Here is your f---in' "well regulated militia"
Jun 23, 2016 14:35:28 #
480,000 Americans die each year due to diseases caused by smoking (cdc.gov) Why isn't smoking illegal?
Jun 23, 2016 14:39:55 #
41,000 Americans die each year from "second hand smoke" induced disease. Why isn't smoking illegal? Why aren't felony charges filed against smokers who cause second hand smoke disease?
Jun 23, 2016 18:22:04 #
Jun 23, 2016 18:45:48 #
skylane5sp wrote:
Because tobacco spends more than the NRA.
Where's the outrage?
Jun 24, 2016 00:16:32 #
Zophman wrote:
Where's the outrage?
Being an ex- smoker, one that did a pack a day for 20 years, I have no feelings for those too fxxxing stupid to quit. There are signs on the carton and on every pack that say "these will kill you". Taxes have been increased and prices raised on cigrattes to the point that each coffin nail costs about 30 cents.
Jun 24, 2016 00:53:10 #
letmedance wrote:
Being an ex- smoker, one that did a pack a day for 20 years, I have no feelings for those too fxxxing stupid to quit. There are signs on the carton and on every pack that say "these will kill you". Taxes have been increased and prices raised on cigrattes to the point that each coffin nail costs about 30 cents.
I'm with you on the stupidity of smokers (that would be me for 16 years at 2 - 3 packs a day...cough.) But what about the 41,000 non smokers each year who die from second hand smoke? Make smoking illegal and there is no second hand smoke and stupid people are protected from themselves! Sounds like the gun argument to me.
Jun 24, 2016 01:35:49 #
Like I said those that are TFS to quit. Had not really thought about the second handers as the are victims of the idiots.
For those of you still smoking, quitting opened up a whole new life for me. Food Tasted better, my teeth lost their stain, the hacking eventually dissipated, my lungs recovered and with increased oxygen to the body, overall health improved greatly.
For those of you still smoking, quitting opened up a whole new life for me. Food Tasted better, my teeth lost their stain, the hacking eventually dissipated, my lungs recovered and with increased oxygen to the body, overall health improved greatly.
Jul 11, 2016 21:02:38 #
hondo812: Don't you think that is largely due to the East vs West philosophical differences? I wonder what the suicide rates are for US vs Japan?
Nagy: Decades ago the murder rates in the US and Japan were very close.
Nagy: Decades ago the murder rates in the US and Japan were very close.
Jul 11, 2016 21:50:20 #
Keenan: Again, nothing but evasion, and a refusal to concede that I just caught you in several more lies/misrepresentations and intentional distractions. Your true colors are coming out, Robert.
Peter has flattened and shredded your illogical bullshit gun nut arguments, and has obviously left you so speechless and naked, that all you can do now is babble on about Saul Alinsky - someone who has been dead for 44 years. YOU HAD TO GO BACK 44 YEARS TO FIND A (DEAD) STRAW MAN TO BEAT UP!
That's how empty you are of real substantive arguments!
Really, Robert? Maybe you are not as intelligent as I thought you were.
Nagy: Robert actually does have considerable knowledge, even considering that he is probably looking some of it up. Without the knowledge, he would not know where to look fast enough to post much of what he does. Unfortunately, his major objective is not to shed light on the discussion, but to impress everyone with how much he knows. That drives him repeatedly to launch into long purples patches, lecturing obliquely on something without actually addressing the issue at all, or only addressing it tangentially.
The Alinsky gambit was so far out in left field, I did not even bother to respond to it, even though I tend to answer most right wing nuttery point by point. I more or less stopped responding to those who merely declare what kind of idiot or faggot I am, but I will also ignore much of Robert's offerings. The good part is that his side issues may be independently interesting, and worth reading, such as his explanation of the relative effectiveness of militias v. professional soldiers in the American Revolution. If he did not support vicious, murderous right wing policies, I might actually like him.
Peter has flattened and shredded your illogical bullshit gun nut arguments, and has obviously left you so speechless and naked, that all you can do now is babble on about Saul Alinsky - someone who has been dead for 44 years. YOU HAD TO GO BACK 44 YEARS TO FIND A (DEAD) STRAW MAN TO BEAT UP!
That's how empty you are of real substantive arguments!Really, Robert? Maybe you are not as intelligent as I thought you were.
Nagy: Robert actually does have considerable knowledge, even considering that he is probably looking some of it up. Without the knowledge, he would not know where to look fast enough to post much of what he does. Unfortunately, his major objective is not to shed light on the discussion, but to impress everyone with how much he knows. That drives him repeatedly to launch into long purples patches, lecturing obliquely on something without actually addressing the issue at all, or only addressing it tangentially.
The Alinsky gambit was so far out in left field, I did not even bother to respond to it, even though I tend to answer most right wing nuttery point by point. I more or less stopped responding to those who merely declare what kind of idiot or faggot I am, but I will also ignore much of Robert's offerings. The good part is that his side issues may be independently interesting, and worth reading, such as his explanation of the relative effectiveness of militias v. professional soldiers in the American Revolution. If he did not support vicious, murderous right wing policies, I might actually like him.
Jul 11, 2016 22:16:49 #
PNagy wrote:
Keenan: Again, nothing but evasion, and a refusal ... (show quote)
LOL.... Peter, just as I would not involve myself with some here I am surprised that you would team up with Keenan to have an infantile discussion about Robert. Robert does not deserve your condenscension, but that's the thing.... Liberals just can't help themselves, you are showing us much more about yourself in this conversation than you could ever hope to tell us about Robert. You I generally take seriously, Keenan, almost never, he is hardly different than those who come here to just insult as they drink their beers or coffee... Why do you want to play in the dirt with Keenan Peter, does it somehow reinforce an image you have of yourself Peter, is it a feel good thing?
Jul 11, 2016 22:40:04 #
Blurryeyed: So Peter, since murders involving the use of rifles only number in the hundreds each year, and this statistic includes the so called "Assault Rifle" would it possibly more effective to lobby for enterprise zones developed with the specific intent of incentivizing decent jobs in these blighted areas, could that possibly have a much greater effect on gun violence in America than an Assault Rifle ban? How about school vouchers at least until a point to where the tax base in these areas improve to the point that they can support schools that would actually effectively educate the children trapped in these areas?
Nagy: You have accidentally or otherwise skirted near the reason for the disproportionate amount of crime, including murder, in urban areas of concentrated minority poverty. I am not sure that you would be willing to admit that that it is really due to the racial discrimination they continue to face, but that really is it. When conditions militate against the success of the average person, too many fail, because most are only average.
Jobs programs is a great idea. Take it a bit further to an outright Marshall Plan for the hood, with one difference; the main objective should not be the profits of the large corporations purporting to deliver the service, but the improvement of communities.
I am abjectly opposed to school vouchers as
1. inefficient ways of delivering educational bang for buck. The cost of services rendered by public institutions includes cost plus corruption. Private corporations deliver services for that same cost plus corruption, but tac on profit. The extra factor involves extra cost, which is generally met by degrading the quality of the service while using "creative accounting" methods to pretend a higher level of service had actually been delivered. I'll include two examples of this below.
2. Vouchers hand public funds over for private profit. They lay down the foundations for the beginnings of government-protected monopolies that are likely to culminate in the formation of fiascos like the British, Dutch, and French East India Companies.
3. Corporations trying to capitalize on public funding for private educational schemes are often very young. They came into existence, like the dozens of corporations after the enactment of a law in 1998 that offered them $50,000 to partner with schools in implementing an innovative educational scheme. What a coincidence that the corporations that lobbied for the bill just happened to have completed in time to qualify for the grants their research proving the effectiveness of their gimmick. It is quite a stretch to claim that in such a short period of time they learned how better to educate students than a large inner-city school district, however flawed, which had been operating for a century.
The rest of this will appear in an addendum entitled "To Blurry, Part II."
Nagy: You have accidentally or otherwise skirted near the reason for the disproportionate amount of crime, including murder, in urban areas of concentrated minority poverty. I am not sure that you would be willing to admit that that it is really due to the racial discrimination they continue to face, but that really is it. When conditions militate against the success of the average person, too many fail, because most are only average.
Jobs programs is a great idea. Take it a bit further to an outright Marshall Plan for the hood, with one difference; the main objective should not be the profits of the large corporations purporting to deliver the service, but the improvement of communities.
I am abjectly opposed to school vouchers as
1. inefficient ways of delivering educational bang for buck. The cost of services rendered by public institutions includes cost plus corruption. Private corporations deliver services for that same cost plus corruption, but tac on profit. The extra factor involves extra cost, which is generally met by degrading the quality of the service while using "creative accounting" methods to pretend a higher level of service had actually been delivered. I'll include two examples of this below.
2. Vouchers hand public funds over for private profit. They lay down the foundations for the beginnings of government-protected monopolies that are likely to culminate in the formation of fiascos like the British, Dutch, and French East India Companies.
3. Corporations trying to capitalize on public funding for private educational schemes are often very young. They came into existence, like the dozens of corporations after the enactment of a law in 1998 that offered them $50,000 to partner with schools in implementing an innovative educational scheme. What a coincidence that the corporations that lobbied for the bill just happened to have completed in time to qualify for the grants their research proving the effectiveness of their gimmick. It is quite a stretch to claim that in such a short period of time they learned how better to educate students than a large inner-city school district, however flawed, which had been operating for a century.
The rest of this will appear in an addendum entitled "To Blurry, Part II."
Jul 11, 2016 23:05:59 #
To Blurry, Part II
The idea of lifting inner city kids through changes in education alone will work only to an extent. Human brains must be cultivated if they are to reach maximum potential. This is seen in Olympic athletes who never attain the highest level of potential unless they began training as children, most notably in gymnastics. Similarly, there are innumerable and complex trigger mechanisms to maximize intellectual capability, many of which if neglected through early childhood limit the child's potential development before he begins kindergarten. One can fairly reliably foretell the intellectual future of four year olds in preschool. Some are precociously bright, some average, some very dull. A few of the ones in the middle are most likely to move to a different rung, but most of them will remain on the intellectual path they show early. The upper and owed strata do not move much. The very poor more often have incompetent parents, whose failure to stimulate the minds of their children often dooms their offspring to end up with less intellectual acumen than their genetic package predisposed them to have.
Most of the "brilliant" corporate and other private fixes are outright frauds. Legitimate traditional efforts will fail, because the intellectually challenged underclass is not operating with a lack of education, but a compromised ability to absorb necessary intellectual skills. Thus, the same school superintendents and boards of directors who blame teachers for the failure of students, also put those teachers there. If their theories were valid, they should be fired for racism, for having put all their weak teachers into the poor minority areas. Nor did one school district take my challenge, if they really believed their teacher and teaching technique-blaming ideas for low performance, to exchange the faculties of a high performing school with that of a low one. If they were not lying through their teeth to hold onto their careers via their own "innovative" fixes, they would have jumped at the opportunity to run a few legitimate scientific tests of their most fervently held dogmas. The tests should have immediately begun to reverse the results, the middle class area faltering, and the poor one beginning to rise.
With a compromised ability to learn the complex coding it takes to read suffers, and so does the ability to perform the similarly involved operations required for math. Without sound foundations in literacy an numeracy, the kids fall behind at a faster rate every year. On average, the ninth graders in the poorest inner-city school districts operate with the intellectual capacity of a fifth grader.
When traditional methods had failed to teach them how to read, write, add, subtract, multiply, and divide, no teacher can coax true high school level performance from them in history, science, literature, and algebra. Nor can giving them more of the methods that failed before teach them any of the necessary skills. They do not need reading and mathematical instruction, but therapy in those skills. The processes do exist, such as the well proven Lindammood-Bell system, but these are very teacher intensive, requiring a very high degree of teacher-student interaction, especially instant feedback. Right wing politicians at every level resist investing in such programs, because of their high upfront cost. If they do adapt them, they add their own modifications, such as increasing the student/teacher ratio, thus making the program totally useless.
In fact, the total cost to society would be far less, if a fair number of teachers were trained in such systems, and worked for the 18-24 months it takes to make an adult illiterate into potential college student. At least a decent percentage of previously uneducable and barely educable people would have a chance of becoming intellectually viable, and thus have a greater chance of economic viability and less chance of costing others in welfare payments and law enforcement.
Reading and math therapy is still not a permanent fix of the educational problems in poor minority areas. The real cause is the residual discrimination that educated whites tend to deny. The same thing proven by studies on the criminal justice system that show blacks are charged with crimes at a higher rate for similar complaints, convicted at a higher rate, and given stiffer sentences: the same thing shown in studies nearly a generation apart, that applications for housing, employment, and education receive statistically significantly more negative responses (fewer hires, placements, interviews) if the only thing that changes is a white-sounding name to a black-sounding one. In this system many of the victims end up with not only compromised intellectual abilities, but the short-term thinking and other attitudinal handicaps of the poor. It is a system that allows only the exceptional to fly the coop. The average person is not exceptional, so he stays, and so do his descendants. Thus, we have a social problem, not an educational one, but it is more expedient for educationists to blame teachers and the system, because the public would rather hear of an easier fix, and certainly does not want to hear an indictment of itself.
Look for "To Blurry, Part III.
The idea of lifting inner city kids through changes in education alone will work only to an extent. Human brains must be cultivated if they are to reach maximum potential. This is seen in Olympic athletes who never attain the highest level of potential unless they began training as children, most notably in gymnastics. Similarly, there are innumerable and complex trigger mechanisms to maximize intellectual capability, many of which if neglected through early childhood limit the child's potential development before he begins kindergarten. One can fairly reliably foretell the intellectual future of four year olds in preschool. Some are precociously bright, some average, some very dull. A few of the ones in the middle are most likely to move to a different rung, but most of them will remain on the intellectual path they show early. The upper and owed strata do not move much. The very poor more often have incompetent parents, whose failure to stimulate the minds of their children often dooms their offspring to end up with less intellectual acumen than their genetic package predisposed them to have.
Most of the "brilliant" corporate and other private fixes are outright frauds. Legitimate traditional efforts will fail, because the intellectually challenged underclass is not operating with a lack of education, but a compromised ability to absorb necessary intellectual skills. Thus, the same school superintendents and boards of directors who blame teachers for the failure of students, also put those teachers there. If their theories were valid, they should be fired for racism, for having put all their weak teachers into the poor minority areas. Nor did one school district take my challenge, if they really believed their teacher and teaching technique-blaming ideas for low performance, to exchange the faculties of a high performing school with that of a low one. If they were not lying through their teeth to hold onto their careers via their own "innovative" fixes, they would have jumped at the opportunity to run a few legitimate scientific tests of their most fervently held dogmas. The tests should have immediately begun to reverse the results, the middle class area faltering, and the poor one beginning to rise.
With a compromised ability to learn the complex coding it takes to read suffers, and so does the ability to perform the similarly involved operations required for math. Without sound foundations in literacy an numeracy, the kids fall behind at a faster rate every year. On average, the ninth graders in the poorest inner-city school districts operate with the intellectual capacity of a fifth grader.
When traditional methods had failed to teach them how to read, write, add, subtract, multiply, and divide, no teacher can coax true high school level performance from them in history, science, literature, and algebra. Nor can giving them more of the methods that failed before teach them any of the necessary skills. They do not need reading and mathematical instruction, but therapy in those skills. The processes do exist, such as the well proven Lindammood-Bell system, but these are very teacher intensive, requiring a very high degree of teacher-student interaction, especially instant feedback. Right wing politicians at every level resist investing in such programs, because of their high upfront cost. If they do adapt them, they add their own modifications, such as increasing the student/teacher ratio, thus making the program totally useless.
In fact, the total cost to society would be far less, if a fair number of teachers were trained in such systems, and worked for the 18-24 months it takes to make an adult illiterate into potential college student. At least a decent percentage of previously uneducable and barely educable people would have a chance of becoming intellectually viable, and thus have a greater chance of economic viability and less chance of costing others in welfare payments and law enforcement.
Reading and math therapy is still not a permanent fix of the educational problems in poor minority areas. The real cause is the residual discrimination that educated whites tend to deny. The same thing proven by studies on the criminal justice system that show blacks are charged with crimes at a higher rate for similar complaints, convicted at a higher rate, and given stiffer sentences: the same thing shown in studies nearly a generation apart, that applications for housing, employment, and education receive statistically significantly more negative responses (fewer hires, placements, interviews) if the only thing that changes is a white-sounding name to a black-sounding one. In this system many of the victims end up with not only compromised intellectual abilities, but the short-term thinking and other attitudinal handicaps of the poor. It is a system that allows only the exceptional to fly the coop. The average person is not exceptional, so he stays, and so do his descendants. Thus, we have a social problem, not an educational one, but it is more expedient for educationists to blame teachers and the system, because the public would rather hear of an easier fix, and certainly does not want to hear an indictment of itself.
Look for "To Blurry, Part III.
Jul 11, 2016 23:08:07 #
green wrote:
You're right! citizens should be able to have any weapon that our military has, including drones & nukes!
I am looking for a M-2 .50 cal heavy MG. Can I vote for you so I can get one? And a weapons platform in the air (drone) would be really nice to help me get rid of some of the varmints I have to live with around here. And a small yield tactical nuclear device (15 KT?) would also be pretty cool to have. When are you registering for office?
Jul 12, 2016 00:11:35 #
To Blurry, Part III
Individual cases in point do not decide major issues, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to go beyond that limited treatment of the abuses that occur when public educational funds are handed out to private corporations. I take it a bit further in the unpublished manuscript, STOP ME BEFORE I TEACH AGAIN, and will implement a still more scholarly approach in the sequel, SUPPLY-SIDE EDUCATION. These two are very revealing.
Case I
In 1998 the Clinton era Comprehensive Educational Reform Act handed out $50,000 grants to schools who formed a partnership with corporations that offered research-based educationist schemes that really worked. The corporations also received $50,000 for each school that agreed to sign onto their one-year gimmicks. Since the law was the verbatim result of corporate lobbyists, the vultures ready to feast at the public trough all just happened to have their research ready to qualify for the grants. How ironic that self-directed studies showed each gimmick was more effective than anything that had ever been done in schools before.
Excel Corporation's (I hope I spelled that right) gimmick was a major school wide project, such as building the world's biggest hotdog. Their research proved that when the school has a unified, worthwhile project, the kids will automatically sep forward to take necessary roles to make it happen. Some will order the materials, learning osmotically the math and other necessary skills, others assemble it, others figure out how to keep it from rotting, or being eaten by non-human visitors. Everyone will learn because of the necessity of completing the project. I theorized that no such thing could happen. In fact, a few of the best kids, or even their teachers, will do everything, while a majority do even less than when they could be graded for their individual performance.
The school where I observed Excel pulling off this fraud, never experienced either everyone magically learning all skills, nor a few doing everything. The kids were not generally interested in exerting themselves in anything, and the teachers would not do such a project for them at the expense of compromising their scores on the state achievement tests. Thus, Excel pretended to mentor the school for a heist of $50,000, and the school pretended to be mentored to qualify for a federal grant of $50,000. It would have been far simpler to just hand both the money and not require them to do the minimal dancing that the federal program required. It would have been far more efficient and honest to give the school the much needed $100,000 without cutting Excel into half the proceeds for doing nearly nothing. In SUPPLY-SIDE EDUCATION I may track the other corporations involved in those grants. I am very sure that most of them did much the same thing as Excel; postured for easy money, but delivered no service.
(part IV to follow)
Individual cases in point do not decide major issues, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to go beyond that limited treatment of the abuses that occur when public educational funds are handed out to private corporations. I take it a bit further in the unpublished manuscript, STOP ME BEFORE I TEACH AGAIN, and will implement a still more scholarly approach in the sequel, SUPPLY-SIDE EDUCATION. These two are very revealing.
Case I
In 1998 the Clinton era Comprehensive Educational Reform Act handed out $50,000 grants to schools who formed a partnership with corporations that offered research-based educationist schemes that really worked. The corporations also received $50,000 for each school that agreed to sign onto their one-year gimmicks. Since the law was the verbatim result of corporate lobbyists, the vultures ready to feast at the public trough all just happened to have their research ready to qualify for the grants. How ironic that self-directed studies showed each gimmick was more effective than anything that had ever been done in schools before.
Excel Corporation's (I hope I spelled that right) gimmick was a major school wide project, such as building the world's biggest hotdog. Their research proved that when the school has a unified, worthwhile project, the kids will automatically sep forward to take necessary roles to make it happen. Some will order the materials, learning osmotically the math and other necessary skills, others assemble it, others figure out how to keep it from rotting, or being eaten by non-human visitors. Everyone will learn because of the necessity of completing the project. I theorized that no such thing could happen. In fact, a few of the best kids, or even their teachers, will do everything, while a majority do even less than when they could be graded for their individual performance.
The school where I observed Excel pulling off this fraud, never experienced either everyone magically learning all skills, nor a few doing everything. The kids were not generally interested in exerting themselves in anything, and the teachers would not do such a project for them at the expense of compromising their scores on the state achievement tests. Thus, Excel pretended to mentor the school for a heist of $50,000, and the school pretended to be mentored to qualify for a federal grant of $50,000. It would have been far simpler to just hand both the money and not require them to do the minimal dancing that the federal program required. It would have been far more efficient and honest to give the school the much needed $100,000 without cutting Excel into half the proceeds for doing nearly nothing. In SUPPLY-SIDE EDUCATION I may track the other corporations involved in those grants. I am very sure that most of them did much the same thing as Excel; postured for easy money, but delivered no service.
(part IV to follow)
Jul 12, 2016 00:22:06 #
PNagy wrote:
To Blurry, Part II br br The idea of lifting inne... (show quote)
Peter,
I am not going to take the time or the energy needed to argue point by point with you other than to make a few counter points to your argument. I am not buying the racism angle of your argument, there are plenty examples of just the opposite, during the work week I stay in a place in West Palm Beach called the Acreage, it is a huge neighborhood of thousands of home situated on 1+ acre lots, a huge place. The point is is that this is one of the most integrated neighborhoods that I have ever seen, I don't know if there are more blacks living here or more whites living here it is just that well integrated. These homes are probably valued at anywhere from $200,000 to $600,000+. For the most part these are not doctors and lawyers, more likely they are nurses, welders, plumbers, contractors, electricians, but they are all educated and hard working people.
The inner cities, they are the direct result of local, state, and federal policies. As the federal funding rolled out for the war on poverty, our big cities in blue states and in many red states as well built these huge projects on the other side of the tracks, shuffled people off into these projects where they remained out of sight and out of mind, mayor Daley of Chicago nor his son who followed him gave two shits about what was happening in the projects he built. They just shuffled people off into those projects, made damn sure that the right people were paid off, they made their millions and did not give a damn about the human suffering that developed there. Same with the education system that you defend. The government set these people aside, government policies segregated these people from the rest of their community, government policy disincentivized work, disincentivized family, and gave them a failing education system. You can talk about racism Peter but in so doing you are denying the truth, the condition of our inner cities has nothing to do with racism and every thing to do with failed government policy. In this West Palm Beach neighborhood Peter, we don't have murders, we don't have drive bys, I am sure that there is some crime, but it is not something that touches most people, and people here get alone, so no I don't accept your liberal view of racism, what's more as we look out upon our greater society we see plenty of people of color doing very well and no one seems to be taking exception to it.... Hell Peter, we have a black president for god's sake.
You act as if private enterprise is pure evil incarnate, you are seemingly blinded to the good that private enterprise has done for our society and the people who comprise it. Without private enterprise our country would hardly be different than Cuba or what Venezuela is quickly becoming. I don't care what you would chose to call your political philosophy Peter but it is clear that your impulses are socialistic approaching communistic as you have always argued the evil of private enterprise. Let me ask you Peter, do you support monopolies? I would assume that you don't but why is that, I mean if our concern is the consumer would a monopoly that controlled an entire market not be able to produce the best product at the cheapest price based on the economy of scale? Would they not have the tremendous purchasing power to buy the commodities and instruments used in their production of goods and services at the best possible price, could they not provide us with those goods and services at a cheaper price than if they were a smaller operation with less purchasing power? I again assume that you would not agree with this theory, I assume that you know as I do that without competition in their market they would not have to concern themselves so much about customer satisfaction, they would not have to meet or beat their competitors value proposition, they would not have to innovate to stay abreast in their market, they could set their pricing as they pleased as the would be no alternatives in the marketplace.... So why do you think that public services are any different? Why is public education such a sacred cow for democrats? We are one of the highest spending countries in the world on public education yet our system is failing miserably, it is not because of a lack of funding Peter, ours is one of the very best funded systems in the world. They fat and lazy Peter just like a monopoly, they have no competition and because they are a government program they never have to worry about a value proposition, the public they serve are forced to become their customers by law, their funding is also taken from the public by the force of law, should the public not like the value proposition there is little that they can do about it, to not participate in the program would expose one to loss of property and possibly incarceration. Now if you introduce vouchers you take care of two very considerable problems at the same time, you introduce competition into a monopolistic system, public schools would be pressured to stop making excuses, stop blaming funding for their failure, and get to work on educating our children as if their very existence depended on it because actually for the worst schools it would.
Your exception to enterprise zones is profit? You are kidding aren't you Peter? So you are advocating for our government to spend all the capital to develop and manage economic activity to bring back hope to the inner cities? It is a bad idea Peter, first off the government knows little about running anything efficiently, they could never become self-sustaining. And just what products and services do you expect the government to develop and sell into our economy? Private enterprise is already investing and developing the new and great products, ideas, and services of tomorrow, the government would never stand a chance against the private economy, it could never compete. You have never been able to see win/win between government and the private economy, like I suggested earlier you see profit as a bad thing that is not to be tolerated, yet it is what has built this great nation and all of the great nations of the world, governments did not build these great nations Peter, it was the private enterprise system that did so, that gave us almost everything that we take for granted in our daily lives....
I leave you with this Peter as a way to illustrate my points.... Just what do you think our telephones would be like today had our government 50 years ago decided that they and only they would provide all phone devices and services..... I am thinking that we would probably still be using wired rotary phones.... just sayin.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.