no reason, there is a lot of economic theory that our government officials believe that suggests what they are doing will greatly improve your lives.

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 16:55

MovingPictures07 wrote:

TGM: Orb wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

I agree 100% this is my view as well.

-------------

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 17:51

hawkcwg wrote:

I agree 100% this is my view as well.

You know, I'd agree with you if only your agreement was not more than 99% Tongue

TGM: Orb wrote:

And Tangerine Dream rule.

You seriously need to try a Minneola... Big smile

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: May 13 2009 at 19:32

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Gotta say T, don't normally agree with you, but you speak the truth here.

-------------
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.

Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 00:39

The US govt should hire The Wolf.

By that I mean, make it not only smaller but more efficient.

Oh, and public schools are a joke.
I can attest to it. I survived 12 years of LAUSD. Dead

Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 01:29

Pet peeve: the lady suing McDonalds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonalds_Restaurants - needed skin grafts because the coffee was 180 degrees. If I were her I would want some medical bills money too, although I can't condone the settlement that was probably over $500,000.

hawkcwg wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

Fewer educated people but with a higher degree of education would make things much worse. Just think about how many jobs require a basic grasp of English and math. What would these people who never had any education at all do with their lives? Like it or not, society is obligated to support them in some way.

And why you think fewer students would make things cheaper for the ones who are left is beyond me.

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you

Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 02:10

Epignosis wrote:

I can't even trust the US Postal Service anymore. They've screwed me out of $104.44. The package I sent was the size of a small refrigerator, and they seem to have lost it. Disapprove

Just bad luck for you my boy.
A dude sent me a guitar via USPS in March, arrived exactly on the day they said it would and without any damage.

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 10:12

Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

I can't even trust the US Postal Service anymore. They've screwed me out of $104.44. The package I sent was the size of a small refrigerator, and they seem to have lost it. Disapprove

Just bad luck for you my boy.
A dude sent me a guitar via USPS in March, arrived exactly on the day they said it would and without any damage.

I agree. If there's a US company that I almost trust 100% is the US Postal Service. It works like a clockwork.

-------------

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 10:56

KoS wrote:

The US govt should hire The Wolf.

By that I mean, make it not only smaller but more efficient.

Oh, and public schools are a joke.
I can attest to it. I survived 12 years of LAUSD. Dead

My public school experience was good, granted this was back in the '70's. I think the quality in the US is largely dependent on the quality of the neighborhood.

By the way stamps just went up two cents. LOL

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: fusionfreak
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 12:35

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

The T You've got a point!

-------------
I was born in the land of Mahavishnu,not so far from Kobaia.I'm looking for the world

of searchers with the help from

crimson king

Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 15:57

For those of you who think that private education is always better than public, I'd like to relate the sorry tale of my aborted PhD at one of Italy's most famous private universities. Those crooks cheated me out of a PhD I had practically finished, took about €13,000 in tuition fees for a totally worthless course of studies (not to mention all the money spent on books and trips to Milan, where the university is located), and gave me three years of constant stress and frustration. The sad thing is that I could not even sue them, because that would have meant staying in Italy instead of moving to the US, and a lawsuit could have brought very unpleasant consequences (those people are very well-connected). I can tell you that my previous experience as a student at a state university in Rome was NOWHERE as bad as this one... and there at least I managed to get my degree (with full marks).

Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 18:02

I fail to see why anybody would want a government to expand, especially at this large of a stage already. The bigger the government gets the less freedom you'll have, and the more corrupt it will get, and then you can't do anything about it, becuase you have a huge government.

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 22:28

himtroy wrote:

I fail to see why anybody would want a government to expand, especially at this large of a stage already. The bigger the government gets the less freedom you'll have, and the more corrupt it will get, and then you can't do anything about it, because you have a huge government.

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 22:35

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

I agree with you on your point about the original question, but not on the school subject. As I previously answered. I think that you have little faith in the people that actually want to learn. Why force people into a jail for 6 hours a day, in a social caste system, wasting away their childhood? If kids want to get into the real world let em. And someone responded that children going to school is a way that keeps them out of trouble, well thats not true at all, because the ones that are going to get some "cash-money" are the ones that are already skipping class, and the ones that want to screw up there future, why should there be a school system to babysit them? Another waste of tax money if you ask me.

-------------

Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 22:38

Slartibartfast wrote:

KoS wrote:

The US govt should hire The Wolf.

By that I mean, make it not only smaller but more efficient.

Oh, and public schools are a joke.
I can attest to it. I survived 12 years of LAUSD. Dead

My public school experience was good, granted this was back in the '70's. I think the quality in the US is largely dependent on the quality of the neighborhood.

By the way stamps just went up two cents. LOL

That is true. Friends of mine that are in/went to public schools in smaller/wealthier areas sound pretty good. I grew up in a solid middle class town, but a large one with a large public school system and ALL of them were in disrepair, overcrowded, had cockroach (or rat) problems.

And that was suburban New Jersey. I've been told, AND seen, public schools in inner cities/poor areas. Some are truly nightmares.

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 22:43

Agreed.

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 23:06

hawkcwg wrote:

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others... and there are people who can't afford healthcare because f**king private insurance companies hold a complete dominance over pricing and over who gets approved and who doesn't. I'd like bigger government because I HAVE BEEN IN OTHER COUNTRIES (unlike some "real americans" who consider traveling going from state to state) and I have seen the difference, and I myself come from a poorer country where people at least are less selfish and greedy. I prefer more government because in America companies do what they want, pay workers sh*t, while they swim in profits, creating a gap that eventually leads to this recession...

Learn a little bit more about people before saying what people want my good Da Chazter. And don't run... Obama doesn't want your gun.... YET.

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 14 2009 at 23:11

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Luckily for the human race, generally parents make this kind of decision, not 12-year olds. Everybody would leave the school system, go to work in dead end jobs, feed the machine with their sweat but without gainging anything in the process. Companies would have cheaper labor than today, and as the employees would be utterly ignorant, they would be able to play with them and pay them what they wanted, and these people would never go anywhere because they wouldn't know better, and as they grow older and gain more responsibilities, they would be even less free to change jobs because of their needs.

Damn... even today, american youngsters can't identify IRAQ, with whom we just had a 23928302-year war, in the map. Imagine without schools....

Yes, I prefer s school system to babysit them than having them on the streets without any maturity and with lots of stupid ideas...

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 00:40

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Damn... even today, american youngsters can't identify IRAQ, with whom we just had a 23928302-year war, in the map. Imagine without schools....

Yes, I prefer s school system to babysit them than having them on the streets without any maturity and with lots of stupid ideas...

I've through the public school system most of my life and no one learns anything in those schools except how to be an obedient, controllable idiot. The only ones that learn are the ones who are willing to play the silly power games with the school officials. Statistics show that the children that are homeschooled, unschooling, or independently learning, are learning five times faster than the average highschooler and most GED degree children have better test scores than the average highschool graduate. So the public school system is completly useless, besides the fact that it babysits the idiot children of america. while the tax payers money is poored down the drain by public school nutcases.

Do you even have children? Because if you do then I think the process would be evidence enough that the system is useless. Go ask a highschooler and ask him or her, Did you learn anything today johnny? Yeah theres this great new app on my phone that allows me to send texts with out the teacher knowing.......

Really go into a highschool or ask a highschooler if he really learned anything today. I bet you the average highschooler didn't learn jack sh*t, they just memorized, and crammed a bunch of information just... To ,,, Pass... A .... Test.....

And as we see, when the general student populous grades are low then we will just have to drop the bar for them some more. Till the general student populous is at an all time low. Then they will be perfect government bait, and easily controlled to run "the machine" as you referred to.

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 00:55

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others? and there are people who can't afford health care because f**king private insurance companies hold a complete dominance over pricing and over who gets approved and who doesn't. I'd like bigger government because I HAVE BEEN IN OTHER COUNTRIES (unlike some "real Americans" who consider traveling going from state to state) and I have seen the difference, and I myself come from a poorer country where people at least are less selfish and greedy. I prefer more government because in America companies do what they want, pay workers sh*t, while they swim in profits, creating a gap that eventually leads to this recession...

Learn a little bit more about people before saying what people want my good Da Chazter. And don't run... Obama doesn't want your gun.... YET.

"I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others?"

How would increasing government help this problem? So you think government should give people more handouts and more money should go to bureaucracies, because the rich mans getting greedy with his power?

THAT would not fix the problem. THAT would cause more problems. As if the government isn't big enough, throwing OUR money away, that they STEAL from us to go to these programs. Why should everyone have to pay money for your ideas? if YOU want to pay money to help people get their medicine, then YOU can go right ahead and daily, monthly, or annually donate money for that cause, But why should WE have to pay for those programs?

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor? Because that's exactly what the government does to aid all its little shenanigans. AND YOU WANT A BIGGER GOVERNMENT, AND MORE BUREAUCRACIES, AND MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thumbs Down

-------------

Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 01:04

hawkcwg wrote:

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor? Because that's exactly what the government does to aid all its little shenanigans. AND YOU WANT A BIGGER GOVERNMENT, AND MORE BUREAUCRACIES, AND MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thumbs Down

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 05:02

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

Learn a little bit more about people before saying what people want my good Da Chazter. And don't run... Obama doesn't want your gun.... YET.

"I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others?"

How would increasing government help this problem? So you think government should give people more handouts and more money should go to bureaucracies, because the rich mans getting greedy with his power?

THAT would not fix the problem. THAT would cause more problems. As if the government isn't big enough, throwing OUR money away, that they STEAL from us to go to these programs. Why should everyone have to pay money for your ideas? if YOU want to pay money to help people get their medicine, then YOU can go right ahead and daily, monthly, or annually donate money for that cause, But why should WE have to pay for those programs?

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor? Because that's exactly what the government does to aid all its little shenanigans. AND YOU WANT A BIGGER GOVERNMENT, AND MORE BUREAUCRACIES, AND MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thumbs Down

1. Social benefits =/= handouts. Unless they're handled badly. Admittedly, you always get a few people leeching off the system, but those seem to me as much to be selfish and relatively well off people who shouldn't be on the program in question as people who are on it and not doing anything about it.

2. The government is elected and supported by the people, aye? Hence, it's not theft, it's represented taxation, which is crucial to being out of anarchy. When you have anarchy, you don't have any rights, because none of your rights are guaranteed or protected except in as much as you have the personal power to do so. I.e. weak people have then less rights than the strong, and it's questionable whether even the strongest truly have rights rather than just power.

Hence, more government actually can = more rights. The trend is to include more obligations as well. Having rights is crucial to having freedom.

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor?

In answer to that, I think so, though you're taking the whole tax thing ridiculously.

The government is elected by your neighbour as well as you, right? If the government has made a pledge to protect everyone's right to healthcare, that's obviously going to come at a cost which is going to have to be footed by the taxpayer in general. You shouldn't be particularly singled out for tax because of wealth, nor should you not be receiving the benefits of that tax money because of wealth. That, I think, is where socialist and communist parties of the last century have been going wrong for a while... obsession with class struggle simply means that they're not a very viable choice for anyone who's in the middle class.

Now, if you're really offended by the idea of elected representatives taxing you, either vote for the ones who say they're not going to and put up with the results if they lose or else move. Out of interest, the government's role in upkeeping the military is obviously pretty important for your security, would you support them ceasing to do that? (which would downsize government a lot more than just reducing 'bureaucracy')

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 05:13

The public school system is completely useless, except at getting people together to form social bonds at a crucial stage of development, putting people who would likely otherwise not be educated at all in education and stopping the entire country getting messed up through grotesque rather than simply undesirable levels of education. Also, surely learning to put up with the powergames and learning to obey instructions is a big part of preparation for business life?

Learning should be more of a focus. Yes. The reason it's not happening isn't because of public schools, but because the priorities are all messed up in favour of applying a dubious competitive measurement of people's capability. This is the case because of capitalistic business, I can only guess, not because the government supports schooling.

Passing tests is an aspect of that measurement. It's about qualification, not about learning, really, though I think you circumstantially learn things while passing those tests. On the other hand, the reason for qualification being so heavily emphasised is competitive, capitalistic business, and not so much governmental support. It'd only be worse in an entirely private system.

And as we see, when the general student populous grades are low then we will just have to drop the bar for them some more. Till the general student populous is at an all time low. Then they will be perfect government bait, and easily controlled to run "the machine" as you referred to.

Technically, it's populace, and because the government is drawn from this populace, they are not some sort of evil Orwellian fiends. They don't all just want to control people. But hey, if it makes you feel better believing that in a country where the taxes are, frankly, incredibly low, the government is aiming at creating some sort of bureaucratic-country-running-without-consulting-the-citizenry machine, feel free to it.

Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 05:13

Taxes are the lifeblood of a government. You get out what you put in. What's most atrocious is the amount of tax money that goes into war compared to that which actually goes into making the country better. Regardless of any ideological bullsh*t, countries with universal healthcare/ socialized medicine are happier than those without (re: Europe). If you don't value happiness, by all means, be anti-socialized medicine out the wazoo.

-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 05:15

stonebeard wrote:

Taxes are the lifeblood of a government. You get out what you put in. What's most atrocious is the amount of tax money that goes into war compared to that which actually goes into making the country better. Regardless of any ideological bullsh*t, countries with universal healthcare/ socialized medicine are happier than those without (re: Europe). If you don't value happiness, by all means, be anti-socialized medicine out the wazoo.

Bingo

Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 06:01

Post of the year Clap

Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 06:27

Yup. Once you actually have a mother or father suffering and needing long term care, those visions of no-tax paradise become less important than having resources to care for them. Yes we can tighten the belt on many things, but for older Americans, it is our duty to care for them.

Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 06:34

I have to say, I just don't understand those people who are obsessed with not paying taxes (and we have quite a few of them in Italy too). Are they really so naive to think that they will ever get anything for free? Or is it just the idea of paying them to the 'big, bad government' that rubs them the wrong way? I'm sorry, but as a person who is nearing the age of 50, I believe the government is made up of people, just like everything else in this world, and does nothing but reflect the nature of its citizens. If people stopped for a while playing the victims of the 'big, bad gov't', and took some responsibility for change, the world would be a better place by far.

Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 08:47

I'm not sure any but complete anarchists favor a complete elimination of all taxes...it's obvious to everyone with greater than a room temperature IQ that some level of taxation is required to fund government - the discussion is about how much government should provide with the obvious correlation being how much revenue it needs to collect, and how much taxes it needs to assess. Like some others, I'm not sure the answer is giving a huge amount of power to a big central government, especially in a country as large as the United States. The problem is that even if one thinks a temporary increase in governmental power is required to get us through economic tough times, that power will be next to impossible to take back.

As in my previous post, I could support any government program if they were shown to be effective, had accountability tied to it, well-defined goals, and could be terminated if shown to be a waste of money. I'm not sure we'll ever get something anything close to this from the US Federal government.

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:42

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Damn... even today, american youngsters can't identify IRAQ, with whom we just had a 23928302-year war, in the map. Imagine without schools....

Yes, I prefer s school system to babysit them than having them on the streets without any maturity and with lots of stupid ideas...

I've through the public school system most of my life so you think your experience is enough evidence for your idea? Don't you think countless people with LOTS of studies have done research and found out that education is necessary? and no one learns anything in those schools except how to be an obedient, controllable idiot. I don't think so, especially since American schools teach youngsters how to be narcisistic punks, not controllable idiots. And if they actually tone down your wish to do what you want, wouldn't it be at least partially good? "Only overcoming yourself shall you overcome". The only ones that learn are the ones who are willing to play the silly power games with the school officials. Sorry but this is absurd, ridiculous, and more... The only ones who learn are those WILLING TO LEARN , who don't want to be ignorants their whole life. And believe me, even the ones who don't want to learn still learn something, at least how to interact with OTHER PEOPLE. Statistics show that the children that are homeschooled, unschooling, or independently learning, are learning five times faster than the average highschooler and most GED degree children have better test scores than the average highschool graduate. Whose statistics? How can a home school be better than an institution with dedicated teachers for each subjects? I guess in some areas there might be advantages, but in general, for a broad, WORLD-VIEW-READY education, a farm in the depth of the Mississippi river can't substitute an actual school. So the public school system is completly useless, No... nthere are people who can't access any other option. Stop being so incredibly selfish. Oh, well, you're young and American..besides the fact that it babysits the idiot children of america. No... those who think they are being babysat are the ones who really need a babysitter. while the tax payers money is poored down the drain by public school nutcases. The system needs 23729382 changes, but elimination is not one. Look to Europe man.... nobody is eliminating schools there...

Do you even have children? No... do you, who are so much younger?? And if you do, then some better education would have helped you. Because if you do then I think the process would be evidence enough that the system is useless. This is preposterous and defies any logic. The system is poorly implemented, that's it. Go ask a highschooler and ask him or her, Did you learn anything today johnny? Some will, some won't. Some are idiots, some aren't. Anyway, we shouldn't generate public policy based on the answers of 16-year old peopleYeah theres this great new app on my phone that allows me to send texts with out the teacher knowing.......Good.... at home in the farm in Nebraska maybe they wouldn't have learned even that useless thing...

Really go into a highschool or ask a highschooler if he really learned anything today. I bet Oh you put a whole idea that would change the fate of millions of people ona BET? hahaha. I though you had better evidence than that. you the average highschooler didn't learn jack sh*t, they just memorized, and crammed a bunch of information just... To ,,, Pass... A .... Test..... They are learning at least how to get over circumstances created by others. They're learning THAT THEY ARE NOT THE ULTIMATE sh*t IN THE WOLRD AND THAT THEY CAN'T GO ABOUT DOING WHAT THEY f**kING WANT.

And as we see, when the general student populous grades are low then we will just have to drop the bar for them some more. The bar is low because many teachers suck... Till the general student populous is at an all time low. Then they will be perfect government bait, and easily controlled to run "the machine" as you referred to. No... grow up please. The government doesn't control anything... but the manager in your local retail store does, the CEO of your manufacturing company does, the mastermind behind that new credit card does.... THEY ENSLAVE you, not the govermnet....

-------------

Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 11:50

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

Learn a little bit more about people before saying what people want my good Da Chazter. And don't run... Obama doesn't want your gun.... YET.

"I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others?"

How would increasing government help this problem? Easy... because if let people do as they want, they would get all the money to themselves and to their "pockets" and no road would be built and no school would be funded and no poor person would have access to healthcare. You are a perfect example of this: extremely upset because you have a few less dollars in your pocket to buy sh*t... So you think government should give people more handouts I haven't said do. and more money should go to bureaucracies, because the rich mans getting greedy with his power? YES. For SOCIAL programs. But you will never understand this. I'm debating someone who will never learn the true meaning of that word.

THAT would not fix the problem. THAT would cause more problems. Why the emphasis on "THAT"?? As if the government isn't big enough, throwing OUR money away, I agree sometimes they waste money... like in your war for example... that they STEAL from us to go to these programs. They don't steal money from you... you pay a contribution for the fact that you live in this country... Why should everyone have to pay money for your ideas? what???? if YOU want to pay money to help people get their medicine, then YOU can go right ahead and daily, monthly, or annually donate money for that cause, But why should WE have to pay for those programs? You're a selfish guy product of a selfish system, so young that you have never seen misery or have never had someone close to you ill and unable to afford health insurance. Live on in your little bubble... It's going down anyway... Go back and grab you gun and defend your country from "them mexicans" or whatever you call them....

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", ??????is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor? Nobody in the history of mankind (at least in the recent centuries) has done that.... what the mailto:#$@% - #$@% did you drink????Because that's exactly what the government does to aid all its little shenanigans. AND YOU WANT A BIGGER GOVERNMENT, AND MORE BUREAUCRACIES, AND MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry man... you've been taught to love money and abhorr the idea of giving a hand... good thing there is such a thing as government, created by the people for the people, not for YOU.

Thumbs Down

Go nread something man.... maybe the Turner Diaries are not that good literature...

-------------

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 13:36

Let's keep the discussions civil. This is a decent poll and I don't want it closed.

-------------

Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:07

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Let's keep the discussions civil. This is a decent poll and I don't want it closed.

Personally I find the poll overly simplistic. Why isn't stay the same size an option? Wink

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:31

Governments will always need to raise money via taxation - this is what pays for essential services in a civilised society. Also, people should bear in mind that the right wing press who always bemoan social assistance and government sponsored essential programmes are also the first ones to bemoan just how crap those services are when the cuts take place.

The key to this argument is that ordinary working people pay more as a proportion of their income in taxes than the exceptionally rich do. The latter can afford to pay bloodsucking accountants to siphon their money away in tax havens, capital schemes, and other money saving wheezes. Until THAT issue is addressed, you will never arrive at a situation where the people are entirely comfortable with the government/state/taxes. Progressive taxation is the key to a fair society, and neither the US or UK have it.

The question is not necessarily whether big government is good, it is whether government is effective, both in terms of administration and delivery. Brown's government has centralised or privatised virtually everything that has moved, thus taking away accountability and control from local people - this is an example of big government being bad. The right wing, of course, want to take government away full stop, except when it suits them and their corporate friends - the tragedy of the UK is that New Labour have been better at this than the Conservatives could ever have dreamed of.

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org

Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:44

lazland wrote:

bloodsucking accountants

I take acception to this remark. Blood makes me squeamish.

-------------

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:54

rushfan4 wrote:

lazland wrote:

bloodsucking accountants

I take acception to this remark. Blood makes me squeamish.

As do I.

-------------

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 14:57

MovingPictures07 wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

lazland wrote:

bloodsucking accountants

I take acception to this remark. Blood makes me squeamish.

As do I.

Are they teaching you the proper techniques for sucking blood in your accounting courses?

-------------

Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 18:52

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

Learn a little bit more about people before saying what people want my good Da Chazter. And don't run... Obama doesn't want your gun.... YET.

"I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others?"

How would increasing government help this problem? Easy... because if let people do as they want, they would get all the money to themselves and to their "pockets" and no road would be built and no school would be funded and no poor person would have access to healthcare. You are a perfect example of this: extremely upset because you have a few less dollars in your pocket to buy sh*t... So you think government should give people more handouts I haven't said do. and more money should go to bureaucracies, because the rich mans getting greedy with his power? YES. For SOCIAL programs. But you will never understand this. I'm debating someone who will never learn the true meaning of that word.

THAT would not fix the problem. THAT would cause more problems. Why the emphasis on "THAT"?? As if the government isn't big enough, throwing OUR money away, I agree sometimes they waste money... like in your war for example... that they STEAL from us to go to these programs. They don't steal money from you... you pay a contribution for the fact that you live in this country... Why should everyone have to pay money for your ideas? what???? if YOU want to pay money to help people get their medicine, then YOU can go right ahead and daily, monthly, or annually donate money for that cause, But why should WE have to pay for those programs? You're a selfish guy product of a selfish system, so young that you have never seen misery or have never had someone close to you ill and unable to afford health insurance. Live on in your little bubble... It's going down anyway... Go back and grab you gun and defend your country from "them mexicans" or whatever you call them....

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", ??????is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor? Nobody in the history of mankind (at least in the recent centuries) has done that.... what the mailto:#$@% - #$@% did you drink????Because that's exactly what the government does to aid all its little shenanigans. AND YOU WANT A BIGGER GOVERNMENT, AND MORE BUREAUCRACIES, AND MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry man... you've been taught to love money and abhorr the idea of giving a hand... good thing there is such a thing as government, created by the people for the people, not for YOU.

Thumbs Down

Go nread something man.... maybe the Turner Diaries are not that good literature...

Sorry to get a bit off topic here, but I take great offense at the notion that the United States is an overall selfish country. Because the last time I checked, this country gives more in foreign aid than any other country in the world. Heck, with the 2004 tsunami/earthquake in the Indian Ocean, the United States provided more aid ($950 billion) than any other country (Australia being second at about $820 billion if I remember correctly). And then other countries go and bitch about how selfish my country is because we're really stingy. Angry

Sorry about that, needed to rant a bit. Anyway, back on the topic at hand. A fine example of expansion right now is the new socialized/national medicine bill or whatever you want to call it that is going to go in front of Congress shortly. The latest numbers I have seen say that the bill is going to cost American taxpayers in the ballpark of $1.2 billion to $1.5 billion (money that we of course don't have) over the next 10 years. I can tell you right now that even though I live in a lower to middle middle-class family, I'm thankful for the fact that my mom is a nurse in a hospital and she has great medical insurance. My dad pays about $8600 per year into an insurance plan he has at work and between the two of them, we pay next to nothing in medical costs. And I'll be damned if I have to see my parents working and being forced to put part of their paychecks into paying so someone else can get medical coverage they couldn't afford otherwise.

The reality is that there is no perfect medical system and there will always be someone who suffers in some way under any health care system. That's the harsh reality of economics; not everyone gets what they want. But I would much prefer the system we have right now to one that would only lead to further government expansion and more corruption.

-------------

Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: May 15 2009 at 19:46

rushfan4 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

lazland wrote:

bloodsucking accountants

I take acception to this remark. Blood makes me squeamish.

As do I.

Are they teaching you the proper techniques for sucking blood in your accounting courses?

Last time I checked.... no. LOL

-------------

Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: May 16 2009 at 05:46

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

Because they themselves don't care about other people, and don't want change, or are not educated on the subject enough to make a logical, rational decision on there own.

Learn a little bit more about people before saying what people want my good Da Chazter. And don't run... Obama doesn't want your gun.... YET.

"I'd prefer more government because it has been proven that people, especially in the US, are extremely selfish and greedy and don't give a flying f**k about the others?"

How would increasing government help this problem? Easy... because if let people do as they want, they would get all the money to themselves and to their "pockets" and no road would be built and no school would be funded and no poor person would have access to healthcare. You are a perfect example of this: extremely upset because you have a few less dollars in your pocket to buy sh*t... So you think government should give people more handouts I haven't said do. and more money should go to bureaucracies, because the rich mans getting greedy with his power? YES. For SOCIAL programs. But you will never understand this. I'm debating someone who will never learn the true meaning of that word.

THAT would not fix the problem. THAT would cause more problems. Why the emphasis on "THAT"?? As if the government isn't big enough, throwing OUR money away, I agree sometimes they waste money... like in your war for example... that they STEAL from us to go to these programs. They don't steal money from you... you pay a contribution for the fact that you live in this country... Why should everyone have to pay money for your ideas? what???? if YOU want to pay money to help people get their medicine, then YOU can go right ahead and daily, monthly, or annually donate money for that cause, But why should WE have to pay for those programs? You're a selfish guy product of a selfish system, so young that you have never seen misery or have never had someone close to you ill and unable to afford health insurance. Live on in your little bubble... It's going down anyway... Go back and grab you gun and defend your country from "them mexicans" or whatever you call them....

If my next door neighbor is dying of "fluenitous", ??????is it right for the cops to come into my house and point a gun to my head and say that i need to give all or some of my money to help my neighbor? Nobody in the history of mankind (at least in the recent centuries) has done that.... what the mailto:#$@% - #$@% did you drink????Because that's exactly what the government does to aid all its little shenanigans. AND YOU WANT A BIGGER GOVERNMENT, AND MORE BUREAUCRACIES, AND MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry man... you've been taught to love money and abhorr the idea of giving a hand... good thing there is such a thing as government, created by the people for the people, not for YOU.

Thumbs Down

Go nread something man.... maybe the Turner Diaries are not that good literature...

OK, just to put that data in context, and not meaning any offense to Americans in general.

If the US provides $950bn, and Australia $820 bn, and the one has a pop of 306,420,000, while the other has a population of 12 and a dingo (or, if we listen to wikipedia, 21,714,000, around just one 15th of what the US has), surely Australia is significantly more generous, but just smaller.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA#cite_note-POP-1 -

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 17 2009 at 00:25

TGM: Orb wrote:

Bingo

I think healthcare should be socialized to an extent, but not regulated my the government.

Now responding to your other stuff- well I don't vote for politicians, because I'm 17 first of all LOL

, but probably would not vote for any one for government, so i would probably take a libertarian view in decreasing government. And right now many people probably would rather not pay taxes, but as we look in history, taxes were formed to run a government body. So since i do not support taxes, I don't support government as well. So I don't want taxes or government. That is my View to be redundant. haha LOL

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 17 2009 at 01:09

Raff wrote:

I have to say, I just don't understand those people who are obsessed with not paying taxes (and we have quite a few of them in Italy too). Are they really so naive to think that they will ever get anything for free? Or is it just the idea of paying them to the 'big, bad government' that rubs them the wrong way? I'm sorry, but as a person who is nearing the age of 50, I believe the government is made up of people, just like everything else in this world, and does nothing but reflect the nature of its citizens. If people stopped for a while playing the victims of the 'big, bad gov't', and took some responsibility for change, the world would be a better place by far.

I agree about the taking responsibility of it. But the issue i have with it, is that, the usage of our taxes, personally, and I'm not religious, but I don't think taxes should pay for abortion clinics, or government programs. I think the initial intentions are always good (usually) but there is a lot of corruption with anyone in power and what the majority of people may want, may not reflect what other people want. Like if some absurd program got passed and the majority of the people want it, even though it may be morally wrong or something, why should the rest of people be forcefully taxed for it?

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 17 2009 at 01:20

Padraic wrote:

I'm not sure any but complete anarchists favor a complete elimination of all taxes...it's obvious to everyone with greater than a room temperature IQ that some level of taxation is required to fund government - the discussion is about how much government should provide with the obvious correlation being how much revenue it needs to collect, and how much taxes it needs to assess. Like some others, I'm not sure the answer is giving a huge amount of power to a big central government, especially in a country as large as the United States. The problem is that even if one thinks a temporary increase in governmental power is required to get us through economic tough times, that power will be next to impossible to take back.

As in my previous post, I could support any government program if they were shown to be effective, had accountability tied to it, well-defined goals, and could be terminated if shown to be a waste of money. I'm not sure we'll ever get something anything close to this from the US Federal government.

Yeah you really nailed it there for me, that's what i'm trying to say, I really strongly agree. And now people are practically powerless, like the vote now goes to the person who has the most publicity coverage and the votes don't necessarily even reflect the views.

-------------

Posted By: hawkcwg
Date Posted: May 17 2009 at 07:10

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

The T wrote:

hawkcwg wrote:

I like how was done in ancient times, children would voluntarily meet up and listen to philosophers speak and really take in the subjects they were interested in.

American high-schools are so atrocious... Now make them voluntary... Damn....

Gun control is the only so-called private issue where I want the government to step in and impose it. Actually, it's not private: it c eases to be private when you can use your gun to kill...

Damn... even today, american youngsters can't identify IRAQ, with whom we just had a 23928302-year war, in the map. Imagine without schools....

Yes, I prefer s school system to babysit them than having them on the streets without any maturity and with lots of stupid ideas...

Well I spent about 3 hours writing a nice response to all your points, and accidentally deleted it all, so

I'll just give you some links for facts, and state disapproval to your stereotyping, racist marks about farming parents compared to a public school system.

And i don't feel like rewriting the whole page list of what the government controls.

I'll also add that children have so many different learning styles its impossible to cater to them all, and most school teachers lack the time and capability to adequately cater to the learning styles so of course children are going to act up.

www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

-------------

Posted By: RoyFairbank
Date Posted: May 18 2009 at 20:26

accident

Posted By: RoyFairbank
Date Posted: May 18 2009 at 20:44

When a rich man says that everyone should be self-reliant I have to say I understand why. Its a good argument.

Another good argument is when a rich man says that anybody can get rich if they try. The formula is sound because no rich pragmatist has been able to test it.

Yet another good argument is when a rich man says private property is important, because otherwise poor men might want to live in the places where they have their multiple houses, might even not recognize that they have a right to more cash in their private bank acount then thousands of people earn in years.

It is very clear then, that even an imaginary situation where society would put this money to social use instead of the rich men's private use would be terrible!

Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: May 19 2009 at 21:08

decrease that junk.