Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where does it end? Should everyone be responsible for paying for their own police? Fire department? Military? Food inspections? Or is it just public education that you oppose?
Pay for as a service? Lets see...
Police for protection? State decides, but I prefer Privatized. Fact is, police are not there to protect you (this is a fact by law), they are there to merely enforce the law. In most cases, they file reports and that is about it. You as an individual are responsible for the security of your property and person.
Fire department? Privatized (many rural areas pay for this).
Military? Federal level, they are to protect the sea and air (no standing military outside of temporary need). States, this is a reasonable tax as the protection of a state is not something an individual can specifically affect.
Food inspections? Consider this, one of the most respected organizations which establishes industry standards and compliances is a private business, not a publicly run one. People who are concerned about such things will flock to companies who espouse proper standards, everyone else will deal with the offenses as they occur.
Start thinking like a free individual rather than government cattle.
So in practical terms you are saying if their parents are not responsible then these children are out of luck, then when those children turn to out of work adults, what do we do with them? You can't see how it would have a negative impact on our society? You can choose not to care but we will all be negatively impacted.
What I am saying is that two wrongs do not make a right. Just because a parent is not responsible does not give you the right to steal from another to pay for them. Donation societies pull in ENORMOUS amounts of income to help those in need and church organizations have since the beginning of the education system taken charge to see the children are taken care of. Telling people they have to pay for another is not charity, it is subjugation, it is theft, it is slavery no matter what you try to rationalize as.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUNNDFRNT
I would probably agree with localizing education, make local communities fund their schools through property taxes exclusively, I would even be open to a surcharge for homes with a school age children but it would have to be weighted against real estate price increases because districts with good schools have a premium on real estate prices so if you are going to benefit from a well supported school you should pay into it or forfeit that benefit.
Make nobody fund anything, let people choose to do such. Making anyone do anything is not American, it is not liberty based, it is not in any shape or forum of this country. People need to stop thinking in terms of how they can force others and start thinking in terms of what they can do themselves and how that might encourage others to do as well.
The US was unique in its concept as that it had a "collective" attitude in many of its pursuits, but its "collectivism" was based on individual choice. People worked together because they chose to, because they saw benefit in that combined effort and received such from it. This was one of the unique things about the US.
You can not force such collective concept, it has to be freely chosen. Many other countries throughout history have attempted to enforce collective societies but they always fail eventually because people realize that they are subjugated to them and then are abused by the others who do not put equal effort in.
You can not build a healthy society at the end of a lash and that is exactly what all this forced taxation and participation does. You have to entice people though individual benefit and merit, encourage them because it truly is beneficial to each individual and in a quantifiable way, not some imaginary gimmick of a response we here from everyone who attempts to defend a collective society.
The fact is, someone else being educated has no real measurable effect on me. My decisions are my own, each decision I make is what has such an effect, not the fact that some kid floated through school on a grant drinking and partying while they gain a worthless degree or education that they now use to flip burgers with. Fact is, our highly educated society is an example against a publicly funded system.
Police for protection? State decides, but I prefer Privatized. Fact is, police are not there to protect you (this is a fact by law), they are there to merely enforce the law. In most cases, they file reports and that is about it. You as an individual are responsible for the security of your property and person.
Fire department? Privatized (many rural areas pay for this).
Military? Federal level, they are to protect the sea and air (no standing military outside of temporary need). States, this is a reasonable tax as the protection of a state is not something an individual can specifically affect.
Food inspections? Consider this, one of the most respected organizations which establishes industry standards and compliances is a private business, not a publicly run one. People who are concerned about such things will flock to companies who espouse proper standards, everyone else will deal with the offenses as they occur.
Start thinking like a free individual rather than government cattle.
Based on your expert analysis, how long do you think it would take to adequately train, and equip a military, from scratch, to respond to an immediate threat? Do you have the faintest idea what goes into training an effective military, how long it takes to forge a cohesive unit, and the lead time to produce arms and equipment? This isn't WW I where you have the luxury of watching the enemy steam towards our lands in his battleships, or march to our land borders on foot, with wagon trains in tow.
This may be the single most uniformed thing I have read today...
Police for protection? State decides, but I prefer Privatized. Fact is, police are not there to protect you (this is a fact by law), they are there to merely enforce the law. In most cases, they file reports and that is about it. You as an individual are responsible for the security of your property and person.
Fire department? Privatized (many rural areas pay for this).
Military? Federal level, they are to protect the sea and air (no standing military outside of temporary need). States, this is a reasonable tax as the protection of a state is not something an individual can specifically affect.
Food inspections? Consider this, one of the most respected organizations which establishes industry standards and compliances is a private business, not a publicly run one. People who are concerned about such things will flock to companies who espouse proper standards, everyone else will deal with the offenses as they occur.
Start thinking like a free individual rather than government cattle.
Police do considerably more than home protection, not sure of your definition of privatized.
Fact remains that most fire departments are public financed and many are volunteer, they work rather well.
So as far as food inspections let the market weed out the bad companies, great plan.
Based on your expert analysis, how long do you think it would take to adequately train, and equip a military, from scratch, to respond to an immediate threat? Do you have the faintest idea what goes into training an effective military, how long it takes to forge a cohesive unit, and the lead time to produce arms and equipment? This isn't WW I where you have the luxury of watching the enemy steam towards our lands in his battleships, or march to our land borders on foot, with wagon trains in tow.
This may be the single most uniformed thing I have read today...
Each state is supposed to supply their own standing military, not the feds. This is how we protect from a tyrannical central government and retain state power.
Police do considerably more than home protection, not sure of your definition of privatized.
Go ahead, explain in detail what they do? I am very well informed on their duties, I would love to hear what you think you know their duties are that are outside of law enforcement? Please, explain!
When a company wants to specifically protect their property (or person), they hire special companies or individuals who serve that specific role (body guards, bouncers, private security and surveillance, etc...).
Law enforcement do not protect, they enforce the law. They are not required to place themselves in danger for you, to take any special risk for the safety of your property or person. Don't confuse what some officers "choose" to do with what they are required to do. A private security force is under far more obligations (depending on contract and focus) than that of a LEO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Fact remains that most fire departments are public financed and many are volunteer, they work rather well.
Me taking your money and spending it as I choose would work rather well too, but then we weren't talking about how you think things work well, were we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
So as far as food inspections let the market weed out the bad companies, great plan.
Buyer Beware. Freedom comes with responsibility and that means as a consumer you must take that extra step to insure you know who you do business with. Governments love dumb cattle for a society, but a free society requires individual thinkers, responsible doers. So, it is of the responsibility of the individual to seek that which will provide what they need and as long as there is a need, there will be an opportunity for someone to excel in meeting such. Welcome to liberty!
Each state is supposed to supply their own standing military, not the feds. This is how we protect from a tyrannical central government and retain state power.
Explain this, how are 50 separate military entities expected to suddenly unite, and somehow, miraculously know how to inter-operate? How will they manage different communications networks, maintenance and logistics for major end items like tanks, helicopters, planes, and ships? How about something as small as ammunition? Your ideas regarding the military are incredibly short sighted, devoid of any logic, and woefully short on common sense.
If there aren't any religious displays or references in the school, isn't that an endorsement of Atheism? The Constitution prevents the government from prohiditing the free expression of religion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
