| Author | Message | ||
     The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1425 Registered: 3-2004  |
society should provide police protection for those who cannot otherwise afford it. those people who qualify for welfare. the rest of you should pay for your security. this silly argument again. we all benefit from police protection. we all dont benefit from your kid. yes, i know, "society benefits from ..." blah blah blah. we all dont receive benefit from your kid going to school. the big difference is that having a kid was YOUR choice. not my choice, YOURS. being protected from crime isnt really a choice situation , is it? though i am sure someone will deliver a silly argument that it is. the truth is that your kids will probably make very little if any impact on society. they will get a job, get married, have kids and die. the only people benefitting will be themselves. being safe from crime and using roads is something that we all use and benefits us all. having a child is a personal choice that should be the responsibility of the ones making the choice. the childless in this country recieve none of the benefits that those with children do, and are unfairly taxed in order to provide schooling for those who dont take responsibility for their personal and private choices. since taxes slow the rate of savings in this country, making it hard or impossible for people to pay for health care, and since peole have less money to put into commerce circulation, it is easy to make the argument that your decision not to pay for your children is actually a burden on society and not a benefit. as for robber barons paying for the FDA, they do. the money to test a new product is provided by the manufacturuer of the product. it is a system that is so warped as to be useless. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1426 Registered: 3-2004 |
here is a very good book that lays out the selfish burden that parents who dont take responsibility for their choices lay on the rest of us. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0684863030/ref=ase_childfreenet/104-7228165-340 3169?s=books&v=glance&n=283155&tagActionCode=childfreenet Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12185 Registered: 1-2003  |
I'm not buying it, either the book or the argument. You don't receive direct benefit from others' children. You receive indirect benefit from them. "This is the only thing my signature says." | ||
| sac Supporter Username: Sac Post Number: 3072 Registered: 5-2001 |
Society benefits from having a next generation to carry on ... and society benefits from that generation being well educated. Society would suffer if they were not well educated. Society includes you, Libertarian, as much as you seem to want to drop out of it. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1428 Registered: 3-2004 |
i agree, children should be educated. YOUR child with YOUR money. i have a dog. he makes me happy. when i am happy i am more productive at work and create more money and product for society. pay for my dog. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1429 Registered: 3-2004 |
De-worshipping Public Education by Karen De Coster Hard as it is to believe, the world is still chock-full of professional educators who worship the ideals of a state-sponsored, indoctrinating public school system. This system is wrought with funding boondoggles, and has proven to be an arrant failure overall, damaging millions of children in the process. Public education is based on the idea that government is the "parent" best equipped to provide children with the values and wisdom required to grow into an intelligent, functional adult. To reiterate what former first lady Hillary Clinton professed, these public school champions believe "it takes a village…." It doesn’t take a village to raise and educate children. It takes a family, a church, interested third parties such as friends and neighbors, or quality private educational institutions that flourish under a capitalistic system and respond to the paying parent-consumers. As Hebrew University historian Martin van Crevald points out in his book, The Rise and Decline of the State, the archetype for state-directed education was popularized by nineteenth-century state worshippers who wanted to impose a love of big government ideals upon the youth. There was also the move toward secularization, and an overall appetite for "discipline" of the unruly (meaning independent) masses that buttressed the campaign to take education out of the hands of family and church. After all, unruly, independently educated masses might resist government’s objectives, and this kind of disarray would be unacceptable in the move toward building a powerful, controlling state apparatus. Prussia’s Frederick William I and France’s Napoleon discerned this, as did a legion of other despotic rulers throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Modern-day education has built on the foundation set forth by these tyrants. What is most disquieting about the public education mindset is that those who believe most strongly in it are convinced that there are no other noble alternatives, and that the alternatives that do exist are merely a hindrance to the only real education, that which is provided via the public domain. The egalitarian core belief of these educators is that society is responsible for obtaining, maintaining, and paying for the process of equally developing young minds. But since the laws of the modern state that control the educational system lean toward equality, that means a bias against the smart and hardworking. This takes education to the level of heavy egalitarian leanings, sustaining the philosophy that schools have the obligation to treat all students as pure equals – equal in intelligence, work ethic, performance, and desire. Such nonsense is refuted by H. George Resch in "Human Variety and Individuality" on the Separation of School and State website. Mr. Resch contends that compulsory, government-controlled education is trying to achieve ends that are not possible due to the fact that general equality is not only impossible to define, but that biological, environmental, and cultural differences among us are so vast that a compulsory, standardized public education poses difficulties that cannot be overcome, and certainly not by a public school system. It’s obvious that public schooling is neither beneficial to most students, nor is it efficient. Education is an acquired good, a good that has to meet the needs of the consumers, or else face rejection in the free market. Hence, the necessity for individually tailored private educational institutions that cater to the urgencies of the marketplace, or home schools that provide a quality environment for each student’s direct needs. In school districts throughout the land, public school teachers and administrators, along with closely allied PTA’s, battle a threatening voucher system – extolled by conservatives as the "great solution" to education. The voucher system, to the public school proponent, means the likely scenario of competition – a little bit of the free market invading their government-protected world of free-form indoctrination. Vouchers may – according to these public educators – open up the possibility that parents would seek higher standards in the public school curriculum, educational materials, and teacher-administrator qualities, or else these parents could easily cash in on their vouchers and move on to an alternative institution that is more likely to listen to their wishes, and modify its overall teaching program accordingly. This means that all those educators using "Heather has Two Mommies" to brainwash children on the "virtues" of homosexuality might have to trade in such liberal balderdash for truly educational literature. How ridiculous that the education system should dare have to fall into the snare of having to concede to the free market! The voucher threat may also pressure schools to drop their ineffectual, equality-minded goals in favor of programs that would champion the forgotten merit of competition, and focus more intensely on those students who are destined for achievement above and beyond the norm. Of course, one should stand strongly opposed to any flagitious voucher system, though for reasons opposite of those propounded by the pro-public schooling hawks. Vouchers are anti-free market in general, and are just another way for government to control young minds, and a way to further dig itself more deeply into the mostly unregulated sphere of private education. Vouchers allow for no freedom whatsoever from the clutches of the state-mandated regulatory circus. However, there is certain joy in seeing public school proponents backed into a corner with their claws out and having to do battle with something moderately competitive. Then, of course, there is the greatest threat of all, which comes from the home schooling crowd. Public educators shrivel at the mere mention of home-schooled students out-performing their public school peers. For example, the National Education Association has recently attacked the legitimacy of home schooling in spite of home-schoolers’ recent successes in terms of placing students first, second, and third in a national spelling bee, and claiming the overall winner in a national geography bee. A huge success for home schooling, and private education in general, these accomplishments raised the ire of those who insist on the public education way. Just recently, a spokesperson for the NEA stated that public schooling is far superior to all forms of private education – because of its advanced academic opportunities and convenience of socialization. This statement ignores the fact that the home schooling environment has developed voluntary communal learning environments that allows for direct community involvement for the students, and draws upon the expertise of numerous individuals to obtain the greatest excellence in resource use for teaching. Let me state that the public education field is not composed entirely of incompetents and ne’er-do-wells. There are a lot of ethical, hard-working and concerned people in the public school systems that desire to do their best to bring sense and order to an unworkable system. The bigger problem remains this: the system was built on authoritarian intentions, the premises for why we need public education are incorrect, and maintaining funding for such a monstrous system becomes impossible in the long run without plundering an entire population to support it. Simple common sense dictates that my paying $1,200 in annual school taxes with no children in the local public school system, while a neighbor with four children taking advantage of the free schooling in our district pays the same $1,200 in school taxes, is indeed a theft of colossal proportions. This constant depredation of an entire community to pay for the education of the children of some of the members of that community violates the core philosophy of self-sustaining, voluntary market coordination. This is truly a form of legalized gangstering, where every property-owning taxpayer is robbed via legal government mandate to help support the goals of the state in maintaining a vicious system of educational welfare for my richer, as well as poorer neighbors. It’s high time that the public resist the inherent dangers of continuing on a path toward a more socialized, bureaucratic, and just plain immoral taxpayer-funded public school system. Taxpayers need to reject the public education nipple and look toward the same market they covet for their goods and services – the free market. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| SO Ref Citizen Username: So_refugee Post Number: 1473 Registered: 2-2005  |
Would the most activist thing be to move to an area that pays to lowest amount of tax, especially if you're not utilizing the services towards which the bulk of your taxes are going? You'd find other municipalities that pay far less than those of us in SO/M. Go outside of NJ - avoiding other high tax states - and you're doing even better. Believe me, I would, if I could. | ||
| anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2561 Registered: 6-2002 |
the truth is that your kids will probably make very little if any impact on society. they will get a job, get married, have kids and die. the only people benefitting will be themselves. being safe from crime and using roads is something that we all use and benefits us all. What if my kid decides to become a cop or a road engineer? | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1430 Registered: 3-2004 |
i prefer to stay and fight rather than run away. you think i should be forced not to live in a place i prefer because of an inequity? seems quite unamerican Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1431 Registered: 3-2004 |
What if my kid decides to become a cop or a road engineer? what if he decides to make fries or sell dope? Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2562 Registered: 6-2002 |
Fries or dope? Don't people benefit from fries and dope? | ||
| SO Ref Citizen Username: So_refugee Post Number: 1474 Registered: 2-2005 |
Never said "forced". You have the choice as to where to live and I appreciate your desire to "fight"; however, this battle seems futile. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1432 Registered: 3-2004 |
actually the amount of legislation addressing this issue, (and favorably to my opinion), has increased in the last couple of years.look at arizona, wisconsin, vermont, and florida. according to recent demographics, the number of childless couples is also on the rise. the tide on this issue is turning, slowly, but it is turning. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1433 Registered: 3-2004 |
You receive indirect benefit from them what a wonderfully nebulous way to bolster an argument. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12186 Registered: 1-2003 |
You receive indirect benefit from them. what a wonderfully nebulous way to bolster an argument. Do you disagree with it? If so, how? "This is the only thing my signature says." | ||
| Joan Supporter Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 6957 Registered: 5-2001 |
Libertarian: I am sure you would agree that at least some of our children go on to make contributions to our society from which we all benefit. To a large extent we are all quite dependent on one another in our urban, specialist society. Someone's child grows your food, delivers it to the market near you, checks to make sure it is safe to eat, stocks the shelves and provides the means for you to purchase it. Someone's child built your house and helps you keep it in repair. Someone's child provides the fuel you need to stay warm in cold weather, prepare your food, keep your car and mass transit running. Someone's child made the fabric and notions that someone else's child used to make the garments you wear. Someone's child created your job and someone else's child sees that you get paid on time (hopefully). We do not always know when these children are five years of age which of our children and our neighbor's children will be the ones from which we will benefit most directly therefore, it is in our best interest as a society to provide the best education we can to as many of our society's children as possible. The problem most of us are struggling with in this thread and IRL is how to do this without bankrupting us all. | ||
| Lydia Supporter Username: Lydial Post Number: 1633 Registered: 5-2001 |
Well said Joan, thanks for your reasoned post and cutting through all the short-sighted nonsense. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5088 Registered: 8-2003 |
Libertarian -- please know I'm just joining the debate. I hope you know I'm not a fan at all of the entitlements I'm about to speak of. Do you plan on receiving Social Security and Medicare? Will you renounce and give back any monies that go beyond what you've put into the system and whatever lackluster rate of return they bring and continue taking from those systems at the expense of other 'children' in this society? | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1435 Registered: 3-2004 |
if i need to rely upon social security and medicare in my later years then i have made a terrible terrible mistake in my planning. so, in a word, no. he problem most of us are struggling with in this thread and IRL is how to do this without bankrupting us all. solution: dont have them if you cant afford them. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| crabby Citizen Username: Crabbyappleton Post Number: 451 Registered: 1-2004 |
kids grow up to vote. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1436 Registered: 3-2004 |
kids grow up to steal cars, whats your point? Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| Parkbench87 Citizen Username: Parkbench87 Post Number: 3433 Registered: 7-2001  |
Even a few kids (Just a few) grow up to become Libertarians | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1437 Registered: 3-2004 |
those children should be nurtured and sheltered as if they were the physical manifestations of gods! Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| Parkbench87 Citizen Username: Parkbench87 Post Number: 3434 Registered: 7-2001 |
"those children should be nurtured and sheltered as if they were the physical manifestations of gods!" Nah, cut their education funding. It's their parents problem, not societies | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1440 Registered: 3-2004 |
At last we agree! Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| buzzsaw Citizen Username: Buzzsaw Post Number: 3690 Registered: 5-2001  |
No one has anything to say about this piece Kathleen posted? http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/essex/index.ssf?/base/news-1/113695890322250.xml&c oll=1 I would say the press release from the county looks a lot like the article. OK - back to the debate about kids.... The many points of view here represent a good idea of why change will never come. No one wants to give in. Everyone is passionate about their point of view - and that is a good thing (hi martha). Was it Don Henley or Don Rickels that said, "there are three sides to every story - yours, mine and the truth". We need to get this property tax thing under control. We have over 600 school districts. Looks like there is room to adjust something there. With every district comes a layer of admins and non-teachers that have to be paid and paid. Now, I would like to say - I love teachers. I am thinking of trying to become one. But over 600 scool districts......there is a lot of costs there that could be cut w/o taking away art/music. In the end. This is all just pi**ing in the wind. What politician is going to try to make these changes? none. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1443 Registered: 3-2004 |
and wait for the massive tax increase corzine is about to lay on all of us. part of his planned increases was leaked yesterday and it s a doozy! Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| buzzsaw Citizen Username: Buzzsaw Post Number: 3693 Registered: 5-2001 |
That is not a suprise. I should learn how to spell "school" before I try to become a teacher. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1445 Registered: 3-2004 |
your oscar goldman avatar makes up for any spelling errors. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| buzzsaw Citizen Username: Buzzsaw Post Number: 3698 Registered: 5-2001 |
out of context quotea & most of an article from local NJ paper: "everybody will feel the pain" "massage parlors" "checks and balances" "14.5 cent PER GALLON gas tax" (www.njo.com) "I'm encouraged by Governor Corzine's inaugural address when he said everybody will feel the pain," said Karrow, R-Hunterdon/Warren. But Karrow, a Hunterdon County freeholder, said the state spends too much and she is doubtful of a true change in practices. "I think that because there are no checks and balances down there," she said. "When full control (rests with) one party, it's going to continue." Assembly Minority Leader Alex DeCroce, R-Morris, said $1 billion in possible spending cuts and cost-saving measures his party proposed last year were ignored. Pointing to the report issued by Corzine's Transition and Governmental Re-engineering Committee, he said he expects a similar year. "There is no question the state budget is loaded with waste that needs to be cut," DeCroce said. "We ask Governor Corzine to eliminate wasteful spending before he considers more tax hikes on our state's overburdened taxpayers." While Corzine has raised some possible budget fixes, no value has been attached to them. Along with expanding the sales tax to include Internet sales, tanning sessions, limousine rides and massage parlor visits, Corzine is proposing a mandatory week off without pay for state workers. He is also looking to increase the state's 14.5-cent-per-gallon tax on gasoline. Some proposals died between a preliminary report distributed Thursday and a revised edition put out the following day. They were making clothing sales subject to New Jersey's 6 percent sales tax and lodging a levy on 401(k) retirement accounts. | ||
| Eponymous Citizen Username: Eponymous Post Number: 49 Registered: 6-2004 |
The Libertarian wrote: "we all dont receive benefit from your kid going to school. the big difference is that having a kid was YOUR choice." Your second sentence is a non-sequitur. Whose choice it is has no bearing on the benefit derived. I could, for example, choose to distribute my vast wealth to every person in the country. Nobody's choice but mine, yet everyone benefits. "...using roads is something that we all use and benefits us all." Not everyone uses the roads. Many people do not own or drive cars, or even take the bus. Please explain how the roads benefit someone who does not drive in a way which cannot be generalized to how those without children benefit from an educated populace. Forcing people to go to school or to have or not have children would be of libertarian concern, as is forcing people to pay for services they may or may not use. To claim that paying for the roads is of a qualitatively different nature than paying to educate fellow citizens strikes me as extremely difficult, and a slippery slope on which most strict libertarians would not which to step. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1458 Registered: 3-2004 |
Your second sentence is a non-sequitur. it certainly is when you pull it out of context. Please explain how the roads benefit someone who does not drive economic product is delivered via an existing infrastructure, ie;roads. we all benefit from a healthy infrastructure. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| dave23 Citizen Username: Dave23 Post Number: 1294 Registered: 5-2001 |
Libertarian, Here it is in simple terms: An educated populace is good for the economy. A good economy is good for you. In Libertarian terms: An educated populace enables enterprise. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12234 Registered: 1-2003 |
I expected that response, and I bet Eponymous did, too. An educated populace is analogous to a road infrastructure. "This is the only thing my signature says." | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1460 Registered: 3-2004 |
many things are good for the economy. i am not forced to pay rent on the property that i own to finance them. especially a personal reproductive choice. one of the most personal private decisions anyone can make. why is it ok to make others pay for this decision? the growth and sale of tobacco is good for the economy. i dont buy cigarettes. the selling of alcohol is good for the economy. i dont buy liquor. by forcing me to pay rent on my owned property, you lower my savings which is bad for the economy. you chose to have kids. you made a private, personal decision. pay for them. i want a pool. its my decision. by buying a pool, i am helping to bolster industry in this country. this is good for the ecconomy. pay for my pool. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| dave23 Citizen Username: Dave23 Post Number: 1295 Registered: 5-2001 |
It's because of an educated populace that we have a strong economy that enables you to have a job that pays enough for you to afford a pool. Complaining isn[']t activism, but it appears to be your biggest hobby. Edit: To put a finer point on it--an educated populace is the very foundation of our economy. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12236 Registered: 1-2003 |
A private pool is not analogous to an educated population or a road system. Public pools? We got 'em. Tobacco is not good for society, on the whole. If we could tally up the value of the suffering from illness and death and add it to the monetary costs thereof, I think we'd find that tobacco costs us more than it gains us. Libertarian, I think the reason we differ is that you prefer not to think in collective terms and prefer to look at individual contributions and benefits. The rest of us occasionally take a bigger picture view, including childless people. "This is the only thing my signature says." | ||
| mjc Citizen Username: Mjc Post Number: 1033 Registered: 10-2004 |
When you're old and need a nurse or home health aide, you won't be looking for other people's educated children? | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1461 Registered: 3-2004 |
The rest of us occasionally take a bigger picture view, including childless people. this is exactly where i think you are wrong. having a child that you cant afford and making others pay for your decision is very selfish thinking. you dont care that i worked for my money or what i want to do with it. you only care about having others finance your sexuaal choices. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1462 Registered: 3-2004 |
When you're old and need a nurse or home health aide, you won't be looking for other people's educated children? these children could be just as well educated by having the people who produced them pay for them. Complaining isnt activism. stop bitching on the internet and do something about it! |
