General Discussion

Originally posted by Impacatus

Originally posted by Fishermage

because education is something that government is not very good at, and it is best left to the market, which will deliver it better and at a lower cost -- AND most important won't raise the ignorant little socialist 'bots it is currently producing.

If you want people to have a better education -- GIVE THEM ONE. No reason to force others into your plan. Plus, every year we have increased the money for education and it hasn't made it better yet.

Ok, I don't understand this.  I do understand the principle that competition can make private institutions perform better than public ones.

But if education was completely privatized, much of the population would not be able to afford it.  How would it do our country or economy any good to suddenly have a generation that can't read?  Education gives people life skills that they can use to improve themselves and their community, and makes them more valuable as workers, which can open up the opportunity for new types of industries to establish themselves.  I would expect education greatly improves the economy of a country, and removing it would have very disastrous effects.

Maybe the people who could afford it would get a better education than we're getting now, but I would expect the net result to be negative.  Besides, if we had no public schools, what would the children of poor parents do all day?  Work in coal mines and textile mills like the old days?

I do not understand how anyone can be sure that one way of approaching the diverse problems a country may face is the best one.  You keep repeating that free market is best at everything, and eventually you're not making decisions based on what works, but on what's free market.  Maybe government intervention has failed you where free market has succeeded, but unless there's some cosmic entity making it so, where's the guarantee that's how it will always be?  Having no medicine is better than bad medicine, but good medicine is better than no medicine.

I don't buy that. Is much of the public unable to buy food? The more we rely on markets, the CHEAPER things are, the MORE people are able to get them.

Force is never the best way to get things to the people -- that is why government fails. Why are provate schools so expensive? Because, like health care, the dominant force in the market is the government.

You ask for guarantees -- there ARE NONE. And government is no better guarantor than the market. Therefore, logic says go with the one that has a better record -=- the market.

That is my point, actually. It is a guarantee that the government will mess it up -- they already have -- no matter how much we spend.

Let us try the way that has always worked best in all times and all places -- let the people be free.

Originally posted by Fishermage

I don't buy that. Is much of the public unable to buy food? The more we rely on markets, the CHEAPER things are, the MORE people are able to get them.

Force is never the best way to get things to the people -- that is why government fails. Why are provate schools so expensive? Because, like health care, the dominant force in the market is the government.

You ask for guarantees -- there ARE NONE. And government is no better guarantor than the market. Therefore, logic says go with the one that has a better record -=- the market.

That is my point, actually. It is a guarantee that the government will mess it up -- they already have -- no matter how much we spend.

Let us try the way that has always worked best in all times and all places -- let the people be free.

Food is heavily subsidized, in many ways.  There are also safety nets to prevent people from starving.  There's enough extra food around that a huge amount of discarded food can be scavenged in a pinch.  Even so, plenty of people have trouble maintaining optimal nutrition.

Education is a very different commodity though.  It's not essential to immediate survival, so it's more likely to be neglected for short term gain, and it can't be stolen or scavenged (at least not usually).  I'm not to clear on the history, but before the public school system, do you think literacy was higher then than it is now?  I doubt it.  I seem to recall child labor being rather common at some points.

I'd like to go back to my metaphor of medicine.  The human immune system has a much, MUCH better record than any sort of artificial medicine.  Does that mean we should abandon its study and practice?  Get rid of all the doctors and hospitals, since our natural immune system is better?

Usually it's best to just let the body do it's thing, but once in awhile, it messes up and you see the opportunity to set it back on the right track.  You take that opportunity, right?

I do not think it's logical to always go with the better record.  Where in life is repeating a mantra and always reacting to diverse situations the same way helpful?  Isn't it better to gather information about each individual situation and make a rational decision based on the particulars?  Make decisions based on the future, not the past.

What DO you think the role of the government is, and why shouldn't that be privatized as well?

You guys like banging your heads against walls or something? You can't argue with people brainwashed in the socialist mentality... They are immune to logic. Feeling good despite the cost to you or me is much more important to them. The only way to combat this, unfotunatly, is to let it come to a head, and when everyone has been pushed enough... viva la revolution! Then we start all over again...

Originally posted by Impacatus

Originally posted by Fishermage

I don't buy that. Is much of the public unable to buy food? The more we rely on markets, the CHEAPER things are, the MORE people are able to get them.

Force is never the best way to get things to the people -- that is why government fails. Why are provate schools so expensive? Because, like health care, the dominant force in the market is the government.

You ask for guarantees -- there ARE NONE. And government is no better guarantor than the market. Therefore, logic says go with the one that has a better record -=- the market.

That is my point, actually. It is a guarantee that the government will mess it up -- they already have -- no matter how much we spend.

Let us try the way that has always worked best in all times and all places -- let the people be free.

Food is heavily subsidized, in many ways.  There are also safety nets to prevent people from starving.  There's enough extra food around that a huge amount of discarded food can be scavenged in a pinch.  Even so, plenty of people have trouble maintaining optimal nutrition.

Education is a very different commodity though.  It's not essential to immediate survival, so it's more likely to be neglected for short term gain, and it can't be stolen or scavenged (at least not usually).  I'm not to clear on the history, but before the public school system, do you think literacy was higher then than it is now?  I doubt it.  I seem to recall child labor being rather common at some points.

I'd like to go back to my metaphor of medicine.  The human immune system has a much, MUCH better record than any sort of artificial medicine.  Does that mean we should abandon its study and practice?  Get rid of all the doctors and hospitals, since our natural immune system is better?

Usually it's best to just let the body do it's thing, but once in awhile, it messes up and you see the opportunity to set it back on the right track.  You take that opportunity, right?

I do not think it's logical to always go with the better record.  Where in life is repeating a mantra and always reacting to diverse situations the same way helpful?  Isn't it better to gather information about each individual situation and make a rational decision based on the particulars?  Make decisions based on the future, not the past.

What DO you think the role of the government is, and why shouldn't that be privatized as well?

the fact is the subsidies are there to keep prices HIGH, and we would be better off if it were not sub subsidized as well. As America becomes more and more socialist, it gets harder and harder to find examples of free markets. I used food because it was a PRIMARILY market system, and does MUCH BETTER than health care or education which are now dominated by socialism, and are therefore failing.

Basically all you are saying is because YOU believe in government and force, it's the better choice. No amount of evidence will convince you otherwise because your faith tells you so.

The role of government is the protection of liberty and human rights; and the reason it should not be privatized is because it is the one thing that government is good at, and the one thing worth shooting people over -- which is all that government is for.

Since government is how we will use force in our lives, we should only use it in those areas where force is a good thing.

Originally posted by Theutus

You guys like banging your heads against walls or something? You can't argue with people brainwashed in the socialist mentality... They are immune to logic. Feeling good despite the cost to you or me is much more important to them. The only way to combat this, unfotunatly, is to let it come to a head, and when everyone has been pushed enough... viva la revolution! Then we start all over again...

Well, I'm not doing this to change brainwashed people. I am doing this to give good arguments for those unbrainwashed out there reading this, to challenge myself, to listen to the best arguments of the opposition, and to clarify everyone's views.

If I didn't enjoy being challenged and discussing things I wouldn't do it. 

Originally posted by Fishermage

Originally posted by Theutus

You guys like banging your heads against walls or something? You can't argue with people brainwashed in the socialist mentality... They are immune to logic. Feeling good despite the cost to you or me is much more important to them. The only way to combat this, unfotunatly, is to let it come to a head, and when everyone has been pushed enough... viva la revolution! Then we start all over again...

 

Well, I'm not doing this to change brainwashed people. I am doing this to give good arguments for those unbrainwashed out there reading this, to challenge myself, to listen to the best arguments of the opposition, and to clarify everyone's views.

If I didn't enjoy being challenged and discussing things I wouldn't do it. 

your whole argument is based on you don't like paying taxes and you don't trust anyone to handle your money except yourself.

my whole argument is that I trust my representaive president to handle my money properly (let's say 99% of the time which is enough for me) and I like where the taxes are being allocated to (since I stand by social programs such as health care and education - I think they for the most part are very helpful for people in need), and I don't mind sacrificing my money for the greater good. and yes, I beleive my tax money is going towards the greater good at least 95% of the time. I liked where Obama wanted to put our tax dollars more than McCain, and you can call it bigger government because he supports social programs that help people and whatnot, but I support that k?

and here is a link for people with an earmark obsession: blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/9908

Originally posted by Fishermage

the fact is the subsidies are there to keep prices HIGH, and we would be better off if it were not sub subsidized as well. As America becomes more and more socialist, it gets harder and harder to find examples of free markets. I used food because it was a PRIMARILY market system, and does MUCH BETTER than health care or education which are now dominated by socialism, and are therefore failing.

How are you measuring this?

Basically all you are saying is because YOU believe in government and force, it's the better choice. No amount of evidence will convince you otherwise because your faith tells you so.

You're the one preaching a faith, not me.  You've basically declared that logic is over and we already have the answer to life's problems.  You've decided that the private sector is better because it is.  That the government is always bad because it is.

Believe it or not, I used to believe something similar.  It's only later that I realized nothing in life is ever that simple.

I'll ask you again, in light of the fact the human body has a much better record than artificial medicine, do you still go to the doctor?

If it were as easy as you say it is, the entire world would be capitalist by now.  As it is, there are plenty of relatively successful countries that you would consider socialist, and countries where the government is too weak and/or ineffective to control commerce are almost invariably in poverty.

I don't believe in socialism or capitalism.  I believe in effective, rational decision making, whatever that concludes.

The role of government is the protection of liberty and human rights; and the reason it should not be privatized is because it is the one thing that government is good at, and the one thing worth shooting people over -- which is all that government is for.

Since government is how we will use force in our lives, we should only use it in those areas where force is a good thing.

 So why should my tax dollars go towards defending my neighbor's liberty?  If I want to spend money on that, I'll hire some private mercenaries.

Has it occurred to you that capitalism as we know it comes from government?  For one thing, there's a body of civil law that make contracts possible, without which banking or running  a business would be much more difficult. 

Furthermore, I've often heard the philosophical argument that no one has the right to take wealth from anyone else.  Sounds good in theory, but where does wealth come from?  Ultimately from land, whether the physical location or the natural resources.  Where does land come from?  The free market didn't make it.  So how did some people end up owning it?  Maybe they bought it from someone else, who bought it from someone else and so on.  Ultimately though, it was probably stolen, usually by a government, who in turn decides who can use it for what.  Land rights, the basis of all wealth, come from the government.