Hopefully I'll be in Canada when 2012 comes around.

(March 31, 2011 at 2:33 am)theVOID Wrote: State education=/= private education.

How do you get from "States have more control" to "less people are educated" - That seems like a complete non-sequitur.

Because they've been consistently fighting to lower their standards, lower teacher pay, allow the teaching of crap as though it was educational (like creationism and intelligent design - remove 'controversial' subjects like sex ed, evolution, and so forth), among other difficulties.
My own state has also removed the limit on how many students a single teacher can have, vastly lowering the quality of the education that each public student recieves. I was told by a chemistry teacher at my old high school that the chemistry class that I was taught in high school was now the equivelent of honors chemistry.

(March 31, 2011 at 2:33 am)theVOID Wrote: Teaching creationism would still be unconstitutional no? Allowing states to set standards within the legal sphere, have more control over spending, more control for teachers, parents and communities wouldn't change that, what it would do is make spending more transparent, more cost effective and give parents, teachers etc more say in what goes on.

You say that as though that has stopped Texas and other states from making the attempt year after year. You have to remember that these idiots believe creationism to be indesputable 'truth' of the universe and that America is a Christian Nation anyway.
Yes, it is against the law to teach creationism. It's not going to stop certain people - especially if the federal government gives up control of public education completely to the states.

(March 31, 2011 at 2:33 am)theVOID Wrote: Why should your government get to dictate beliefs to everyone else, be they right or wrong? And even if you wanted a single government mandate such as "you must teach what is currently espoused by the consensus of experts in the relevant field to get funding" there would be no other reason to usurp power.

The government doesn't 'dictate beliefs' to anyone. They're charged with setting the national standards of education and what constitutes a necessary education for them to have at minimum by the age of 18. That's neither right nor wrong, it's a method of making sure this country has things like a nearly perfect literacy rate among adults, among other things.
The education system is the way it is now primarily because the feds and states keep cutting education funding to support their tax cuts for the wealthy and other illegal operations. States are consistently trying to get away with teaching these 'beliefs' you attempt to attribute to the federal government.
The only reason that private schools are any better at any of this is because they do better than public schools at teaching students these standards in many cases *but they are still required to meet state and federal education standards*. Of course, they are also far more expensive to be affordable by most people.

(March 31, 2011 at 2:33 am)theVOID Wrote: Regulated Capitalism = Interfering in the consensual trade of adults = Opportunities and motivations for corruption = Corporate welfare = Tainted markets = debt.

You keep up this optimism that somehow an unregulated capitalist market is going to stomp out corruption when all its going to do is remove many of the limits between the corrupting forces (the wealthy wanting to be given favorable breaks) and the government that's supposed to be protecting their citizens from tyranny.
I live in a healthy society and I've gotten a decent education thanks to many of those 'corrupting influences.' I dreak clean water, eat healthy foods, and be sure that most of the items in my home are safe to use, and go to work with the certainty that I will be safe and unspoiled from many abuses thanks to government regulation of some form or another. Yes, it interferes with the 'consentual trade of adults', but it does so for everyone's protection in more cases than not.

I misread the title as "Republicans Resent the people".

Republicans represent the RICH people

There..I fixed it for you.

(March 30, 2011 at 9:23 pm)Dotard Wrote: Cocksuckers. The lot of 'em.


Oh wait... that's not an insult anymore is it?

Given that not only gay men suck cock, it is not an insult, even if you're a homophobe.

Quote:I disagree with them here

Then you face a dilemma, Void. You see, THEY will be saying that YOU are not a TRUE LIBERTARIAN!

Meanwhile, they continue to advance the agenda of their rich corporate masters while gleefully fucking over the poor and middle classes.

(March 31, 2011 at 11:53 am)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: Because they've been consistently fighting to lower their standards, lower teacher pay, allow the...

Okay good points, you can have that one.

Quote:You keep up this optimism that somehow an unregulated capitalist market is going to stomp out corruption when all its going to do is remove many of the limits between the corrupting forces (the wealthy wanting to be given favorable breaks) and the government that's supposed to be protecting their citizens from tyranny.

Tyranny? Ah, another corporophobe.

They get far bigger advantages from government that they do constraints. Do you think that the number of regulations on the market outweighs the cushy privileges, tax breaks and subsidies? No - Especially not for the bigger corporations, the regulations fuck over small to medium sized business far more because they don't get the massive welfare packages to account for it!

Your government just "regulated" the labor force again by changing the definition of disabled to extend to anxiety, bi-polar, HIV and so on, now over half the labor market qualifies as disabled, and the employees no longer have the burden of proof to demonstrate they are disabled, the employer has to prove that they aren't!

Skip to 4:30.

http://fetch.noxsolutions.com/schiff/aud...110330.mp3

In a free market you CAN'T give the wealthy breaks, you can't give them any taxpayer money at all - they can only get what they want via trade. If they can do so through consensual trade then who fucking cares?

Quote:I live in a healthy society and I've gotten a decent education thanks to many of those 'corrupting influences.' I dreak clean water, eat healthy foods, and be sure that most of the items in my home are safe to use, and go to work with the certainty that I will be safe and unspoiled from many abuses thanks to government regulation of some form or another. Yes, it interferes with the 'consentual trade of adults', but it does so for everyone's protection in more cases than not.

Cant' get clean water and an education without the government! Can't buy veggies without the government! No company will make safe products without regulations, right? That's bollocks. It's in the best interests of the companies to make safe products, not only will they lose customers otherwise, they can be prosecuted for negligence - You don't need some government official to go check up on them, you just need to arrest them when they do something wrong.

And what was that link? A rival company produced the same product cheaper and the FDA said "sure you can do that?" - That's an example of good competition, not some government win.

(March 31, 2011 at 12:16 pm)Shell B Wrote: Given that not only gay men suck cock.....

Many girls I know.... Uhem, never mind.

(March 31, 2011 at 12:49 pm)theVOID Wrote: No company will make safe products without regulations, right? That's bollocks. It's in the best interests of the companies to make safe products, not only will they lose customers otherwise, they can be prosecuted for negligence - You don't need some government official to go check up on them, you just need to arrest them when they do something wrong.

Compnaies will get away with what they can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHGbrlufryw

http://motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto-madness

Quote:for seven years the ford motor company sold cars in which it knew people would needlessly burn to death

And thats just Ford.

Capitalism is just about money, not ethical behavour, just money.
It will srew you any way it can, if its caught it will wriggle out of it any way it can.

Take the tobacco industry and its struggle to cover up the science that proved links to cancer and smoking.

Capitalism is not pure evil, but it comes close.

That's why negligence is illegal! That ford case isn't a matter of regulation, it's a failure of law and order.

The tobacco companies lying was fraud, they should have been prosecuted when it was discovered they lied. Regulation wouldn't have achieved a fucking thing there, they still would have lied.

People aren't punished anywhere near enough when they do wrong, that's the problem and it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with regulating markets.

None of you seem to get the difference between regulation and policing.

(March 31, 2011 at 12:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:I disagree with them here

Then you face a dilemma, Void. You see, THEY will be saying that YOU are not a TRUE LIBERTARIAN!

Meanwhile, they continue to advance the agenda of their rich corporate masters while gleefully fucking over the poor and middle classes.

You think I give a shit? My positions can be classified as 'Libertarian' by the very definition of the word, I couldn't care less what a specific party says about it. Oh no, I don't agree with a specific party in another country on every single fucking issue? Pffft.

You think the government bailing out and propping up corporations with taxpayer money isn't fucking over the poor and middle class? That's exactly what you get with Kenesianism - Fuck that! Then only thing the government needs to do is arrest people who break the law, they don't need to be the fucking money masters that you want them to be, the angels who guide the economy and manipulate currency and fuck with the direction of growth.