Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 You may not have realised but people dont earn huge amounts of money, even if they increase their productivity in their job they still wont earn more money for it, so without a public education system I would have to work another job so maybe 70+ hours a week work just so my son can go to school. So he would suffer because he would never see his father because I would be forced to work just so he could go to school. This would also be unbenficial for me because I would always be tired, no leisure time, no family time. Many people are too skilled for their jobs because there are not jobs out there, you makeit seem like they can just walk up to their employer or another empolyer and walk into a job, that does not happen. Also I said education should not be ran to make profits, it should be to provide an education to everyone, if you start runnign the education system solely to make a profit then the level of education would suffer, teachers wages getting cut back, cutting spending to non profitable subjects like art. Also with the home schooling arguement, so if the parent isn't intelligent enouogh to be earning enough money in a job to send their child to school what makes you think they will be intelligent enough to provide a complete education? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Please explain the realities of today's global markets, drop some knowledge bro don't just make blanket statements and move forward as if they are fact. Or as if you have any idea as to what you are claiming. I am wondering how the Libertarian theory holds up to the derivative markets? There is almost no labor involved in these markets since it is almost fully based on speculation and not necessarily tied to supply and demand. Also, how do Libertarians feel about capital gains? Almost all extremely rich people, live off of capital gains. There is zero labor involved, yet there is a vast amount of money being made for the rich. Would all this go away in a "Gold Standard"? Not once has anyone address how a "free market" will affect markets like these. Not once. Tell us how the "free market" will affect these markets, especially since they are not based on a goods/labor arrangement. In fact, when you get down to it, the whole stock market is not necessarily based on your simplistic models either. How would this work out in a "free market"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 You may not have realised but people dont earn huge amounts of money, even if they increase their productivity in their job they still wont earn more money for it, so without a public education system I would have to work another job so maybe 70+ hours a week work just so my son can go to school. So he would suffer because he would never see his father because I would be forced to work just so he could go to school. This would also be unbenficial for me because I would always be tired, no leisure time, no family time. Many people are too skilled for their jobs because there are not jobs out there, you makeit seem like they can just walk up to their employer or another empolyer and walk into a job, that does not happen. Also I said education should not be ran to make profits, it should be to provide an education to everyone, if you start runnign the education system solely to make a profit then the level of education would suffer, teachers wages getting cut back, cutting spending to non profitable subjects like art. Also with the home schooling arguement, so if the parent isn't intelligent enouogh to be earning enough money in a job to send their child to school what makes you think they will be intelligent enough to provide a complete education? Don't forget that in a for-profit classroom, if they start failing people, then less people will want to attend that school. So, their grades become artificially high and that market gets corrupted. In the end, the whole system gets debased and education becomes something meaningless that you will need just to compete. The competitive market necessitates that they need a good graduation rate, if not, the schools profits will take a hit and they will lose business. You already see it in the for-profit colleges out there now, people just getting a piece of paper with no real education behind it. There are more variables involved, but if all schools were for-profit, this is what would happen to a more extreme level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 You may not have realised but people dont earn huge amounts of money, even if they increase their productivity in their job they still wont earn more money for it, so without a public education system I would have to work another job so maybe 70+ hours a week work just so my son can go to school. you just criticized me for my resistance to forceful taxation because i 'didnt want to pay for anything' and now you are telling me you want everything for free. hmmm... you still dont get it. if state schools were abolished, schools that people could afford would pop up. imagine if we had government monopolized food stores and they sold rice for 20$ a pound. you would have us believe that if we allowed freedom, that the price would go to 200 a pound and no one could afford it. yet in all your other posts , you are complaining about 'big business' charging to 'cheap of prices' putting ''mom and pop stores' out of business. and you think that these greedy business men would not come up with a satisfactory schooling method that people can afford? So he would suffer because he would never see his father because I would be forced to work just so he could go to school. This would also be unbenficial for me because I would always be tired, no leisure time, no family time.that may be true, but lets remember it is living standards and productivity that gives us leisure. lets not forget when people were flocking their horrible lives on the farm to make more money in a horrible factory, they were bettering their lot in life. it wasnt THAT long ago when people were working 12 hours a day just to put food on the table, they werent spending their extra income on iphones and vacations. because their labor was worth so little that they had to work that many hours. the way to get rich is to increase your productivity. get better skills if you want to work less and make more money. Also I said education should not be ran to make profits, it should be to provide an education to everyone, if you start runnign the education system solely to make a profit then the level of education would suffer, teachers wages getting cut back, cutting spending to non profitable subjects like art.why should teachers make more money when they cant even teach the kids anything at the rates they currently make? state schools fail horribly at providing an education, so i think you are arguing a moot point. basically you are in favor of free schools, that you dont have to pay for, your neighbor does, and if he doesnt you send in the guys in uniforms with badges and guns to extract the revenue, and to top it off, you dont even want children educated, you want them indoctrinated and dumbed down. Also with the home schooling arguement, so if the parent isn't intelligent enouogh to be earning enough money in a job to send their child to school what makes you think they will be intelligent enough to provide a complete education?i dont know, seems similar too..'what if the parents are not capable of feeding their kids?' or 'what if they feed their kids something that i dont like?' if you base your entire case on the cases that hardly ever happen, it just gets plain stupid. what if parents choose to stay home and teach their kids but have a high labor productivity? plenty of people do this. you are asking questions similar to...'what if we let private industry build bridges... instead of government?' 'why how will they pour the concrete or set the beams?' 'how will they span the distance?' these are just technical problems that get ironed out. i already said you can have your public school, if you just dont throw people in jail if they dont fund. but since i have already demonstrated by having you say it with your own mouth, liberals do not put thier money where their mouths are. they like to talk a good game about compassion, charity, etc. yet when it comes to their own dime, they recoil at the very thought of putting their own money down. if all the liberals and statists just voluntarily pooled their own money and set up their own private voluntarily 'public' institutions, they could just shut the F up and get on with their lives and leave the rest of us alone. perhaps you should ask warren buffett, michael moore and al gore what they would do in those situations and since they the funds to fix all those problems, take up the issue with them. i'd also say that given the number of people who justify the entire coercive school system on teh fact that 1 person in a state might not be able to 'adequately' educate their children to the specifications of other people.... that these people are illustrating a demand to fund a non profit institution to take care of these kids on a totally voluntary basis. after all there is plenty of demand for red cross services, why not free private school services? look at all the free information on the internet, probably in 20 years the internet and free distribution materials will make formal schooling irrelevant. the destitute and homeless have plenty of private shelters and soup kitchens, why not a bunch of free private schools? you are illustrating the demand for this by making your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 and I have said it before you don't like it where you live and the rules and laws that entales then you can move, I don't need to give up 100% of my wage just have a fair taxation policy for everyone living atandards in America are not the best in the world, if I remember rightly they arent in the top 10, because of the shitty labour laws you have and the number of hours people have to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 state schools fail horribly at providing an education, so i think you are arguing a moot point. This statement is just wrong. I am not saying that there are not bad schools out there, but there definitely are great schools out there that prove this statement wrong. It would be just as wrong to say that all private schools are great schools, which in not the case either. AOD is making the assumption that private schools are great and public schools are bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 and I have said it before you don't like it where you live and the rules and laws that entales then you can move, I don't need to give up 100% of my wage just have a fair taxation policy for everyone and i've said it many times before, what gives the govt the right to rule in teh first place? that is the question. according to you if a bunch of guys move into your neighborhood, declare themselves the rulers, tax everyone at 50% just because, and a few of the gangs friends consent to their behavior, then they allow you people to vote on a few different 'leaders' and you dont like their policies....your answer to this is 'well, i dont like these guys, so i just got to move.' instead of kicking their asses out of your neighborhood. that is all a government is. a gang with a flag. that is how all governments came around. the very question is what gave them the right to rule in the first place, where did the people consent and what gives them the power to run everyones lives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 they havent declared themselves ruler, they have been democratically elected, that is the difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realism Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 and they produce the best results. this is undeniable fact. Can you cite something that backs this up? I agree that most public school systems leave something to be desired but I'm not sure that warrants home schooling being undeniably the best route for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 oh oh ok. so the neighborhood puts forth a bunch of tyrants to be 'elected,' 51% vote for them, 49% vote against them, but to bad. move. hitler was elected by democratic election. so much for democracy. those stupid ass jews should of just moved. same with those stupid property title clinging kulaks in the ukraine. if you dont like the democratically elected government, just move. duh. those stupid idiots making trouble for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ^coming from someone who does not even vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 so now democracy isnt good enough, jesus christ, I said move if you don't like the rules that much. But democracy and government are better than complete anarchy, which is what you want, even though you think there would be some kind of order there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Can you cite something that backs this up? I agree that most public school systems leave something to be desired but I'm not sure that warrants home schooling being undeniably the best route for everyone. i thought it was pretty common knowledge home school students typically score 15-30%+ above public schools. that being said, in no way am i attempting to say homeschooling is 'for everyone.' i apologize if i said or implied that. im merely pointing out a cheap alternative to produce a top quality student that solves a few of the problems others have thrown at me. that is the beauty of a free society, there is no central plan. each individual plans for themselves and decides what is best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 so now democracy isnt good enough, jesus christ, I said move if you don't like the rules that much. But democracy and government are better than complete anarchy, which is what you want, even though you think there would be some kind of order there. i'll take it you concede the point to me, because my argument obviously smashes yours. even if was talking anarchy.... what keeps you from entering your neighbors house when ever you want? is it really the police force or is it the non permission of the owner and their property rights? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 no I do not concede the point at all, I just cant be bothered to argue with you. you believe whatever you want and have as much fait in it as you like, I just know it will not work in a real world and that most people would be worse off because of it, but that doesnt matter to you because it is their choice to be worse off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 i'll take it you concede the point to me, because my argument obviously smashes yours. even if was talking anarchy.... what keeps you from entering your neighbors house when ever you want? is it really the police force or is it the non permission of the owner and their property rights? i would be more concerned about being arrested and thrown in prison thhan having a fight with a neighbour. It is the same reason I dont walk into a supermarket fill mytrolley with my shopping and just walk out because I dont want to be arrested and put in prison. but mainly because it is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 so you believe its wrong... and your morals tell you this and property rights back it up....yet you are trying to say that in an anarchist society there is no order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 because that is me, not everybody. If I thought I would get away with it I would have no problem robbing a supermarket blind, ok I wouldnt break into peoples homes but big businesses then yea I will take everything I can because I know they do the same to me with every chance they get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 But, Decy, don't you know that in a true free market, there is no crime, because everyone respects everyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 also in your family idea where mum is homeschooling the kids and dad is out working 70 hours a wekk to provide, what happens to them once his company decides they can get cheaper labour in china? They say to him you can keep your job but take a 50% pay cut or you will be fired. What happens then? Where does he get help from when he is unable to find another job? This is where your idea always falls down for me because they have to rely on the charity of others (which will not happen) you need a welfare state to help in these circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 a free market only runs on the premise that everyone is only interested in self interest, this means that chairty and help to people in need would not be there because it isnt in their self interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 a free market only runs on the premise that everyone is only interested in self interest, this means that chairty and help to people in need would not be there because it isnt in their self interest. this is just ridiculous. people give to charity because its makes them feel good. because they feel good, it is their own self interest that makes them give. why do private soup kitchens, the red cross and other voluntary charities exist today? is government forcing people to fund them? im a radical liberty advocate yet i believe 100% in voluntary charity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 also in your family idea where mum is homeschooling the kids and dad is out working 70 hours a wekk to provide, what happens to them once his company decides they can get cheaper labour in china? They say to him you can keep your job but take a 50% pay cut or you will be fired. What happens then? Where does he get help from when he is unable to find another job? This is where your idea always falls down for me because they have to rely on the charity of others (which will not happen) you need a welfare state to help in these circumstances. what happens if the family on government welfare gets hit by a car on a government road by a state worker? huh huh huh huh huh ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 and that is great that you are AOD, however as previously mentioned when I worked for a bank, the vast majority of people dont care about charity and do not give to charity, therefore there would be a need for welfare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 what happens if the family on government welfare gets hit by a car on a government road by a state worker? huh huh huh huh huh ? has nothing to do with the scenario I proposed so I will just assume you have no answer to that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 because that is me, not everybody. If I thought I would get away with it I would have no problem robbing a supermarket blind, ok I wouldnt break into peoples homes but big businesses then yea I will take everything I can because I know they do the same to me with every chance they get. but the question is how is order kept without the government, correct? if you break into my house or you try to push carts out of super markets without paying, there is generally some sort of private security mechanism, be it an armed home owner or an armed security guard. ps. i love how you equate your yearning for actual theft from someone to the exact same as you voluntarily giving your money to apple for your iphone. in your view, apple stole your money. so did you rape your first girlfriend on the first date or did you persuade her get in the sack with you? after all, no difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I dont own any apple products, yes I paid for my phone, however I pay for my electric and gas through a company that decides to hike its prices higher than the increases it costs them to buy the electric/gas. This gas company is part of a larger corporation that also owns supermarkets so yea I would have no problem in stealing from them because they steal from me, I dont have a choice in the matter because all the energy companies increase their prices at the same time, they manipulate the market as PRIVATE companies and they remove the choice to go to someone cheaper service because they ALL increase their prices. nothing to do with government, infact the UK government hass stepped in before to stop them increasing prices like this before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 has nothing to do with the scenario I proposed so I will just assume you have no answer to that i think it has everything to do with the discussion at hand....its just a crazy off the wall made up scenario to try to veer the discussion off course. my question is just as relevant as you. i mean, what happens if anyone loses a job? what happens if someone cuts off their fingers eating a steak? if you lose a job, you should have savings to fall back on. just like any other normal person who relies on themselves and not anyone else. whats your next question? 'what does the one legged, wheel chair bound, homosexual, buggy whip maker do that works 70 hours a week when the automobile comes along if we dont have a central government with the power to assassinate citizens without a trial?' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 No my next question would be, with the cost of living so high nowadays with fuel, energy costs etc always rising above inflation, and with wages being stagnant with no real increases in wages in years and years how is someone supposed to save when their whole income is being accounted for in basic living needs like heat food and shelter? I ask you legitimate real world questions and you come back with nonsensical crap 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 oh and dont say they should increase their productivity because their employer isn't going to put up their wages because it doesn't work like that in the real world. Also in the real world there isnt a huge selection of jobs so they can't just leave their job and move elsewhere. Should they just say ah fuck having a life I will now work 120 hours a week? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.