(April 13, 2011 at 10:51 pm)Aerzia Saerules Arktuos Wrote: I don't mind private schools existing... but the government does need to have an option available for those with no/little money. Whether you call it public school or vouchers is really a question in it's own. Social security also needs to continue, and i don't mind the government opening it up to donations so long as they continue to maintain it. Health the same.
Agree, state monopolies on education aren't a good thing imo, it tends to get more expensive while performance decreases. Children cannot be held responsible for themselves thus I do believe that there is a social responsibility to provide them with equal opportunities, subsidies or vouchers for private schools seems a better solution to me, make parents with high incomes write their own checks, give discounts for middle income families and provide free education for poor families - At the least we need to ensure that all children can get a good education regardless of their families fiscal situation.
Social security is insolvent, It should realistically only be available for those who have used all their own capital, their savings and home equity - The rich at the very least shouldn't be able to qualify, nor should they qualify for state funded healthcare. Yes, people should have to sell their homes to qualify, so they don't get to pass their homes on to their children, well tough - If you are going to take from the working population for your retirement and do it while sitting on a few hundred thousand dollars of equity you're morally bankrupt, it's like saying "Hey you who is working hard and paying taxes! Yes you! I'm retired and need an income, so give me your cash! But I'm going to keep my house!"
Quote:I don't think I'm an extremist... if you make a rule i won't follow: i'm not going to go blow up a hundred people or mine the roads... i'm just not going to follow it
Agreed, nobody should have ANY say on what you can do with your own being.
Quote:If we're under the ideal of a somewhat regulated public market, it is simply that the most reputable doctors are the first ones expensive/new medical equipment go to.
What if the doctors all live in some rich suburb? Should the best equipment go there? I doubt it, ANY state funding needs to be distributed evenly, equal opportunity is about all people being treated equally by the state.
Quote: It's the same understanding I have towards the best marksman in the military being the first one to receive the high-end rifle. If you have the money to afford the price of these things without being on the top end, i don't mind you buying it... but it's a priority system to me if you don't.
I agree with you as far as military spending goes, it's all about efficient spending, that's fine, but your earlier example wasn't that much of a priority system, it should be the priority of the recipients and not the priority of the providers.
Quote:You might qualify as a "Libertarian Socialist" though some of them seem like they just want to storm every corporation and business, arrest every employer and appoint their own people while giving all the shares to the employees - I think that people owning their production is a good idea, but they have to do it the right way - Start a business, buy shares in one you work for, form a collective to purchase businesses and join unions - But to take it by force is completely immoral.
There is only one type of situation in which that course of action is defensible (that being when the country is in vital need of their assets and cannot obtain them fast enough any other way). Outside of that, the position is untenable (and especially impractical).
[/quote]
Except it's NOT their assets, the property belongs to the person who owns it, the only time that would ever be applicable as far as I'm concerned is if the business in question was found guilty in a court of stealing the business or assets, in that case a seizure and redistribution is justified - I really doubt your corporatists state would give the business to the workers though, they would sell it to someone else and the workers would be no better for it - They would simply use the money they had acquired to work towards whatever agenda they think will get them reelected.
.
