People's Contradictory Beliefs?

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Sava
It's just that we Socialists believe that education and health care are human rights issues and should be not-for-profit.

That's mixing definitions -- the former is a morality issue, while the latter is more of an implementation issue. F'rinstance, school vouchers (which IIRC are championed more by conservatives than by liberals) imply that education is a right, but implement this right in such a manner that enterprising individuals can glean a fair profit from it.

[Sava]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Socialists believe in government run programs.

The whole thing is, all you rebel wannabes don't even know :

A) What you want to be, because
B) You don't know the definitions of what you think you aspire to become.

Please don't tell me I need to cut and paste definitions for you... I get tired of holding your hand sometimes...

My brand of Socialism leans more towards non-profit, or profit-capped, democractically controlled corporations rather than just government run programs in the American sense. There's this fallacy that without profit, there's no incentive to keep costs down and things efficient. But like I said, that's a fallacy. If properly run, any government/non-profit entity could be efficient, and without wasting money on CEO and executive bonuses/perks, there's more money to expand the business.

I'll create another thread soon in order to explain my own brand of socialism.

[Sava]

Originally posted by loinburger


That's mixing definitions -- the former is a morality issue, while the latter is more of an implementation issue. F'rinstance, school vouchers (which IIRC are championed more by conservatives than by liberals) imply that education is a right, but implement this right in such a manner that enterprising individuals can glean a fair profit from it.

School vouchers (like the ones Bush has proposed) don't do anything to help the cost of education for low-income families. The voucher program would give a maximum of $1500 per semester. Now when private schools average around $7500 per semester, that doesn't do much to help. They're like coupons basically. All they do is give government money to private/religious schools; a pork-barrel gift to Bush's constituents.

Free public education could easily be implemented. It's just a matter of stopping the government from wasting the money it currently has. For instance... this whole Afghanistan thing (a big failure in the war on terror) could have easily improved public schooling. Personally, I think the education of young Americans is more important than getting rid of the Taliban.

[loinburger]

It's more than just a problem of funding, though. Chicago public schools receive more money per student than almost any other school system in the US, yet they're some of the worst schools. Double the money that they receive, and you'll just double the wastage.

[Sava]

uhmmm... I think you're mistaken about that Loin... also, teacher shortages are more to blame for CHicago's school problems. And people don't want to become teachers because they make sh!tty pay. So pay teachers more so more people become teachers... money = education in America.

[lightblue]

Originally posted by Darius871
How does this make sense? IMO, in a state of nature the man who has no compunction at all about killing another man for his home or his wife would be more likely to survive. So by your logic evolution would give us few if any morals. You admitted yourself that morals are a supression of ourt natural instinct, so then how can you say it comes from evolution?

People that behaved like this must have reproduced less than the people who were altruistic and helped the community. Probably because of a variet of reasons like being outcast from a tribe, not having a support network when ill/injured and that sort of thing. As such being altruisitic is part of our natural insticnt, it is what makes us.