Quoting Christoffer Ivarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [Chris] > >> Another > >> example is good public schools, funded by taxes from all people living > >> within a certain area - if the general education level is heightened that > >> is > >> certainly beneficial for the development of both that region and on a > >> greater plane, the intellectual level.
[Platt] > > I'm glad you said "good" public schools. Unfortunately, in the U.S. there > > are very few good government schools. There are many reason why this > > is so, not the least being a national teacher's union that prevents local > > school boards from firing bad teachers and making other desired changes in > > the curriculum. [Chris] > And it has nothing to do with funding? That public schools doesn't work very > good in a state that doesn't believe in public-schools isn't very hard to > understand in my book. It has something to do with funding, but not much. I think if you compare the cost per student of schools in the U.S. to Europe you would find that the U.S. on average spends as much if not more. Most people in the U.S. do believe in public schools, but their patience is wearing thin. That's why you see a move to provide parents with vouchers so they can pick a public school rather than be forced to send their children to a dysfunctional school. [Platt] > > Yes. I see your point (except for an immune system of political or > > religious agendas being built into the system). But consider the other > > side > > of the coin: > > > > "The democratic welfare state is always temporary in nature. It simply > > cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It will continue to exist > > up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves > > generous benefits from the public treasury. From that moment on, the > > majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits > > from > > the public treasury, with the result that every democratic welfare state > > will finally collapse due to the loose fiscal policies, which is always > > followed by a dictatorship. > > > > "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning > > of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, the nations > > always progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to > > spiritual > > faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; > > from > > liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to > > apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back to bondage." --- > > Attributed to Alexander Fraser Tyler, a Scottish professor, 1714 -- 1778. > > > > Or to put it more simply, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to > > purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor > > Safety." -- > > Benjamin Franklin [Chris] > What the hell is this? This throwing around mindless quotes might work with > someone who doesn't actually study history and knows nothing about it (200 > years, now where did THAT rabbit come from?). I mean, I see your point, but > you have no real arguments, you just have random quotes that doesn't add up. > > Have a look at this one for example: > > Ben Franklin also said: "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, > > is > > not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." Mindless? Ben Franklin is mindless? Surely you jest. > Well, what happened was that the poor, the workers, the farmers etc took the > initiative to create a political movement to create a more humane and safer > society for themselves. This was pretty much achieved as soon as everybody > gained the right to vote (something they didn't do by doing nothing I'll > tell you). This is the beginning of the Scandinavian model, the success of > which is undisputed. Hardly "undisputed." According to a study by the Swedish Institute of Trade, the "median household income in Sweden at the end of the 1990s was equivalent to $26,800 compared with a median of $39,400 for U.S. households." The study concluded: average income in Sweden is less than the average income for black Americans which comprise the lowest income group in the U.S. > So then you have a system where people can get cheap, > good healthcare, good education, and that, because there is a social safety > net, reduces crime far better then in those countries that haven't. What > happens is that overall one get's a more stable base to build upon. And I am > sorry to disappoint you, but within this model there is no repression of the > mind or body, and yes, there is a free market and all that - it works fine > as long as one realizes that everything isn't black and white. I might also > add that at the moment (since 2006) we have a right-wing government (you > would probably call them liberals anyway) but not even they want to remove > the system, only modify it. No one wants to remove the system, and the worst > thing anyone can be accused of in a political debate is to what to have it > the way it is in the US (now that the Soviet is gone). See above. Also, what is your tax rate? > I'm just saying, things aren't black and white, either or. The middle way is > almost always the best. When it comes to defending individual liberty, I don't think the middle way is almost always the best. Sometimes you have to stand and fight. Don't you agree? Regards, Platt ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
